Georgia v. South Carolina

Background

The States of Georgia and South Carolina disagreed about where their shared boundary runs through three rivers: the Savannah, the Tugaloo (Túgalo), and the Chattooga. Georgia sued to have the Court decide whether the border is the middle of the river or the low-water mark on Georgia’s shore, and whether islands in those rivers belong to Georgia. The parties based their rights on a written 1787 agreement (the Beaufort Convention), which also reserved islands in the Savannah and Tugaloo to Georgia and guaranteed equal navigation rights.

Reasoning

The central question was how to read the Beaufort Convention and place the border in different river conditions. The Court held that where there are no islands the line is the middle of the river when water is at its ordinary level. Where islands lie between a branch and the South Carolina shore, the boundary is the midstream line between the island bank and the South Carolina bank at ordinary water. The Court also found that the Chattooga is the northern extension of the Tugaloo branch and that the Convention reserved islands there to Georgia. The Court rejected locating the boundary at Georgia’s low-water mark and explained that the Convention’s navigation clause removes any argument based on the main navigable channel.

Real world impact

The decision settles which state controls the islands and where the state line runs, a matter important to property owners, state officials, and businesses that operate dams or hydroelectric plants in those rivers. The Court instructed the parties to submit a decree to carry out these rulings and split the costs of the suit equally.