Arkansas v. Tennessee
Headline: Boundary dispute along the Mississippi: the Court accepts the Boundary Commission’s line between Arkansas and Tennessee, overruling Tennessee’s objections, fixing the state border and ordering the states to split most costs.
Holding:
- Officially fixes the Arkansas–Tennessee boundary along the Mississippi River.
- Requires the states to share most costs of the Boundary Commissioners and report.
- Tennessee must pay printing costs for evidence and the Supplemental Report and exhibits.
Summary
Background
The dispute involved the States of Arkansas and Tennessee over their border along a portion of the Mississippi River affected by the Centennial CutOff. The Court appointed three Boundary Commissioners—C. B. Bailey, Charles A. Barton, and Horace Van Deventer—by interlocutory decree on June 10, 1918, to run, locate, and designate the line. The Commissioners filed a detailed report with station points, bearings, and maps, and Tennessee filed exceptions (formal objections) to that report.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the Commissioners’ report should be accepted and the objections sustained. The Court overruled Tennessee’s exceptions and accepted the Commission’s detailed report as the official boundary description. The Court directed that the boundary described by the Commissioners, totaling 116,641 feet (22.09 miles) and set out by numbered stations and bearings, be treated and fixed as the boundary between the two States and be marked accordingly. The opinion announces this action as a final decree.
Real world impact
As a result, the Arkansas–Tennessee line along the described stretch of the Mississippi River is officially established and must be marked in the field according to the report. The costs certified by the Commissioners are approved; most costs, including printing the Report and maps, will be split equally between the States, while Tennessee alone must pay for printing the evidence and the Supplemental Report and exhibits. The Court’s order closes this phase of the interstate boundary dispute.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?