Please let's not have the "how many angels can dance on the head of htis
pin" discussion again. We can and do measure natural borders, and we don't
need an electron microscope to do it. They did measure around the presumed
1934 low water line on Ellis Island and there is a length to it. It is
really silly to say that a river that courses, e.g., 10 miles must be
regarded as infinite in shorelineand equal to the Nile.
Regarding Ellis Island, while you are correct about the origin of the legal
matter (NJ's claim regarding the filled portion of the island on formerly
submerged ground) NJ didn't dispute NY jurisdiction on the original 1834
defined island. The 1834 compact is the "lesser" instrument I refer to,
which appears to me to be something less than actually conferring NY
statehood to the island, but is merely a NJ concession of NY's right to
authority over the original island.
I still am not clear on whether Ellis is a true outclave of NY, or simply NJ
territory that has had its jurisdiction ceded to NY by simple agreement.
> ----------
> From: acroorca2002[SMTP:orc@...]
> Reply To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 6:51 PM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
>
> yes the process has been clear since message 9922
>
> the only thing we dont have yet is any confirmation of the
> congressional ratification of the final njny agreement
>
> so perhaps the boundary is still legally pending for that reason
>
>
> but the procedure of plotting & connecting dots that was actually
> followed here in 1998 for the new njny
> despite frank & utter ignorance of the original fractal njny
> boundary of 1834
> upon which those dots from the 1857 map were based
> etc etc
> is exactly what you & others can still only dream of doing with
> oktx at the high water line of the red river
> even tho you might see that actual line today with your own eyes
>
> & this technical ability gap only further exaggerates the intrinsic
> incommensurability of boundary types previously observed
> since the new njny in this case is legally a geodetic boundary
> while oktx there is legally defined only as a natural or fractal one
>
>
> now about your ultimate question
> i believe this was really the first question to be answered
>
> nj sued ny in 1993 because ny had been acting for long years as
> tho it had legal jurisdiction over the whole island
>
> & i believe all this presumptiousness emanated not only from
> the state of ny but the county & city of ny as well
> depending on what function was involved
>
> so i believe the entire island was totally integrated into ny in every
> way
> & integrated into nj in no way at all
> other than that nj surrounded it
>
> & this total integration into ny is exactly what nj was objecting to
>
>
> if you are only wanting to see the corporate papers of ny state or
> county or city mentioning ellis island
> or other legal documentation to this effect
> i am pretty sure something like that could be found
>
> & i dont believe there were or could have been any lower level
> agreements
> since it evidently wasnt a matter of agreement at all beyond 1834
> but only of gradual change & a gradually increasing presumption
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
> <flynnk@r...> wrote:
> > See this for the process that was used:
> >
> > http://www.state.nj.us/dep/gis/gisupdate/up1499.pdf
> >
> > The article was not satisfactory in addressing my ultimate
> question: "Is
> > Ellis Island a corporate part of NY state wholly surrounded by
> NJ, or is it
> > simply a part of NJ that is controlled and administered by NY
> state through
> > an agreement on a lesser level than actual territory of NY
> state?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 3:30 PM
> > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday 07 May 2003 04:57 pm, you wrote:
> > So, does the boundary conform to a set of defined corners with
> stright line
> > segments between them or to the high water mark?
> > BJB
> >
> > > Yes. someone posted an article from a NJ GIS newsletter
> and it included a
> > > map from the pleadings that showed the NY jurisdictional
> boundary... it
> > > follows the presumed 1834 low water mark, now on high
> ground thanks to the
> > > surrounding infill.
> > >
> > > BTW, I forgot to mention earlier, what I posted is consistent in
> fact with
> > > the CNN quote; there is no conflict. Most of the current Ellis
> Island is
> > > reclaimed land and hence NJ, not NY.
> > >
> > > Again I pose the question, though: Is the NY jurisdiction due
> merely to an
> > > 18th century practice memorialized in a 19th century compact
> allowing NY
> > to
> > > exercise authority there, or is there some instrument that
> actually makes
> > > Ellis Island a part of the corporate entity of the state of NY?
> It's a
> > > subtle difference, but is the island a disconnected piece of
> NY state or
> > > just a part of NJ that NY owns and governs by lesser
> agreement?
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Brian J. Butler [mailto:bjbutler@b...]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 1:51 PM
> > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wednesday 07 May 2003 03:08 pm, you wrote:
> > > I thought someone mentioned that this boundary was now
> defined by a set of
> > > marked corners. If so, I agree that the boundary's length is
> measurable,
> > > but
> > > that is a different problem than we discussed earlier.
> > > BJB
> > >
> > > > Note that I wrote the "original" island which was +/- 3 ac in
> size. The
> > > > 1834 NY-NJ compact gave NY jurisdiction over land above
> the low water
> > > > level, while NJ had jurisdiction of all land submerged.
> When the US
> > Gov't
> > > > began filling operations and expanded the size of the
> island in the late
> > > > 1800s to use it as an immigration center, the seed of the
> dispute was
> > >
> > > sown.
> > >
> > > > The 1997 SCOTUS decision recognized that in 1834,
> expansion of the
> > island
> > > > was not envisioned; so that the dredging and filling
> operations that
> > > > followed took place on submerged -- i.e. NJ -- land and
> therefore is NJ,
> > > > not NY. So the island is split jurisdiction along the 1834 low
> water
> > mark
> > > > -- and despite the earlier arguments about the supposed
> impossibility of
> > > > measuring a water boundary or other physical boundary,
> has in this case
> > > > been clearly defined.
> > > >
> > > > What I want to know and have not yet received a clear
> answer is this:
> > >
> > > Since
> > >
> > > > the NY-NJ boundary officially runs down the middle of the
> Hudson and out
> > > > the center of the bay itself, and Ellis and Bedloe's (Liberty)
> islands
> > > > lie wholly on the NJ side of that centerline, are those
> islands that are
> > > > under NY jurisdiction merely pieces of NJ that are ruled by
> NY, or are
> > > > they corporately part of the official lands of the state of NY,
> that is,
> > > > true outclaves of NY?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: L. A. Nadybal [mailto:lnadybal@c...]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 6:33 AM
> > > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > How does your reply square with what CNN wrote in its
> report on the
> > > > Supreme Court case from the end of May 03 where it
> stated:
> > > >
> > > > "As a result, most of the island in New York Harbor from
> now on must
> > > > be considered Ellis Island, New Jersey"?
> > > >
> > > > I agree the Feds don't have a mini-DC there, but the
> Sumpreme Court
> > > > only said, apparently, that the Feds don't have the right to
> alter the
> > > > border of two states at that point. Does the dispute go on?
> > > >
> > > > LN
> > > >
> > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
> <flynnk@r...>
> > wrote:
> > > > > Ellis Island, while owned by the federal government, is
> not federal
> > > > > territory with a boundary to be established. The 3-acre +/-
> original
> > > >
> > > > island
> > > >
> > > > > is NY and the infill surrounding area, and surrounding
> waters, is NJ.
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: L. A. Nadybal [mailto:lnadybal@c...]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 8:15 PM
> > > > > To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "acroorca2002"
> <orc@o...> wrote:
> > > > > > in reply to craig:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >"it is noteworthy that the ellis island njny loop was
> originally
> > > > > >fractal but since it is based today on a former rather than
> the
> > > > > > present shoreline the supreme court adjudicator or
> special master
> > was
> > > > > > forced to rationalize the line into a series of plotted
> points"
> > > > >
> > > > > That wouldn't come into play as an aswer to the question
> about
> > > > > "interstate" boundaries, because the part of Ellis Island
> that is
> > > > > federal would make it the second place within the country
> that is not
> > > > > a part of any state. For that reason, we couldn't consider
> the DC-VA
> > > > > border in trying to answer the question. There's got to be
> a tripoint
> > > > > at one place on the perimiter of the federal portion of Ellis
> island
> > > > > and another at some other location on the perimiter from
> which the
> > > > > joint border continues anew. NJ-NY will not have a
> common border
> > > > > where the federal portion interrupts.
> > > > >
> > > > > And, to close off with the "but..." question? Did the
> Supreme Court
> > > > > actually say that the plot of federal land on the island is
> not part
> > > > > of either state or did the court do a "favorite" and leave
> things
> > > > > ambiguous by saying only that neither state had
> jurisdiction?
> > > > >
> > > > > LN
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > >
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> > --
> > Brian J. Butler
> > BJB Software, Inc.
> > 508-429-1441
> > bjbutler@b...
> > http://www.bjbsoftware.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>