I'll have to dig into this further, but my initial take on this is
that the second retrocession I mentioned did not involve the pierheads
as the 1945 Act specifically mentioned. Under that act, the
highwatermark on the VA side stayed at high level, noting that this
included south of 2nd St. Alexandria to the Jones Point. The second
retrocession was the Act of Feb 23, 1927, ceding Battery Cove, where
it says everythhing "from a line drawn at Jones Point at low water
mark" north to "Point Lumly, now Pioneer Mills, at low water mark" of
46.57 acres was ceded. That means everything south of Pioneer Mills
to Jones Point has as the boundary low water mark - matching the
Maryland low water mark ... unless the 1945 act undid this ad placed
the border back to high watermark by mentioning high water mark south
of 2nd street following the pierhead. There are no piers alonf the
whole stretch, especially at Jones PLoint, so it would seem at first
blush that when one passed the piers, the "pierhead" profile ended and
the boundary returnd to low water mark.
There was recently built a housing tract over the water, and I'm
wondering now how that changed the border. Whether the border here is
high or at low watermark, it seems to be in District airspace.
I have been at Jones point, and the border markers indicate something
other than the three borders coming to a single point. Maryland's
border seems to intersect the Virginia border at some 30-50 feet
north of the lighthouse. There is a border marker immediately
to the east of the lighthouse, about 10 feet away from it, showing
where the two 45-degree lines form the tip of the "old District"
used to meet when DC was a diamond, but MD's border doesn't hit at
that point. Maryland's border stone is on the flat land that forms
the Jones Point bluff, 6 feet above and 10 feet inland from thd water.
I'll have to drive over there and look at it again, and perhaps take
a couple of pictures for you.
--- In BoundaryPoint@y..., orc@o... wrote:
> yes len & major thanx for this & at least another dose of detail
here on principal speaking for at least several interested parties
present
>
>
>
> the only second retrocession i am aware of included some potomac
pierhead waters which it was technically impossible to retrocede to va
since potomac waters never were nor could be va but only md per royal
charters since charles ii
>
>
>
> the intensity of interest in this case arose because the dcmdvas
federative tripoint moved a pierheads length into the river from the
riparian initial monument point beneath jones point light
>
>
>
> & it has recently been fueled further by the realization of the
crazy fact that
>
> except for the pierhead exception
>
> dc reaches the high water mark on the right bank while md doesnt
reach beyond the low water mark there
>
> owing to conflicting court opinions
>
> a matter of particular interest in the configuration of the dcmdvan
tripoint
>
> tho it evidently doesnt actually displace this upstream twin tp
>
> nor affect at all the previously displaced downstream twin tp
>
>
>
> so please do elaborate on any of the above & zero in on both of
these tripoints in particular
>
>
>
> thanx
>
> m
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "L. A. Nadybal" <lnadybal@h...> wrote:
>
> > There were two retrocessions one large, one more recent and
really
>
> > small - I have the texts of the laws placing this into effect - if
>
> > anyone wants to see them. The reasoning is contained in the
texts. I
>
> > work for DC government, and can get anyone who wnts this, details
to
>
> > the nth degree about the subject.
>
> > Regards
>
> > LN
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., orc@o... wrote:
>
> > > --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., Anton Sherwood <bronto@p...> wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > m donner wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > > > > about the retrocession by the usa of rightbank dc to va
>
> > preceding va
>
> > >
>
> > > > > secession
>
> > >
>
> > > > [...]
>
> > >
>
> > > > > it happened in 1846
>
> > >
>
> > > >
>
> > >
>
> > > > thanks. and do you know why?
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > i believe it was always a sort of back lot & never really got
>
> > developed anything like the left bank did
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > > so eventually congress voted to give it back to virginia in
order to
>
> > end the pointless federal responsibility for it
>
> > >
>
> > > provided its free white male citizens would agree
>
> > >
>
> > > which they did by a vote of 763 to 222
>
> > >
>
> > > per bus&ss
>
> > >
>
> > > m