dershott 52d mile point reach a point 59 links east of the present bank of the pond. Thirty chains east of their 52d mile point, as seen by their notes, the Hendershott line crossed the Stokes' field fence. The line of this fence is still plainly visible. A line straight from the 52nd mile point claimed to be witnessed by the "elm and oak," to the 54th mile point, will pass at least 70 feet south of the "Stokes" fence line, as noted by Hendershott. For more than thirty years, and after the establishing of the boundary line by Hendershott and Minor, it is claimed a road was maintained and worked as a Missouri road between the 52nd and 54th mile points, and that until within the past five years this fact was never questioned. It is claimed that the line recognized by parties living on both sides of the boundary as being the Hendershott line since his survey, and until within the past few years, is now plainly shown for a very considerable distance between the 52nd and 53rd mile points by the line of what is known as the " "Fugate" fence line. It is claimed this fence was put up by one Fugate, the owner of land in, and a resident of, Iowa (and who was also a surveyor), and who, living as he did close to the line and present when the Hendershott survey was made, probably knew where the true line was, and placed his fence on that line. This line very closely agrees with a line running directly from Sullivan's 52nd mile point to the 54th mile point, the last named having been satisfactorily identified and located by the Commissioners. It is claimed to be improbable that Fugate placed his fence north of the proper line.

The Commissioners most carefully considered all the conditions relating to the point claimed to be the Hendershott 52nd mile point and witnessed by the "elm and oak," but the more the matter was weighed the stronger became their conclusion that the trees mentioned could not have been the witness trees as claimed. Coincidences of position constitute their claim. It is proper here to state that within a short distance to the north of the 52nd mile point as established by the Commissioners, are the stumps of an elm and burr oak which

agree as well as do the other elm and oak as to distance from the 51st mile point, better as to topographical conditions, and are very similar as to the relative position required by the field notes for the witnesses to the 52nd mile point. The Commissioners have no idea that these stumps referred to were those of Hendershott's witness trees, but make this statement to show that coincidences such as shown by the "elm and oak," are not impossible. To have crossed the "Stokes" fence, in a distance of 30 chains, starting from the supposititious 52nd mile point claimed to be witnessed by the elm and oak, an angle of at least 2° to the left would have been necessary, and also another angle to the right, equally great in order to run directly to the 54th mile point. Hendershott's notes make no mention of any such angles. The angle recorded as having been made at the 52nd mile point was .29' to the North, the course having been changed according to the Hendershott notes from N. 89° 16' E. to N. 88° 47' E. We are satisfied from personal investigation, and from points found and referred to our base line, that the original Sullivan line can be readily traced from his 51st mile point to his 52nd mile point, and we believe it very probable that the Hendershott line between the 52nd and 54th mile points is nearly identical with the Sullivan line. Whilst we did not adopt the Sullivan line between the points named, very good reasons could have been given for doing so. The Hendershott notes make no mention of Sullivan's line after leaving his 49th mile point until his 54th mile point was reached. They make no mention of finding Sullivan's 52nd mile point, or of any trees on his line. But they say in their report (page 4, 10th Howard Report), that they "discovered abundant blazes and many witness trees, which enabled us to find and re-mark the said (Sullivan) line as directed by the Court." Also on page 7, same report, it is stated: "But in heavy bodies of timber no difficulty was experienced in discovering evidences of the precise location of the (Sullivan) line, not only by blazes, but by line and witness trees." (Italics are ours.) And on same page: "The general to

pography of the country, and especially the crossing of the streams, greatly facilitated us in following the line, and in some instances when confirmed by the old blazes enabled us to establish it with sufficient certainty." Commencing some ten chains east of the 51st mile point, the country through which the boundary line passes was and is heavily timbered, and as before stated, the Sullivan line in the timber is at this time readily to be found. The inference that the Hendershott line eastward from the 51st mile was nearly identical with the Sullivan line is quite as strong as the contrary, notwithstanding no mention is made by Hendershott of the Sullivan line after leaving a point 6.20 chains east of the 49th mile point until reaching the 54th mile point.

The Sullivan line, between the 51st and 52nd mile points, as shown by his field notes, crossed the east fork of Grand River (now called Weldon), three times. This line now, by reason of changes in the bed of the stream, will cross the Weldon five times. With the exception of the "elm and oak," there were no traditional or apparent evidences claimed as indicating the original location of the Hendershott and Minor 52nd mile point. A line run east with the bearings given by the Hendershott notes, from their 51st mile point, would pass at least 40 feet south of the point indicated by the "elm and oak." A line run eastward as per the Hendershott notes, from the point claimed as the Hendershott and Minor 52nd mile point, would pass at least 90 feet south of their 54th mile point. The Commissioners carefully considered all the comparatively authentic traces of the Hendershott Mine, together with the topographical conditions given in the notes of the survey. Between the 53rd and 54th mile points were found evidences of the Hendershott line which were satisfactory, and the line established by us was run directly from the 54th mile point, which, as before stated, was identified to the 52nd mile point, and passing through the points found between the 53rd and 54th mile points. The Hendershott notes show a line direct from the 52nd to the 54th mile point.

The line as finally established and marked by us, between the 52nd and 53rd mile points, is north of the boundary line as claimed for Iowa, and south of that line as claimed by Missouri, and, as it happens, very nearly equally divides the narrow territory in dispute although there was no intention to compromise the difference. We are satisfied that the line as established by us, between the 53rd and 54th mile points, is very nearly, if not identical with the original Hendershott line, and in accordance with the marks of that survey. The same line was produced to the 52nd mile point, notwithstanding it passes considerably south of the plainly indicated Sullivan line. The 52nd mile point as established and marked by us, was placed as nearly as possible in accordance with the notes of the Hendershott survey, evidenced by the width of the pond, and also its distance from the "Stokes" fence line.

The field notes of the Hendershott and Minor survey show as follows:

At 6.30 chains eastward from the Hendershott 42nd mile point Sullivan's 42nd mile point was found, and course changed at that point from N. 88° 53' E. to N, 89° 06′ E.

6.37 chains eastward of Hendershott's 43rd mile point Sullivan's 43rd mile point was found, and course changed at that point from N. 89° 16' E. to N. 89° 47' E.

7.00 chains eastward of Hendershott's 44th mile point Sullivan's 44th mile point was found and course changed at that point from N. 89° 47' E. to N. 89° 9′ E.

6.20 chains eastward from Hendershott's 49th mile point Sullivan's 49th mile point was found, and course changed at that point from N. 89° 9' E. to N. 89° 16′ E.

4.07. chains eastward of Hendershott's 54th mile point Sullivan's 54th mile point was found and course changed at that point from N. 89° 16′ E. to N. 89° 2′ E.

2.53 chains eastward of Hendershott's 58th mile point Sullivan's 58th mile point was found, and course changed at that point from N. 89° 2' E. to N. 89° 27′ E.

In each instance it will be seen that the Hendershott courses

are changed at the Sullivan mile points. The decree of your honorable Court, made January 3, 1851, declared that the line should be direct between each Hendershott mile point and it is evident that the actual courses between the points referred to above are not in accordance with the recorded courses. It was found, by reference to our base line, in all cases where the field notes show a straight line between such points that when the distance recorded as a straight line was two or more miles, the line is actually a curve. The ordinates measured from the base line do not show any regular rate of curvature, and the curves themselves swing to the South and then to the North, the base line crossing the boundary line three times in twenty miles. The greatest distance of base line from boundary line is at the 55th mile point, which is about 247 feet north of base. The 46th mile point is 160 feet south, and the 60th mile point 153 feet south of base.

It is difficult to account for the discrepancies found between the recorded line as shown in Hendershott's notes, and the line actually found. It is quite possible that the irregularities either grew out of the inaccuracy of the solar compass used on the survey, or an inaccurate use of the instrument itself.

We were surprised at the facility with which the Sullivan line could at the time of our survey be traced for considerable distances along the twenty miles of line included in our operations. Of twenty-one mile points from the 40th to the 60th inclusive, Sullivan had witness trees for fifteen. Some of these witness trees can now be found, and also well defined line trees mentioned by him. On Hendershott's line only eight mile points out of the twenty-one referred to were witnessed by trees. Had the care shown by Sullivan in marking his line, been exercised by Hendershott and Minor, the line of the latter would have been much more fully and satisfactorily defined. The hurried manner in which the work of the Hendershott survey was performed, (151 miles of re-location, in addition to random lines, having been accomplished in 30 days), may in some measure account for the great lack of witness