Summary

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Georgia v. South Carolina — Opinion of the Court

Even the smallest emerging island, no matter how near the South Carolina shore, would cause the entire boundary between the States to shift northward, depriving South Carolina not only of the land that constitutes the island but also any riverbed between the island and the center line that previously formed the boundary. We doubt that the parties, in drafting the Treaty, meant to create a boundary that shifted so radically each time a new island emerged in the river.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Georgia v. South Carolina — Opinion of the Court

Both States agreed that the presence of an island on the South Carolina side of the river altered the boundary so as to bring the island within the jurisdiction of Georgia. In its decision on the merits, the Court resolved two contested issues relevant here.
First it held, ruling in Georgia's favor, that "where, in any of the boundary rivers here involved, there are no islands the location of the boundary line between the two States is the thread of the river-the middle line of the stream-regardless of the channel of navigation. . . ."
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Georgia v. South Carolina — Opinion of the Court

Georgia was chargeable with knowledge that the Treaty of Beaufort placed all the Savannah River islands in Georgia. Yet Georgia authorities could have discovered there was no record of taxation or other sovereign action over these lands by Georgia except, possibly, for three isolated instances in the early part of the 19th century. Some documents recorded in Georgia, because they also involved Georgia property, describe the islands as in South Carolina. There is evidence, too, that Savannah residents were aware of cultivation on the islands.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature