University of Virginia Library

SURVEYOR'S REPORT.

This report was disapproved and rejected by the General Assembly
of Virginia on the 9th of March, 1860, and the Governor
of the Commonwealth was authorized and directed to settle with

Baugh and Black for services rendered, and to appoint one or more
commissioners to run again and re-mark the line between Virginia
and Tennessee in strict conformity with the compact of 1802.

The result of this effort to run and re-mark the line of 1802
having failed, the entire question was again open for discussion
and controversy.

In the year 1869, the superintendent of the United States Coast
Survey directed Richard B. Cutts to proceed to Bristol, with instructions
to observe the solar eclipse on August 7th, and to connect
the station at Bristol with one or more of the monuments
which mark the boundary line in that vicinity. Pursuant to instructions,
Mr. Cutts proceeded to Bristol, and, after having discharged
his duties, made the following report to his superior.

In the year 1871, the General Assembly of Virginia passed an
act providing for the appointment of commissioners to ascertain
and locate the true boundary line between this State and the State
of Tennessee, and in the year 1886 a similar act was adopted, but
the State of Tennessee persistently refusing to take any action
looking to a settlement of the question, the General Assembly of
Virginia, on the 31st day of January, 1890, passed an act repealing
the act of the General Assembly of Virginia passed on the 22d
of January, 1803, confirming and establishing the boundary line
between this State and the State of Tennessee as ascertained by the
report of the commissioners appointed in that year, and declared
the true line of this State to be in latitude 36°, 30′ north; and that
the line agreed upon between the States on the 22d of January,
1803, was erroneous by reason of mistakes in fact caused by defective
instruments and incompetent observers, and that the same is
not obligatory on the State. In the meantime, on the 7th day of
January, 1890, a suit had been instituted in the Supreme Court of
the United States by the Commonwealth of Virginia through her
attorneys, R. A. Ayers and William F. Rhea vs. the Commonwealth
of Tennessee, the object of the suit being to have the Supreme
Court of the United States declare the true line between the States
to be 36°, 30′ north latitude, as provided for in the original charter
of the colonies of Virginia and North Carolina.

Numerous depositions were taken in this case, and the Supreme
Court of the United States, on the 3d day of April, 1893, rendered
their opinion, and decided that Virginia was estopped by her action
in the year 1803, and declaring the true line between the States
to be the compromise line of 1803.[49]

Controversies between the citizens of Virginia and the citizens
of Tennessee at this time and for some time previous thereto were

of frequent occurrence, and oftentimes seriously threatened the
breach of the peace.

In the year 1889, N. T. Wills, Joseph Southerland and R. R.
Butler undertook to take possession of a tract of land situated near
Green Cove in this county, the property of Marion Miller and the
heirs of George W. Hopkins, deceased, and continued their efforts
until the year 1892, in which year Marion Miller obtained an injunction
from the judge of the Circuit Court of this county restraining
the said Wills, Southerland and Butler from interfering
with said property, and in the month of October, 1893, the defendants
answered in said suit. Numerous depositions were taken,
and on the 24th of May, 1895, the judge of the Circuit Court of
this county rendered an opinion, holding that the summit of White
Top, as the beginning of the compromise line of 1802, did not
mean, nor never was intended to mean, the top of the highest peak
of that mountain, but that it meant the top of the mountain at
the point where the compromise line run by the commissioners of
1802 began. But the court, in view of the fact that the corner
where the line of 1802 actually began was uncertain, ordered and
decreed that the following issues out of chancery should be tried
at the bar of the court, namely:

First. Does the compromise line of 1802, between the States of
Virginia and Tennessee, as located and established by General Joseph
Martin, Creed Taylor and Peter Johnston, commissioners on
the part of Virginia, and Moses Fisk, General John Sevier and
General George Rutledge, commissioners on the part of Tennessee,
lie south or north of the lands in controversy?

Second. At what point did it actually begin, and in what direction
was it actually run and located until it passed west of the
lands now claimed by complainant and in controversy in this cause?

This issue was tried by a jury, composed of R. P. Carson, W. O.
Booker, H. B. Roberts, D. A. Jones, Jerry Whitaker, Thomas H.
Akers, J. C. Hayter, George Keller, James Hagy, W. F. Arnett,
Robert Miller, and James Fields.

This jury, after hearing all the evidence produced by the parties,
returned the following verdict:

"1st. We, the jury, find and decide that the compromise line of
1802-'03 runs south of the land in controversy.

"2nd. The jury further find that the point where that line began

is on the summit of Pond Mountain, and runs due west beyond
the lands in controversy."

The defendants moved the court to set aside this verdict of the
jury and grant them a new trial, and the court, in the month of
January, 1896, delivered an opinion disagreeing with the jury in
their conclusions and adjudging that the top of Pond mountain was
not the summit of White Top, where the said line began, and fixed
said line north, instead of south, of the land in controversy, and
declared the land in controversy to be in the State of Tennessee
and without the jurisdiction of the court.

From this opinion of the court the plaintiff, Marion Miller, appealed
to the Court of Appeals of Virginia, and that court, on the
18th of November, 1897, delivered an opinion reversing the judgment
of the Circuit Court of Washington county and fixing the
boundary line between the States of Virginia and Tennessee as a
straight line, beginning on the top of White Top mountain where
the northeastern corner of Tennessee terminates and following a due
west course midway between Walker's and Henderson's lines to the
top of the Cumberland mountain where the southwestern corner of
Virginia terminates.[50]

By this decision the contention of the citizens of the State of
Virginia was sustained, and the position of the claimants of lands
under titles derived from the State of Virginia was greatly
strengthened.

Thus matters stood when, on the 30th day of April, 1900, a
consent decree was entered by the Supreme Court of the United
States in the suit of Tennessee, complainant, vs. the State of Virginia,
defendant, directing commissioners to ascertain, retrace, remark
and re-establish the boundary line between the State of Tennessee
and the State of Virginia as fixed in the year 1803.

W. C. Hodgkins, J. B. Baylor and Andrew H. Buchanan were
appointed commissioners to execute said decree.

These commissioners proceeded to execute this decree, and on
the 5th day of January, 1903, filed their report in the clerk's office
of the Supreme Court of the United States, which report is in the
words and figures following, to-wit:

Detailed report of the operations of the commission appointed
by the Supreme Court of the United States (April 30, 1900,) to
retrace and re-mark the boundary line between the States of Tennessee
and Virginia.

At the date of the above decree and for several months thereafter
the State of Virginia had no funds available for the proceedings
ordered by the court, and none could be had until there could
be a session of the State Legislature to make the needed appropriation.
It was, therefore, necessary for your commissioners to
seek an extension of the time within which they might make their
report, and, upon the motion of the attorney-general of Virginia,
an extension was granted until the next term of court.

At a session of the General Assembly of Virginia held in the
winter of 1900-1901, the sum of five thousand dollars was appropriated
for the purpose of paying Virginia's share of the expenses
of this boundary survey. The Tennessee Legislature had previously
made a like appropriation.

Your commissioners, therefore, made preparations for beginning
the execution of their duties under your decree of April 30, 1900,
as early in the season of 1901 as the weather conditions should permit.

The commission held its first meeting at Washington, D. C., on
May 16, 1901, and organized by choosing William C. Hodgkins,
of the State of Massachusetts, as chairman, James B. Baylor, of
the State of Virginia, as secretary, and Andrew H. Buchanan, of
the State of Tennessee, as treasurer.

At this meeting there was a full discussion of the problem presented
and of the method of work which might be most suitable
under all the conditions. Arrangements were also made for procuring
the necessary camp outfit and supplies.

Through the courtesy of the superintendent of the United States
Coast and Geodetic Survey your commissioners were able to procure
from that bureau, without charge, not only the outfit of tents
and camp furniture required for the shelter and comfort of the
party, but also valuable instruments needed for the survey.

This relieved the States of Tennessee and Virginia of a considerable
expense which would otherwise have been unavoidable.
The two States were spared another heavy item of expense by the
fact that each of your commissioners is a civil engineer and entirely

familiar with work of this nature. It was, therefore, unnecessary
to follow the usual course of employing engineers or surveyors to
carry out the field work under the direction of the commissioners.
Instead of that, your commissioners themselves conducted all the
field work, hiring only such rodmen, axemen, etc., as were necessary
from time to time. By such methods and by exercising rigid
economy in all their expenditures, your commissioners have been
able to complete the entire work, including the setting of cut-stone
monuments and also including the amount charged for their own
remuneration for the sum of $9,475.99, which is but little more
than the amount charged to the State of Virginia alone by the joint
commission of 1858-1859.

It having been decided at the first meeting of the commission
that the most convenient place for beginning field operations would
be the city of Bristol, which is located directly upon the boundary
line, the commission adjourned to that place.

Field-work was begun on May 22, 1901, with the examination of
a portion of the line east of Bristol, where a number of trees were
found which bore the marks of the surveys of 1802 and 1858-'59.
As there have been considerable controversy and conflicting testimony
in regard to the nature of these old marks, it may be well to
show by diagrams and photographs the actual arrangements and
appearance of those of both years, as well as of the somewhat different
mark which was used for the present re-marking by your
commissioners:

 

1802.	1859.	1902.

While the marks made in 1858-'59 are still numerous in forested
areas and are generally easily distinguishable, those made in 1802
are becoming scarce, and sometimes are barely discernible when
found.

This is shown in the accompanying photograph of a large white
oak tree, upon which the marks of 1858-'59 can readily be traced,
while only three of those made in 1802 can be distinguished, and
those with difficulty. The marks of 1802 were apparently made
with a small and light hatchet, and on many trees which have a

thick and rough bark the hatchet does not seem to have reached
the wood, and in such cases the gradual exfoliation of the bark
has often nearly or entirely obliterated the mark. Where the wood
was wounded a small burr has formed, which can nearly always be
recognized; but cuts which did not completely penetrate the bark
have sometimes disappeared.

The marks left by the survey of 1858-'59 were found of very
great value as guides to the older "diamond" marks of 1802. Both
marks were often found on the same tree, and it was a rare occurrence
to find the diamond mark without the mark of 1859 either
above or below it. In fact, it was very soon noticed that the mere
fact of finding the mark of 1858-'59 either above or below the normal
position on a tree was an almost certain indication that a diamond
mark had been found there at the date of the latter marking,
even though, through the action of time and the elements, all vestiges
of it may now have disappeared. Since the date of the last
survey, very many marked trees have been destroyed through various
agencies, especially since the more rapid development of this
section in the recent years has caused a greater demand for lumber,
and in some places the trees bearing the old marks are so far
apart and the marks themselves are so faint that great trouble and
delay would often have been experienced in the search for these old
marks had it not been for the aid afforded by the marks of 1858-'59,
which always proved reliable guides by which to find the older
marks.

In this connection it may not be inappropriate for your commissioners
to state that they everywhere found that the joint commission
of 1859 did its work in a careful and conscientious manner,
and that they believe its line, as marked on the growing timber, is
identical with that marked by the joint commission of 1802, and
that full credence should be given to statements of fact in the report
of that survey.

From a point about a mile and a quarter east of Bristol the line
was traced without difficulty, other than that due to the broken nature
of the country traversed, as far as the beginning of what is
commonly known as the Denton Valley offset.

At this point occurs the greatest and most remarkable irregularity
in the whole course of this line, there being a deflection from
the direct course of 66°, 10′ for a distance of 8715.6 feet. The

portion of the boundary east of the offset is further north than that
west of the offset, so that the deflection is to the south in going
westward from the eastern end of the line, the direction in which
it was originally run out, or to the north in working eastward from
Bristol, as was done in the present survey for reasons of convenience.
In either case the deflection is to the left hand; but it is not
the same in each case, as the two portions of the line east and west
of the offsets are not exactly parallel to each other. This difference
of direction amounts to 1°, 30′, as shown on the map of the
line accompanying this report.

Owing to the long controversy over this offset and the persistent
assertions of certain parties that marked timber would be found on
the eastern prolongation of the portion of the line extending from
Bristol to Denton's valley, if the same were run out, your commissioners
felt obliged, in order to settle the question for all time, to
run out this line and make a careful search for marked timber
along its course. This was accordingly done and a careful examination
of the timber on each side of the transit line was made as
the work progressed, but with only negative results.

Although several weeks were spent in running this line across
the series of very rough and heavily-timbered mountains lying
between Denton's valley and Pond Mountain, near the corner of
North Carolina, and although every story brought to the commissioners
by people interested in the result was carefully examined,
your commissioners were utterly unable to find or have pointed out
to them one authentic mark of the line 1802, either on this line or
anywhere in its vicinity.

On the other hand, the "offset line" and the portion of the line
running eastward from the offset to the vicinity of the White Top
mountain were found well marked; both the 1802 and the 1858-'59
marks were found at frequent intervals.

In order to be assured that these marks were authentic, blocks
were cut from several of these trees at different points on said
offset line, and the ages of the marks were determined by counting
the rings of the annual growth.

These tests showed that the marks were of the supposed age.
The ages of the most important marks were verified by the United
States Bureau of Forestry. As was found in 1858-'59, the marking
of the timber ceased (or began) on a comparatively low eminence,

known as Burnt Hill, which from the neighboring heights of White
Top or Pond mountain seems to be in the bottom of a hollow.

The apparent discrepancy between this situation and the language
of the report of the joint commissioners of 1802, which
reads: "Beginning on the summit of the mountain generally known
as the White Top mountain," etc., has led some to suppose that
the line should be extended further east, to the summit of the so-called
"divide" or watershed between the tributaries of the Holston
and New rivers.

There seems, however, nothing to support this theory except the
somewhat hazy idea that the eastern end or point of beginning of
this line ought to be on a summit.

As a matter of fact, the actual end of the line of Burnt Hill is
on quite as much of a summit as if it had been on the "divide,"
which in this place is so low and flat as to be scarcely perceptible
as an elevation of any importance. It certainly could never be supposed
to be the summit of White Top mountain, which towers far
above it, its huge, dome-like bulk filling the northeastern horizon.

No marked trees of 1802 or 1858-'59 could be found east of
Burnt Hill, though the line was produced through heavy timber of
original growth to the "divide," and careful search was made for
them. The same condition was found in 1859, as reported by the
commission of that year. A point which that commission seems
to have overlooked is the important fact that the eastern end of
the marked line at Burnt Hill is almost exactly in line between
the corner of North Carolina, on Pond Mountain, and the summit
of White Top mountain. What more likely than that the
commissioners of 1802, who had agreed to lay out a line equally
distant from the older lines, known as Walker's and Henderson's
and beginning on the summit of the mountain generally known
as the White Top mountain, should begin at the point where the
Walker line reached the northwestern corner of North Carolina,
and where accordingly the jurisdiction of Tennessee should begin,
and run thence in the direction of the most important peak to the
northward and eastward until they reached the desired middle
point between the lines of Walker and Henderson, and from that
point started on their westerly course. It is hard to understand
why they should have omitted to mark this part of the line; but
this small bit of boundary extending from the northeast corner of

Tennessee to the northwest corner of North Carolina seems to have
been somewhat overlooked in more recent proceedings. Your commissioners
respectfully recommend that the straight line between
these two points be declared to be the boundary, believing as they
do, in the absence of any marks to the contrary, that this was the
original and true line. All of this section is composed of very
rugged and densely-wooded mountains with but a scanty population.

The progress of the work in this mountainous anl almost inaccessible
region was delayed not only by the nature of the country
and by the fact that in this very worst part of the whole line it was
necessary to run out these two independent lines, doubling the labor
to be expended, but also by the unfortunately rainy weather which
was experienced. The frequent and heavy rains often stopped
field work, washed the few roads so badly that they became almost
impassable, and raised the streams so high that sometimes for
days at a time it was impossible to ford them.

It was not until September 21st that your commissioners were
able to close work in the White Top region and return to Bristol
to start westward from that place towards Cumberland Gap.

For the remainder of the season, however, both the weather and
the nature of the country were much more favorable for field
operations, and excellent progress was made, though it was impossible
to complete the work before the approach of winter.

So far as the portion of the boundary passing through the central
portion of the city of Bristol is concerned, the labors of your
commissioners were forestalled by a special act of the General
Assembly of the State of Tennessee, approved January 28, 1901,
ceding to the State of Virginia the northern half of the main
street of the two cities. The General Assembly of Virginia accepted
the cession by an act approved February 9, 1901, and the
action of the two legislatures was subsequently ratified by the Congress
and approved by the President of the United States March
3, 1901. This cession covers, however, but a small part of the
boundary, extending only from the northwest corner of the old
town of Bristol on the west to the western boundary of the Bristol
cemetery on the east. As it is important to guard against the
possible renewal of this long-standing controversy, and as the town
is already extending beyond the above limits, it was deemed proper

to mark the old diamond line by monuments, just as if there had
been no legal change in the boundary for this short distance. But
your commissioners regret to report that they have been unable to
reach a unanimous conclusion in regard to the true location of the
said diamond line within and near the above limits.

Commissioners Hodgkins and Buchanan, after careful study of
all the evidence of record and after diligent examination of the
ground, are of the opinion that the said diamond line of 1802-1803
runs from monument No. 25, near the first marked trees east of
Bristol, in a straight line, to monument No. 26, on the western
boundary of the Bristol cemetery and on the north line of Main or
State street; thence along the northern line of said Main or State
street to "a planted stone in the edge of a field formerly owned by
Z. L. Burson, being the northwest corner of the corporate territory
of the old town of Bristol" referred to in the act of cession, supra;
and thence in a straight line to monument No. 28 in the fork of the
main road and near the first marked trees west of Bristol.

Commissioner Baylor, on the other hand, after equally careful
consideration of all the evidence of record and diligent examination
of the ground, is of the opinion that the said diamond line of
1802-1803 runs from monument No. 25, near the first marked tree
east of Bristol, in a straight line to monument No. 27, situated
just outside of the wall of the Bristol cemetery, and on the middle
line of Main or State street as it runs west from this point; and
thence in a straight line along the middle of Main or State street
to monument No. 28, near the centre of the fork of the main road
and near the first marked trees of 1858-'59 west of Bristol.

The said line running through the centre of Main or State street
is just thirty feet south of monument No. 26 on the north property
line of Main or State street outside the western wall of Bristol
cemetery.

Westward from Bristol, the boundary was retraced without difficulty
by the marked trees, just as in the previous work to the
eastward.

Only one marked deviation from the general course of the line
was encountered during the remainder of the season. This was on
the property formerly known as the Hickman place, in the vicinity
of the village of Bloomingdale, Tennessee.

Here the line was found to have a deflection of 8°, 30′ to the

right or north for the distance of 3161.8 feet. From the western
end of this offset the line resumed its general westerly course,
and so continued until the end of the work of that year. As the
season advanced it became evident that even under the most favorable
conditions it would be impossible to complete the survey without
working far into the winter, which on many accounts was undesirable.

The attorney-generals of the two States therefore joined in a
request for a further extension of time within which your commissioners
might file their report, and this honorable court thereupon
extended that time until the opening of the October term,
1902.

The field operations for the season of 1901 were closed at the
end of October, at which time the survey had been extended to the
Clinch river, forty-three miles east of Cumberland Gap, the total
length of boundary retraced being seventy miles, besides sixteen
miles of trial line run on the extension of the "straight line" from
Denton's valley to Pond mountain.

Before the opening of the field work for the season 1902 a complaint
reached your commissioners from a citizen of Johnson
county, Tennessee, supposed to be reliable, to the effect that interested
parties were interfering with the marks placed on the line the
previous year, and that, in some cases at least, the monuments had
not been properly placed by the persons employed for that purpose.

Although these statements seem scarcely credible in view of the
general interest taken in the work by the inhabitants, your commissioners
thought it best to investigate the matter and to satisfy
themselves by personal inspection that the monuments had remained
undisturbed in their proper places.

This was accordingly done at the outset of the season's work,
and it was ascertained that the stories of falsification of the marking
were without any foundation of fact; that all the monuments
between the northeast corner of Tennessee and Bristol had been
properly set, and that none of them had been disturbed.

These preliminary operations occupied the time from June 23
to July 4, on which day your commissioners returned to Bristol.
After placing some additional monuments on the old line in and
near Bristol they proceeded to Gate City, Virginia, where the

camp outfit had been stored at the close of the work in the preceding
autumn, and at once went into camp at Robinett, Tennessee,
west of the north fork of the Clinch river.

The survey of the boundary line was resumed at the point where
it had been suspended the year before, at the crossing of Clinch
river near Church's ford.

From this point to Cumberland Gap the line crosses a succession
of mountains and valleys with comparatively little level or cleared
land. Little difficulty was experienced in tracing the line in this
part of its course, the marked trees being generally found at frequent
intervals. The line preserved its general course as before,
except that two deflections to the northward were found, which
were similar to that found the year before near Bloomingdale.

The first of these occurred on the mountain called Wallen's
Ridge, where the line made a deflection of 19° to the north before
reaching the summit, and kept that course for a distance of 4643.7
feet before resuming its usual direction. There were numerous
trees with both the 1802 and 1859 marks on this deflected line.

The final deflection of 4° 10′ to the north for a distance of
6503.3 feet began at the "old furnace road" near Station creek,
less than three miles from the west end of the line on Cumberland
mountain. From the western end of this offset the line runs
straight to the terminus.

There has been considerable controversy and litigation over
these last three miles of the boundary, and a number of witnesses
have testified in the case of Virginia ag't Tennessee, Supreme
Court United States, October term 1891, that there were none of
the marks of the previous surveys remaining between Station creek
and the summit of Cumberland mountain, owing to the destruction
of the timber in that area during the military operations of the
Civil war.

Your commissioners were able to find, however, three trees well
marked with the mark of 1859 survey, and at least one of these
bore evidence in the position of this mark that an old diamond
mark was formerly visible above it.

These marked trees were found on the east and west part of the
line west of the offset, and are in excellent alignment, and settled
beyond the possibility of doubt the location of this part of the
boundary, and hence the short remaining distance to the summit

of Cumberland mountain. This line passes near and a little south
of the old mill several times referred to in the case above cited, and
thence across the Union railroad station, leaving most of the town
of Cumberland Gap in Tennessee. The summit of Cumberland
mountain was reached on Saturday, August 23, 1902, and on the
following Monday the field work of the survey was completed and
the camp outfit was packed and shipped to Washington. Your
commissioners then separated; Professor Buchanan returned to
his home at Lebanon, Tennessee, to work up his field notes, and
Mr. Hodgkins to Washington, to attend to business of the commission
and to draft a report of its operations, while Mr. Baylor
remained on the ground until September 13, superintending the
placing of monuments along the part of the line surveyed in 1902.

In conclusion, your commissioners state that they have found the
duties imposed upon them by your instructions often arduous
and exacting, and that the survey just completed proved far more
laborious, and was attended by greater hardships, than any of them
had anticipated; but that they have nevertheless given the same
careful attention to every part of it, and that they believe it to be
correct throughout.

List of monuments of cut limestone and other durable marks as
hereinafter more fully described:

(1)—At northeast corner of Tennessee, at Burnt Hill.

(2)—On summit of Flat Spring ridge.

(3)—On Valley Creek road on John Tolliver's place.

(4)—On road from Laurel river to White Top mountain near an
old mill.

(5)—On road up Laurel river near a double ford.

On summit of Iron mountain, near the north end of the rocky
bluff, a cairn of rocks was erected.

(6)—At eastern foot Holston mountain, a short distance from
Beaver Dam creek and the Virginia and Carolina railway.

Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station, "Damascus,"
on summit of Holston mountain, a stone marked [ILLUSTRATION]

(7)—On Rockhouse Branch road in the valley on Mary Nealy
place.

(8)—On road from Barron railway station to New Shady road
cut-stone monument of 1858-'59.

(9)—In woods north of New Shady road where the line changes
its course to south 23° 50′ west (mag.) a marked deflection from
the general course of the line.

(10)—On the New Shady road where this deflected line
crosses it.

(11)—In woods on Little mountain west of Cox creek where
this bearing of south 23° 50′ west (mag.) ends, and the line resumes
its general course to the westward.

(12)—On the road just north of cross road leading to Thomas
Denton's place.

(13)—On road on hill on C. D. Short's place.

(14)—On road on east bank of the south fork of Holston river,
cut-stone monument of 1858-'59.

(15)—On hill in George Garrett's cow lot west and north of
south fork Holston river.

(16)—On road to King's mill near John Buckle's house.

(17)—On road to King's Mill via Thomas' place.

(18)—On summit of open hill east of Painter place, concrete
monument.

(19)—On road running east of Painter house.

(20)—On road running west of Painter house, cut-stone monument
of 1858-'59.

(21)—On road through woods west of Painter property.

(22)—On summit of first high ridge east of Paperville road.

(23)—On Paperville road at Jones' place.

(24)—On road west of Carmack house.

(25)—On Booher place near first marked tree of 1858-'59 east
of Bristol.

(26)—On north property line of the main street of Bristol outside
the western wall of the cemetery. Commissioner Baylor does
not consider this a part of the true line.

(27)—Outside the street wall of Bristol cemetery at the point
where the average centre line of Main street intersects said wall.
Commissioners Hodgkins and Buchanan do not consider this a
point on the boundary. A stone post in the edge of a field formerly
owned by Z. L. Burson at the northwest corner of the old corporate

territory of the old town of Bristol. Commissioner Baylor does
not consider this a point on the boundary.

(28)—In the fork of the main road west of the town of Bristol.

(29)—On the road to Bristol east of Worley place.

(30)—On road to Bristol west of Worley place.

Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station, "Dunn," on
summit of ridge on old Dunn's place, stone marked [ILLUSTRATION]

(31)—On Dishner Valley road.

(32)—On road to Bristol east of Gumm spring.

(33)—On road to Bristol near Tallman house.

(34)—On road in valley west of old abandoned railway bed.

(35)—On Scott road.

(36)—On road west of Akard place.

(37)—On road near Jackson place.

(38)—On Boozey Creek road.

(39)—On road to Hilston ford, cut-stone monument 1858-'59.

(40)—On Timbertree road.

(41)—Between two roads just east of Gate City road.

(42)—In woods west of Gate City road where there is a deflection
of 8° 30′ to the right or north from the general course of the
line on old Hickman place.

(43)—In woods northeast of Bloomingdale where this 8° 30′ deflection
from the general course of the line ends in going westward
and line resumes its general course.

(44)—On road to Bloomingdale.

(45)—On Wall Gap road.

(46)—On road up ravine.

(47)—On Carter Valley road.

(48)—On Gate City and Kingsport road, cut-stone monument of
1858-'59.

Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station, "Cloud," on
bluff of North Holston river, stone marked [ILLUSTRATION]

(49)—On east bank of North Holston river.

(50)—On road on west bank of North Holston river.

(51)—At cross roads on Stanley Valley road, cut-stone monument
of 1858-'59.

(52)—On Stanley Valley road on hill at turn in road.

(53)—On Cameron postoffice road.

(54)—On Stanley Valley road south of barn of N. J. Bussell,
cut-stone monument of 1858-'59.

(55)—On Stanley Valley road, cut-stone monument of 1858-'59.

(56)—On road which runs across Opossum ridge.

(57)—On Moore's Gap road.

(58)—On Caney Valley road.

(59)—On Little Poor Valley road south of Mary Field house.

(60)—On Poor Valley road, cut-stone monument of 1858-'59.

On summit of Clinch mountain, cairn of rocks erected a few
feet south of the Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station,
"Wildcat," which station marked with [ILLUSTRATION] cut in sandstone rock.

(61)—On Clinch Valley road.

(62)—On road on east bank of Clinch river above Church's ford.

(63)—On road at Jane Bagley's house.

On summit of open hill east of Fisher Valley road line, crosses
solid rock. Small hole drilled in it with a T cut south of hole and
V north of it.

(64)—On Fisher Valley road.

On summit of a high ridge east of Robinett line, crosses solid
rock. Small hole drilled in it with V cut on north side of hole and
T south of it.

(65)—On road at Robinett.

On side of ridge at east edge of woods line, crosses rock. Small
hole drilled in it with V cut on north side of hole and T on south
of it.

On summit of Newman's ridge line, crosses rock similarly marked.

(66)—On Rogersville and Jonesville road.

(67)—On Little Creek road.

(68)—On Sneedville and Black Water Salt Works road.

(69)—On Black Water Valley road near J. Mullen's house.

Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station, "Powell," on
summit of Powell mountain, large sandstone rock marked [ILLUSTRATION]

(70)—On Mulberry Gap and Wallen Creek road near large
poplar.

(71)—Near junction of Mulberry Gap and Jonesville roads.

(72)—On east face of Wallen's ridge on edge of trail over ridge
where there is a deflection to the right or north of 19° from the
general course of the line.

On summit of Wallen's ridge line, crosses large sandstone rock.
Small hole cut in it with V cut north of hole and T south of it.

(73)—On west face of Wallen's ridge in open field on the
boundary fence of Mollie Thompson and J. W. Moore, where this
deflection of 19° from the general course of the line ends in going
westward and line resumes its general course.

(74)—On road east of Powell river and north of Welch or
Baldwin ford.

On rock bluff west of Powell river a small hole was cut with V
north of this hole and T south of it.

(75)—On Powell river and Sneedville road, on west hill of
Powell river, rough stone monument with V cut on north face and
T on south face.

(76)—On Powell river and Sneedville road.

(77)—On Martin Creek road.

(78)—On Low Hollow road.

(79)—On Four Mile Creek road.

(80)—On Bayless' Mill road.

(81) On Ball's Mill road.

Coast and Geodetic Survey triangulation station, "Minter," on
summit of hill near gate and fence corner.

(83)—On road south of Jacob Estep's house.

(84)—On East Machine Branch road.

(85)—On West Machine Branch road.

(86)—On Ducktown road.

(87)—On Mud Hollow Hole road near large limestone spring.

(88)—On Hoskin's Valley road near large limestone spring.

(89)—On George Souther's saw-mill road.

(90)—On Louisville and Nashville railway near Brooks' crossing.

(91)—On old Iron Works roads where there is a deflection of
4° 10′ to the right on north from the general course of the line.

(92)—On Station Creek road.

(93)—On the east side of Poor Valley ridge where this deflection
of 4° 10′ from the general course of the line ends in going
westward and line resumes its general course.

(94)—On Cumberland Gap and Virginia road east of Cumberland
Gap.

(95)—On small hill just east of road connecting Cumberland
Gap with Old Virginia and Cumberland Gap road in the edge of
the old town park.

(96)—On side of open hill facing south about two and one-half
squares east of the Tazewell and Kentucky roads at Cumberland
Gap.

(97)—On west side of Tazewell and Kentucky roads and just
east of woolen factory at Cumberland Gap.

(98)—At foot of Cumberland mountain west of the Union Railway
station and in line with the south edge of the south chimney
of said Union Railway station.

(99)—On summit of Cumberland mountain. The monument
of cut limestone had V and T cut on its adjacent vertical faces
and "Corner" cut on its top. Its base is set in cement and broken
rock with one diagonal running east and west. The summit of the
sandstone ledge was blasted in order to set this monument.

In addition to the cut-stone monuments and other durable marks
your commissioners marked with six chops, thus:

the trees on and within ten feet of this line on each side.

Your commissioners unanimously agree in recommending that
the rights of individuals having claims or titles to lands on either
side of said boundary line as ascertained, re-marked and re-established
by your commissioners shall not in consequence thereof in
any wise be prejudiced or affected where said individuals have paid
their taxes in good faith in the wrong State.

William C. Hodgkins,
Commissioner.

[ILLUSTRATION][Description: [SEAL.]]

James B. Baylor,
Commissioner.

[ILLUSTRATION][Description: [SEAL.]]

Andrew H. Buchanan,
Commissioner.

The Supreme Court of the United States on the 1st day of June,
1903, confirmed this report and entered the following order:

This cause came on to be heard on May 18, 1903, on the proceedings
heretofore had herein and upon the report of William C.
Hodgkins, James B. Baylor and Andrew H. Buchanan, commissioners
appointed by the decretal order herein of April 30, 1900, to
ascertain, retrace, re-mark and re-establish the real, certain and
true boundary line between the States of Tennessee and Virginia
as actually run and located from White Top mountain to Cumberland
Gap under proceedings had between the two States in 18011803,
and as adjudged and decreed by this court in its decree of
April 3, 1893, in a certain original case in equity wherein the State
of Virginia was complainant and the State of Tennessee was defendant,
which report is annexed hereto and made part hereof.

And it appearing to the court that said report was filed in this
court on the 5th day of January, 1903, and that the same is unexcepted
to by either party in any respect, therefore, upon the motion
of the State of Tennessee by her attorney-general and of the
State of Virginia by her attorney-general, it is ordered that said
report be, and the same is hereby, in all things confirmed.

It is thereupon ordered, adjudged and decreed that the real,
certain and true boundary line between the States of Tennessee
and Virginia as actually run and located under the compact and
proceedings had between the two States in 1801-1803, and as adjudged
by this court on the 3d day of April, 1893, in said original
cause in equity wherein the State of Virginia was complainant and
the State of Tennessee was defendant as aforesaid, was at the institution
of this suit, and now is, except as hereinafter shown, as
described and delineated in said report filed herein on January 5,
1903, as aforesaid.

And it further appearing to the court, and it being so admitted
by both parties, that since the institution of this suit and the decretal
order of April 30, 1900, as aforesaid, a compact was entered
into by the States of Tennessee and Virginia expressed in the concurrent
laws of said States, namely, the act of the General Assembly
of Tennessee, approved January 28, 1901, entitled "An act to
cede to the State of Virginia a certain narrow strip of territory belonging
to the State of Tennessee lying between the northern
boundary line of the city of Bristol, in the county of Sullivan,

and the southern boundary line of the city of Bristol, in the county
of Washington, State of Virginia, being the northern half of
Main street of the said two cities," and the reciprocal act of the
General Assembly of Virginia, approved February 9, 1901, entitled
"An act to accept the cession by the State of Tennessee to
the State of Virginia of a certain narrow strip of territory claimed
as belonging to the State of Tennessee and described as lying between
the northern boundary line of the city of Bristol, in the
county of Sullivan, State of Tennessee, and the southern boundary
line of the city of Bristol, in the county of Washington, State of
Virginia, being the northern half of the Main street of the said
two cities."

And it further appearing that said compact received the consent
of the Congress of the United States by joint resolution approved
March 3, 1901, as follows:

"Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That a recent
compact or agreement having been made by and between the States
of Tennessee and Virginia whereby the State of Tennessee by an
act of its legislature approved January twenty-eighth, nineteen
hundred and one, ceded to the State of Virginia certain territory
specifically described in said act, and being the northern half of the
Main street between the cities of Bristol, Tennessee and Virginia,
and the State of Virginia, by act of its general assembly, approved
February ninth, nineteen hundred and one, having accepted said
cession of the State of Tennessee, the consent of Congress is hereby
given to said compact or agreement between said States fixing the
boundary line between said States as shown by said acts referred to,
and the same is hereby ratified."

And the said commissioners in their said report having ascertained
and recommended the straight line from the end of the "diamond
marked" or compact line of 1801-1803 to the corner of the
States of North Carolina and Tennessee as the true boundary line
between the States of Virginia and Tennessee between those two
points, the court, approving said recommendation and finding of
said commissioners, doth adopt the same.

And the court being of opinion that it is proper to recognize the
line so established by said last mentioned compact of 1901 as the
real, certain, and true interstate boundary line within and between
said two cities, and to definitely determine and fix in this cause

what is the real and true and certain boundary line between said
States throughout the entire length thereof from the corner of the
States of North Carolina and Tennessee, on Pond mountain, to
the corner of Virginia and Kentucky, at Cumberlnd Gap, doth
therefore adjudge, order, and decree that the entire, real, certain
and true boundary line between the States of Tennessee and Virginia
is the line described and delineated in said report filed herein
on January 5, 1903, modified as to so much of said line as lies
between the two cities of Bristol by the aforesaid compact of 1901
between the two States, and as so described, delineated and modified
said boundary line, from the said North Carolina corner to the
eastern end of the compact line of 1801-1803, known as the "diamond
marked" line, and thence to Cumberland Gap, is hereby determined,
fixed and established.

It is to be hoped that this action of the Supreme Court of the
United States will put an end to this controversy, which has lasted
for more than 130 years.