18. (b) "The boundary lines actually run and marked" (in the field) "shall be established as the proper boundary lines of the sections, or subdivisions, for which they were intended, and the length of such lines as returned by either of the surveyors aforesaid shall be held and considered as the true length thereof. And the boundary lines which shall not have been actually run and marked as aforesaid shall be ascertained by running straight lines from the established corners to the opposite corresponding corners, but in those portions of the fractional townships where no such opposite or corresponding corners have been or can be fixed, the said boundary lines shall be ascertained by running from the established corners due north and south" (see secs. 67 and 79) “or east and west lines, as the case may be, to the water course, Indian boundary line, or other external boundary of such fractional township."

19. (c) "Each section, or subdivision of section, the contents whereof shall have been returned by the surveyor-general, shall be held and considered as containing the exact quantity expressed in such return; and the half-sections and quarter-sections, the contents whereof shall not have been thus returned, shall be held and considered as containing the one-half or the one-fourth part, respectively, of the returned contents of the section of which they may make part." 20. These three principles were clearly designed for the purpose of establishing beyond dispute all lines and monuments of accepted official surveys and of placing a statutory limitation against attempts to alter the same, or to set up complaints of deficiency of area as a basis for resurvey.

PENALTIES FOR REMOVAL OF MONUMENTS.

21. Several of the States have passed laws prescribing penalties for the destruction or removal of United States survey corners, and the act of Congress quoted on page 2 relates to such destruction or removal in all the States and Territories. Any person having knowledge of a violation of the law last mentioned may present legal evidence thereof to the United States attorney for the district in which the land lies, and request the prosecution of the offender. Should any such attorney improperly refuse to take action, the matter may be called to the attention of the Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.

Act of April 24, 1820.

U. S. Statutes at
Section 2397, U. s.

Large, vol. 3, p. 566.

22. The act of Congress approved April 24, 1820, provides for the sale of public lands in half-quarter sections, and requires that " in every case of the division of a quarter section the line for the division thereof shall run north and south," "and fractional sections, containing 160 acres and upwards, shall in like manner, as nearly as practicable, be subdivided into half quarter sections, under such rules

Revised Statutes.

and regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury; but fractional sections containing less than 160 acres shall not be divided."

Act of May 24, 1824.

Large, vol. 4, p. 34.

Act of April 5, 1832.

23. The act of Congress approved May 24, 1824, provides "that whenever, in the opinion of the President of the U. S. Statutes at United States, a departure from the ordinary mode of surveying land on any river, lake, bayou, or water course would promote the public interest, he may direct the surveyorgeneral in whose district such land is situated, and where the change is intended to be made, under such rules and regulations as the President may prescribe, to cause the lands thus situated to be surveyed in tracts of two acres in width, fronting on any river, bayou, lake, or water course, and running back the depth of forty acres." 24. The act of Congress approved April 5, 1832, directed the subdivision of the public lands into quarter-quarter sections; that in every case of the division of a halfquarter section the dividing line should run east and west, and that fractional sections should be subdivided, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Under the latter provision the Secretary directed that fractional sections containing less than 160 acres, or the residuary portion of a fractional section, after the subdivision into as many quarter-quarter sections as it is susceptible of, may be subdivided into lots, each containing the quantity of a quarter-quarter section as nearly as practicable, by so laying down the line of subdivision that they shall be 20 chains wide, which distances are to be marked on the plat of subdivisions, as are also the areas of the quarter-quarters and residuary fractions.

U. S. Statutes at
Section 2397, U. S.

Large, vol. 4, p. 503.

Revised Statutes.

These two acts last mentioned provided that the corners and contents of half-quarter and quarter-quarter sections should be ascertained as nearly as possible in the manner and on the principles prescribed in the act of Congress approved February 11, 1805.

GENERAL RULES.

25. From the foregoing synopsis of congressional legislation it is evident

First. That the boundaries of the public lands established and returned by the duly appointed government surveyors, when approved by the surveyors-general and accepted by the Government, are unchangeable.

Second. That the original township, section, and quarter-section corners established by the government surveyors must stand as the true corners which they were intended to represent, whether the corners be in the place shown by the field-notes or not.

Third. That quarter-quarter corners not established by the government surveyors shall be placed on the straight lines joining the section and quarter-section corners and midway between them, except on the last half mile of section lines closing on the north and west boundaries of the township, or on other lines between fractional sections.

Fourth. That all subdivisional lines of a section running between corners established in the original survey of a township must be straight lines, running from the proper corner in one section line to its opposite corresponding corner in the opposite section line. (See secs. 75 to 82.)

Fifth. That in a fractional section where no opposite corresponding corner has been or can be established, any required subdivision line of such section must be run from the proper original corner in the boundary line as nearly due east and west, or north and south, as the case may be, to the water course, Indian reservation, or other boundary of such section, as due parallelism to section lines will permit, under the modifying rule in sec. 79.

26. From the foregoing it will be plain that extinct corners of the government surveys must be restored to their original locations, whenever it is possible to do so; and hence resort should always be first had to the marks of the survey in the field. The locus of the missing corner should be first identified on the ground by the aid of the mound, pits, line trees, bearing trees, etc., described in the field notes of the original survey.

27. The identification of mounds, pits, buried memorials, witness trees, or other permanent objects noted in the field notes of survey, affords the best means of relocating the missing corner in its original position. If this can not be done, clear and convincing testimony of citizens as to the place it originally occupied should be taken, if such can be obtained. In any event, whether the locus of the corner be fixed by the one means or the other, such locus should always be tested and confirmed by measurements to known corners. No definite rule can be laid down as to what shall be sufficient evidence in such cases, and much must be left to the skill, fidelity, and good judgment of the surveyor in the performance of his work.

28. Actions or decisions by county surveyors which may result in changes of boundaries of tracts of land and involve questions of ownership in connection therewith, are subject to review by the local courts in proceedings instituted in accordance with the local statutes governing such matters.

EXCEPTIONAL CASES.

29. When new measurements are made on a single line to determine the position thereon for a restored lost corner (for example, a quarter-section corner on line between two original section corners),

or when new measurements are made between original corners on two lines for the purpose of fixing by their intersection the position of a restored missing corner (for example, a corner common to four sections of four townships), it will almost invariably happen that discrepancies will be developed between the new measurements and the original measurements in the field notes. When these differences occur the surveyor will in all cases establish the missing corner by proportionate measurements (see secs. 49, 83, 84, and 85) on lines conforming to the original field notes and by the method followed in the original survey. From this rule there can be no departure, since it is the basis upon which the whole operation depends for accuracy

and truth.

30. In cases where the relocated corner can not be made to harmonize with the field notes in all directions, and unexplained discrepancy in the original survey is apparent, it sometimes becomes the task of the surveyor to place it according to the requirements of one line and against the calls of another line. For instance, if the line between sections 30 and 31, reported 78 chains long, would draw the missing corner on range line 1 chain eastward out of range with the other exterior corners, the presumption would be strong that the range line had been run straight and the length of the section line wrongly reported, because experience shows that west random lines are regarded as less important than range lines and more liable to error.

31. Again, where a corner on a standard parallel has been obliterated, it is proper to assume that it was placed in line with other corners, and if an anomalous length of line reported between sections 3 and 4 would throw the closing corner into the northern township, a surveyor would properly assume that the older survey of the standard line is to control the length of the later and minor line. The marks or corners found on such a line closing to a standard parallel fix its location, but its length should be limited by its actual intersection, at which point the lost closing corner may be placed.

32. The strict rule of the law that "all corners marked in the field shall be established as the corners which they were intended to designate," and the further rule that "the length of lines returned by the surveyors shall be held and considered as the true length thereof," are found in some cases to be impossible of fulfillment in all directions at once, and a surveyor is obliged to choose, in his own discretion, which of two or more lines must yield, in order to permit the rules to be applied at all.

33. In a case of an erroneous but existing closing corner, which was set some distance out of the true state boundary of Missouri and Kansas, it was held by this office that a surveyor subdividing the fractional section should preserve the boundary as a straight line, and should not regard said closing corner as the proper corner of the ad

jacent fractional lots. The said corner was considered as fixing the position of the line between two fractional sections, but that its length extended to a new corner to be set on the true boundary line. The surveyor should therefore preserve such an original corner as evidence of the line; but its erroneous position should not be allowed to cause a crook between mile corners of the original state boundary. It is only in cases where it is manifestly impossible to carry out the literal terms of the law that a surveyor can be justified in making such a decision.

34. The principle of the preponderance of one line over another of less importance has been recognized in the rule for restoring a section corner common to two townships, in former editions of this circular. The new corner should be placed on the township line; and measurements to check its position by distances to corners within the townships are useful to confirm it if found to agree well, but should not cause it to be placed off the line if found not to agree, if the general condition of the boundary supports the presumption that it was properly aligned.

MAGNETIC DECLINATION.

35. The subject of the "variation," formerly deemed most important in surveys, is mentioned here only to advise against its use as a basis for the location of any lost line, though it may be a temporary guide in a preliminary search for old evidences. Its importance is greatly overrated, from lack of knowledge of the actual practice of surveyors, in the days when both their instruments and their knowledge were more primitive.

36. The General Land Office prohibits its employees and contracting surveyors from depending to any extent on courses derived from the needle. It also declines to advise other surveyors what variation to use in their own regions, for evident reasons, as follows: The amount of local magnetism can not truly be determined by any process of mere calculation.

The secular change of declination reported at some distant time and place is no safe guide to the fact at any other station or period. The variation recorded in old work may have been quite incorrect, as large contracts were sometimes executed by assuming a variation, from hearsay or estimation, and without due verification.

The needle is not only subject to daily and yearly change, but is also liable to defects in the instrument, so that different compasses may run different courses.

37. Another serious cause of distrust is found in the authorized rules followed in early surveys, down to the year 1864, under which a vast amount of public land was surveyed with a record showing variations which were openly inconsistent, and which should here be explained.