Boundaries and landmarks; a practical manual

Preface

THIS manual is intended to familiarize the surveyor with the different types of old boundaries that exist throughout the country. A great deal has been written on this general subject, especially in reference to the public lands of the West. Very little, however, is being done on the conveyances of the Eastern States, and it is my hope to furnish sometlu'ng which may prove useful to those who are likely to meet with cases of this sort. No attempt is made to describe how the lines should be measured; the intent is rather to furnish suggestions as to the method of locating the line to be measured — in short, finding it. It is far more important to have faulty measurements on the place where the line truly exists, than an accurate measurement where the line does not exist at all.

A. C. M.

NEW YORK, Sept., 1912.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. THE WORK AND TRAINING OF THE SURVEYOR i

II. THE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. SIMPLE DEEDS WITHOUT

Chapter I.. . ; , --,-,- -.• The Work And Training Of The Surveyor

As compared with the vocation of the civil engineer, the calling of the surveyor has always been regarded as comparatively easy and simple. This is true not only in the popular conception of the two lines of work, but also in the view taken of them in text-books and in courses of instruction. The training of the surveyor consists essentially in practice in turning angles, measuring lines and getting over obstructions, to which are added rather meager suggestions on the subjection of the compass and the re-running of old surveys. He is considered preeminently a measurer of land. This is very true, and in certain localities and under certain conditions this may compose almost the entire work of the surveyor. But in the vast majority of cases the actual measuring of land forms the smaller portion of his duties. His hardest work is often, to use a colloquial phrase, to " find the land " to be surveyed.

In a large part of our land, through the generations past, the precise boundaries of holdings have received little attention. In the years when land was worth comparatively little, when there was little money to be spared from the necessities of life for surveys, and when the surveys, when made, were very crude, little attention was given to the establishment or the maintenance of boundaries. Loose, faulty and ignorant conveyances, the use of perishable J&ildmarj^s pr 4<> landmarks at all, the temptation to build iences ".off, line " for a dozen reasons, good and bad, and innumerable x> trier l • things have conspired to render the boundaries of land the most uncertain of all things.

We have to-day fully entered upon the era of high land values. The high prices paid by the wealthy for lands from which to form estates have revolutionized the methods of handling realty. The title of all property must be absolutely guaranteed and payment is usually made by the acre. As a result heavy demands are made upon the surveyor who finds himself confronted by two necessities, first, the necessity of making an extremely accurate set of measurements and, secondly, the necessity of defining clearly the boundaries of the land which he must measure - and the latter is by far the harder task. These problems he must work out single-handed and with the fear of failure shadowing him day by day and hour by hour. Since no two problems present exactly the same complications, it is useless for any one to attempt to lay out any fixed rules of procedure, yet it may be fairly said that from experience each surveyor acquires a certain amount of definite information concerning boundaries and landmarks and certain definite conceptions concerning the relative importance of different kinds of evidence, both direct

THE WORK AND TRAINING OF THE SURVEYOR 3

and circumstantial. He is compelled to formulate for his own use certain general methods of procedure, and it is probable that the methods worked out by different surveyors bear a much closer resemblance to each other than would be supposed at first thought.

As far as my observation goes, in his preparatory studies the surveyor receives little help or suggestion to enable him to grapple with this important but elusive part of his work. The intention of this treatise is to endeavor to meet, in a small and tentative manner, this very distinct need. A good deal has been written on this general subject with reference to the public lands of the West, but little has been done in this line in connection with the ordinary conveyances of the eastern United States. My hope is to furnish something which may prove useful to those who are destined to wrestle with problems of this nature. No attempt will be made to describe methods of measuring the line; the intention is to furnish suggestions for finding the line which is to be measured. For after all, when it comes to a question of the stability of property and the peace of the community, it is far more important to have a somewhat faulty measurement of the spot where the line truly exists than it is to have an extremely accurate measurement of the place where the line does not exist at all.

Chapter II

THE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY. SIMPLE DEEDS WITHOUT DIMENSIONS.

THE description of property by landmarks and by boundaries is very ancient. A special curse is pronounced in the Old Testament against the man who shall remove his neighbor's landmark, while a very large part of the Book of Joshua is occupied by the description of the various pieces of land allotted to the different houses of the Israelites. While the chief importance was put on the landmark, yet it is plain that there was felt a need of some further concrete description of the land. This feeling has increased with the growth of civilization, until to-day we have arrived at the guaranteed title and the detailed map which accompanies it. The need of such descriptions is intensified by the habitual ignorance of boundaries which is to be found in those who have occupied land for many years. Every surveyor has had numberless cases where the owners have been absolutely unable to follow out the boundaries of their land even approximately, and equally numerous cases where boundaries pointed out in all confidence and certainty have been found to be grossly inaccurate. A written description on the other hand, while it may be originally faulty and while it is liable to clerical error in

THE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 5

copying, is free from the personal equation — it is free from preconceived ideas and it does not forget with the lapse of years.

The surveyor, then, is driven at once to supplement and correct the personal information furnished him by everything in the way of recorded descriptions on which he can lay his hands.

These records are of three kinds:

1. Records of the piece of land in question.

2. Records of the private lands which bound it.

3. Records of the public lands which bound it, in the form of highways, etc.

To the above boundaries should perhaps be added boundaries by water, were it not for the fact that boundaries by water are from their shifting nature essentially without the established records found in the three previous cases. The law prescribes clearly the course to be followed in surveying along water boundaries.

The records of the land in question and of the private lands adjoining are, of course, the deeds which conveyed the properties to their owners. These deeds are to be found in the hands of the owners or in certain places where they have, for one reason or another, deposited them. Certified copies of them are also to be found (unless the deed has gone unrecorded), fully indexed, in the Office of the County Clerk, where they are open to public inspection. To these records must be added such former maps and " cards of land " as may have been made and preserved.

They are a great help when they can be obtained, but they are usually few and far between.

The records of the public lands adjoining are usually records of Town Highways or County Highways, to be found with the Town and County clerks respectively. In the case of municipal surveys there are records of streets, parks, etc., which are to be found with the proper city officials.

The fundamental description of property, however, is to be regarded as the DEED, and it is necessary first to consider the nature and intention of this instrument in order to understand why it is so often disappointing and deficient from the surveyor's standpoint.

A deed is essentially a lawyer's not a surveyor's document. Its intention is to make the possession of a certain piece of land sure to the owner forever, not to give a minute description of the land for the comfort of the surveyor. For legal reasons some lawyers prefer to omit from a deed all data of direction and length of the boundaries, describing it only by adjoiners and landmarks or by adjoiners only. Such a deed, after stating the names of the seller and buyer, the amount of compensation, the date of the transfer and the town, county and state where the land is situated, would proceed to the description somewhat as follows:

" Beginning at the Northwest corner of the property to be conveyed where it adjoins the Highway leading from M to N and running thence in an Easterly direc-

THE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 7

tion along the land of William Smith until it comes to the land of Richard Jones, thence, in a Southerly direction along the land of the said Richard Jones to a large stone at the Southeast corner of the land being conveyed where it adjoins the land of Richard Jones and land now or late of John Brown, thence in a Westerly direction along the land now or late of John Brown to the East side of the aforesaid Highway, thence in a Northerly direction along the Easterly side of the aforesaid Highway to the point or place of beginning, Containing within the said bounds Forty and one-half acres of land be the same more or less."

Then usually follow references to the records of earlier transfers of the same land, showing continuity of title and various other matter according to the particular nature of the deed. Finally come the signatures of the grantors, the acknowledgment before a Notary Public and the County Clerk's memorandum of public record.

It is argued that the above description clearly and concisely conveys all the land lying in the four-sided area bounded by Smith, Jones, Brown and the highway without raising any questions or controversies; while if directions and distances were given they might fall short of or overlap the known boundaries of the adjoiners, in one case leaving unclaimed gores of land and in the other leading to boundary controversies. Nevertheless, the surveyor is expected to take this deed and from it define the land with the greatest clearness and accuracy.

It is probable and it may be fairly said that there are two standpoints from which the surveying of the ab< piece of land may be regarded. In the first place this IE may be surveyed " as occupied " or " as found in poss sion." This means that it is to be surveyed according the present standing boundaries between the land and four adjoiners, no attempt being made to raise the dan£ ous question as to whether the fences, etc., occupy to-< the original boundary lines. If this method is satisfact to all parties interested, there seems to be no reason v the land should not be measured and marked as the bou aries stand. But to guard against complications in years to come, the map or description should be clee marked " surveyed as occupied " or " surveyed as founc possession " or "as the fences now stand " and the d given. This will prevent misunderstandings which mi arise from the survey being subsequently used to se boundary disputes.

The other method, which is generally adopted as correct one, is to endeavor to determine the boundaries the land " as originally intended to be conveyed." eight cases out of ten all parties would prefer to get b to the original boundaries as they stood at the time of early transfers. This is all the more desirable since deed made out yesterday is very apt to follow closely verbatim, the wording of the early descriptions. In a of boundary controversies this method must always followed. In any case it does no harm to know the cient conditions, since it is a very simple matter for

THE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 9

the parties concerned to set aside the old boundaries in favor of the new, if they believe this to be the wiser course. For this reason throughout this treatise it will be taken for granted that the surveyor is trying to get back to the boundaries of the land "as originally intended to be conveyed."

Chapter III. The Relative Legal Value Of Evidences Of Boundary

THE description in the preceding chapter may be regarded as fairly representing that very large class of descriptions in which no dimensions are given but where the land is described by adjoiners and landmarks. Therefore it is manifest that the decisions of the surveyor must be based on two kinds of evidence only:

1. Landmarks in the field.

2. The claims of the adjoiners.

The subject of landmarks must be taken up in detail separately, while the same laws which govern the description of the land in question will also apply to the descriptions of the adjoiners' lands.

Before going farther it may be well to note briefly the order of importance which the law assigns to the different kinds of evidence which come under the cognizance of the surveyor.

In a book entitled " The Law of Operations Preliminary to Construction in Engineering and Architecture " by John Cassan Wait, M.C.E., LL.B (John Wiley & Sons, 1900), the author has taken up very fully from a legal standpoint the problems of the surveyor. A few quotations from the chapter entitled " Description. Conflict of Calls " throw

EVIDENCES OF BOUNDARY II

much light on the relative value of the evidence in question. Mr. Wait says:

" The calls as generally adopted to locate a survey are in the following order, viz.: (i) monuments or marks on the ground; (2) calls for ad joiners; (3) courses and distances; (4) quantity or area. If the marks found upon the ground conflict with the calls for adjoiners, with the courses and distances, and with the area, the marks upon the ground, i.e., the monuments, must still govern.

" The monuments themselves need not exist, for where they are gone they may be supplied by proofs of their former existence.

" The rule is well established that where land is described by courses and distances, and also by calls for adjoiners, the latter will govern if there be a discrepancy and there are no monuments.

" The third factor in order of importance is the course, which is usually held to govern the distance.

" As quantity or area is directly dependent on courses and distances, being calculated from them, it should be controlled by them."

Under the general head of Marks in the Field the same author says:

" The highest and best evidence of the location of a tract of land is that furnished by the monuments found on the ground and which have been made for that particular tract.

"The line originally run, fixed and marked is the true boundary line that will control irrespective of any mistakes or errors in running and marking the line.

" The marks on the ground of an old survey, indicating the lines originally run, are the best evidence of the location of the survey.

" The position of old fences may be considered in ascertaining disputed boundaries. As between the old boundary fences and any survey made for the monuments after dispute, the fences are by far the better evidence of what the lines of the lot actually were."

The first duty of the surveyor in running out a description without dimensions must therefore be to look for

1. Landmarks especially named for the piece of land in question, such as the " large stone " in the foregoing description ;

2. The marks of a previous survey;

3. Indications of old fences.

If he cannot find sufficient evidence in one or more of these classes he should take up the claims of adjoiners, and if these again prove insufficient for locating the line he should urge all parties interested to settle upon a new boundary line by common agreement. But the search for the landmarks must come first.

Chapter IV. Landmarks

STAKES AND STONES.

CERTAIN landmarks may be specifically mentioned in a description. These may perhaps be called special landmarks and must be identified as far as possible from the characteristics named in that description. But beside these there are a large number of general marks not mentioned perhaps in the deed, but which are nevertheless of the greatest possible value. Yet there can be no hard and fast classification of these, because they vary greatly with locality. On Long Island, where the most of my own work lies, there are certain marks which are of the highest importance, yet their use is confined largely, if not entirely, to Long Island. From the great abundance of yellow locust and the great capacity of its wood for resisting decay, it is used almost exclusively for surveyors' stakes in this section. " To a locust stake " is the typical phrasing of a Long Island description. It is preeminently the surveyor's mark for the locality, yet it is manifestly not a landmark for regions where the yellow locust does not grow. For the reason that stones of glacial origin are plentiful in the hills of the North Shore and scarce on the plains of the center and

the South Shore the interpretation of the meaning of stones as indicating old boundaries differs considerably in localities actually separated by perhaps only a dozen miles. The nature of landmarks or, more accurately speaking, of the marks employed to indicate a boundary, may therefore vary greatly with the locality, and it is imperative that the surveyor should at once familiarize himself with the usages which prevail in the section where he is working. There are, however, certain kinds of landmarks which are widespread in their general use, though local custom may

modify even these somewhat.

The following may be regarded, I think, as the most important:

The stake. — A stake of some sort, driven down to mark a corner or a point where the course breaks, is one of the most universal landmarks. Besides the " corner stakes " one or more " line stakes" are frequently driven at different points on a long straight line to assist in following its direction.

Stake and stone. — A stake is often reinforced and emphasized by having a stone laid beside it, as shown by Fig. i. Sometimes there is a stone placed on either side, as shown by Fig. 2, and at times there are found four stones placed symmetrically around a stake, like in Fig. 3. Sometimes there is a little irregular pile, as shown

FIG. i.

Stake and stone corner.

FIG. 2. Stone placed on either side of the stake.

FIG. 3. Four stones placed sym- FIG. 4. Irregular pile of stones used metrically around a stake. for a corner.

1 6 by Fig. 4. The stone and stake are more frequently used at prominent angles of a piece of land, shown by Fig. i. There seems to be little question that in these cases the stake is the actual corner — the stone simply emphasizes it. The stone. — A stone set up for a landmark is a very ancient way of defining land, but like many ancient customs it is very vague.

In sections where large stones are so scarce as to make them valuable for marks, a common custom is to place the stone or heap of stones squarely on the corner.

The center seems to be the angle point.

Such a large stone frequently defines a corner in unfenced land (Figs, i and 5).

In other places, more usually in fenced land, there are stones used as markers in a very different way. In these cases the owner of a piece of land selects a large stone having two faces meeting at approximately the same angle as do the two courses which join at the corner which he intends to mark. He then places the stone entirely on his own land, fitting the angle of the stone into the angle of the courses, so that the two faces coincide with these courses

FIG. 5. A large stone used as a corner.

— Fig. 6 shows such a case. In case a stone with suitable faces cannot be found or in case the angle is of more than 1 80 degrees, he frequently takes a stone with one strong angle and places this angle coincident with the point of junction of the courses, as you will see by Fig. 7.

Where well-marked fences are still standing it is easy to interpret this corner. Sometimes the stone is so happily shaped that the FlG.' 6. A large stone having meaning is clear, but where there two faces' meeting at aP-

proximately the same angle,

is the slightest trace of doubt, as do the courses that join prompt inquiry should be made at that P°mtas to who originally placed the stone. As far as the author has been able to observe, these stones present some or all of the following characteristics: (i) they possess one particularly conspicuous angle, (2) they have every appearance

FIG. 7. A sharp pointed stone placed at the junction of the courses.

of having been placed artificially, (3) they are usually on end or on edge. The presence of these characteristics will generally suggest when this form of marking has been used, though the common corner stone may sometimes present some of the same characteristics. These private angle stones have been mistaken for common corner stones and the station made over the center, where there was no possible doubt that it should have been made at the edge. In such cases the surveyor should collect all the evidence he can and then decide in favor of the balance of probability.

Fence stones. — There is one other class of stones which is to be found in some sections and which is of the greatest importance. Reference is made to the so-called " fence stones." In certain sections the oldest fences were almost invariably of the zigzag rail type known as " worm," " snake " or " Virginia rail." Under the apex of each zigzag, where the ends of the rails crossed, it was the custom to place a stone in order to raise the lower rail from the ground and prevent its decay. This is particularly true on Long Island. The old fences have long since disappeared and new fences have been erected in their place, or it may be that hedgerow and forests have reclaimed their own; but there the ancient stones lie in two parallel rows, the individuals of one row alternating with those of the other. The line always ran down the center of such a fence and therefore now lies midway between these two parallel lines of stones. The points at which the line breaks are to be found by ranging out the rows, the course changing where the range of the fence stones changes. It should be remembered, however, that where these stones lie on steep earth hillsides they have a tendency to slide down hill. Also there are few people who have the ability to " line a fence " straight across hill and hollow. So it not unfrequently happens that where an old map or survey shows unmistakably one long straight course, the fence stones may show half a dozen short ones, the average being identical.

The value of the fence stones cannot be overestimated and the illustration, Fig. 8, will at once show the conditions. Once I was called upon to survey an old farm which had acquired value and was to be sold by the acre. There existed a good map of the land made early in the last century, but at different times small tracts had been purchased and added to the farm while in other portions of it sections had been sold off, so that the boundaries were very uncertain.

Along the back line for about 700 feet the fences had entirely disappeared, the wood had been cut off and after the axe had come the fires. The whole had " come up again to sprouts." The owner, who had been born on the land, twice endeavored to show me the line. The second time he got lost and, when he found himself,

£ was half a mile distant from the farm

« itself. At last one fence stone was found

•~ about where the line should be, then a

£ second and then a third in close prox-

g imity. These gave the direction in

'§ which to work. Finally, by searching

M -5 J3 at the proper intervals, digging away

*• 55

~f the mold here and prodding with a range marker there, nearly every stone of the series was found. Finally, when the survey was plotted, it was found that the fence stones marked the original back line of the old map, the only difference being that the map gave one long straight course and the fence stones six or seven short courses (Fig. 9 shows the conditions). In searching for fence stones it should be remembered that the rows are usually about four feet apart and that the rails which they supported were twelve feet in length. In some cases I found that old fence stones

were removed to be used for other

purposes. The holes, however,

which were left in digging them

out, will often mark their former

location for some years.

Fence stones are almost always landmarks of long standing, for while J$x2&

new rails are often laid on the old stones, it is doubtful if this form of fence is ever erected along new lines at the present time, — the post-andrail fence and the wire fence have succeeded it, — and the zigzag fences now standing probably represent later erections on old foundations.

In determining the point where fences of this sort come together at an acute angle, care should be taken to extend the ranges of the two fences to their logical intersection, as it is a very common practice to join the rails across from one line to the other before the actual point of intersection is reached.

In conclusion it may be fairly said that in the fence stones you have not one or two boundary stones but a consecutive series so numerous that the loss of a number of members makes no essential difference. I have found them to be universally considered landmarks so ancient and so clear that controversy might not extend beyond them. If the fence stones were found, all the parties concerned were completely satisfied.

There is one other arrangement of stones which may be regarded as a very good landmark. It is a common custom to throw the small waste stones picked up on cultivated fields under the fences which border these fields. These collections of stones often furnish an excellent method of determining the general location of a long vanished fence, as you will see by Fig. 10. The belt which they occupy is often several feet wide and they may originally have been thrown only on one side of the fence; but they are often of the very greatest service in determining the approximate position of a boundary line. They must not be confounded with the " fence stones " among which they may lie.

CHAPTER V. LANDMARKS (continued)

MARKED TIMBER. DITCHES AND BALKS.

TREES are frequently used as monuments in the description of property. In these cases the kind of tree is usually named or the tree is specified as a " marked " tree. As far as the author's personal experience goes, he has found that in the sections where stone for landmarks was scarce, extra attention was given to marking or " blazing " the trees. In the southern portion of Long Island, for instance, there are few fence stones but there is a good deal of marked timber.

The methods of marking timber to indicate a line must of necessity vary greatly with locality and usage, but there are certain " blaze marks " which are so well established that they must be regarded as extremely important, especially as they usually come under the head of " marks on the ground of an old survey. " A property owner often sets up the artificial landmarks, but it is more frequently ,the surveyor who marks the timber.

Corner trees. — A " corner tree " is usually marked in some distinctive way (Fig. n shows one). Sometimes a series of three notches, one over the other, is cut on each

of the four sides, or it may be that these notches are con-

FIG. ii. The three notches in some cases are cut on the four sides of the tree, and in other cases, only on one side when the intersecting lines enter the tree.

FIG. 12. The stone being jammed into the roots of the tree, where it enters the ground.

fined to the sides where the intersecting lines enter the tree. Sometimes a stone is jammed into the earth at the foot of the tree to emphasize the corner, like in Fig. 12. There is an instance where the stump of a corner tree which had been small and inconspicuous had been cut down