Sunday Favorites: The Florida Georgia Line, Part 2

As mentioned in the last week's column, Andrew Ellicott, a surveyor working for the U.S. government, and Captain Esteven Minor, a representative of Spain, were unable to conduct a physical survey of the entire Florida boundary in the year 1800. This was due to a section of the land being situated in Native American territory, which prevented them from proceeding through that part of the journey. Instead, they relied on mathematical estimations to determine the boundary.

Plan of Amelia Island in East Florida ; a chart of the entrance into St. Marys River taken by Captn. W. Fuller in November, 1769.

Around the year 1822, the United States authorities initiated another survey of public lands in the recently acquired Florida territory. This required a physically surveyed and marked line of the boundary that Ellicott and Minor had not reached. The starting point for this survey was chosen at Tallahassee. From this central point, two primary lines were established: the Tallahassee meridian, running north and south, and the base line, running east and west. This pivotal location, situated near the County Jail in the City of Tallahassee, serves as the origin for all land surveys in the State of Florida, excluding Spanish Grants, according to “Florida Against Georgia: A Story of the Boundary Dispute” published by Florida Historical Quarterly.

Georgia authorities were concerned that the point selected by Ellicott and Minor, which had known as “Elicott’s Mound” was not located at the true head of the St. Mary’s River. Before Federal authorities officiated the Florida Georgia line, Georgia appointed commissioners to go through the Creek territory to determine the “true head of the St. Mary’ River.” These commissioners were protected with their own militia and instructed to produce a special report for the Georgia Governor Sam Rayburn who would then deliver it the President of the United States, according to the publication.

The Commissioners eventually reported to the Governor that Andrew Ellicott's position was accurate. During this period, Georgia had enlisted J.C. Watson to conduct yet another survey. Watson's line ran south of Ellicott's Mound, although it did not extend as far south as some Georgians wanted. The State of Georgia backed his claim and began planning and platting its boundaries and counties according to the Watson line, a move which would be challenged by Florida in Supreme Court.

Numerous efforts were undertaken to modify or adjust the boundary line set by Ellicott and Minor, but all attempts proved unsuccessful in creating a more sensible boundary. Despite legal challenges, disputes, and complaints being filed, none of them withstood scrutiny or were deemed valid.

In 1857 the governors of the two states agreed to finalize the Minor and Ellicott boundary, after almost 60 years of challenges. Both states enacted legislation empowering their respective Governors to appoint surveyors tasked with collaboratively marking and running a distinct line between the agreed-upon points. This line would be officially recognized as the established boundary between the two states. When the two surveyors concluded, they were within 25 feet of Ellicott's Mound.

Upon reporting the survey results to the two states, multiple resolutions were passed by their legislatures. On February 8, 1861, both Florida and Georgia Legislature adopted the line as the permanent boundary between Georgia and Florida.

This agreement settled the longstanding controversy that originated in 1819, with a definitive boundary line established by the two states. The lawsuit initiated by the State of Florida against the State of Georgia was dismissed.

 The Act of Congress in 1872 brought closure to the dispute that had persisted for over five decades. The dismissal of Florida's lawsuit against Georgia marked the final chapter in this lengthy and intricate boundary saga, providing a definitive resolution after nearly 60 years of challenges and uncertainties. Ellicott and Minor deserve recognition for their uncanny accuracy in determining the boundary despite the challenges they faced in the process.