Daily capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1896-1899, 1896-06-11


line, is that of an interested parry,
based upon the theory that the neiu
notes Of the Leslie survey, although
they rdescribe the line as running
along the Wilson line" allege that
they, (the field notes. fix the north
east corner at point 10 feet WITHIN
tine wilson claim. There Is not
vestlge Of the alleged "old corner
and but one witness tree ana thaC
so nearly in the course OIL
the line as to be Of no value III
fixing the corner by its disU-
ance therefrom, answering in that re-
spect Just as well for the true cor
ner on the Wilson line, leaving only
its COURSE with which to support the
theory OF the alleged mistake OF the
surveyor, of which advantage is pro-
posed to be taken, "a surveyor having
recently placed new corner thereJ
as against the course of the true line
70' 2le, given in the United States
patents to both claims. The prior
survey Of the same line In The wilson
line, correctly, as proven by the COM
pass, as well as by the originally es-
tabllshed corner and witness trees,
without any conflict: give such pre-
ponderence of testimony in favor OF
the true line 70' 21s as to establish
the original corner on that line be-
yond reasonable doubt; without rely
ing upon the all-sutiicient fact in
itself, OF priority of title.
Besides, the Leslie patent describes
the land by metes and corners, not by
"metes and bounds" thus, "thence S.
70' 21 1859 chains, thence $3.50
chains, ETC." Not S. 1921 east,
to a corner, or stake, hence
mistake Of the surveyor in the field
notes or in establishing corner would
be corrected by the course and dis
tance given in the patent. The de-
scription in the patent is paramount.
The field notes are auxiliary only.
The tail does not wag the dog.
The paradoXical statement of the
committee, in its report of April 18th,
that "the Wilson line, 20 2lS e., is
not a straight line" | beg to refer to
the ghosts of Euclid and Legendre.
Our city charter confers upon the
counclI"exclusive power. "See sub.dly.
No. 80, Sec. 8. "To provide for the
surveying of blocks and streets Of the
city, and for marking the boundary
lines of such blocks and streets, etc,
etc" In accordance with Sub. Div.
No. 27, authorizing 1t TO make bylaws
and ordinances not inconsistent with
the laws of the United States or of
this state, TO carry into effect the
provisions OF this charter, the council
passed an ordinance on April 9th,
1861, providing for the survey and es-
tablishment OF the common bounda-
res OF all the blocks and streets Of the
city, which was dene under contract
with j. Il. Greer, and stands today
rs the official survey of the city, no
additions having been since made
thereto, except 10 extend existing
streets. Section |. title 2, chap. 7
further provides, "when any street
Improvements are ordered to be made
in the city Of Salem, or sidewalks are
ordered TO be built, all such improve
ments shall be made, and all such
sidewalks laid according TO n survey
duly made and recorded, by virtue OF
an ordinance, passed April 9th, 1861,
known as ordinance No. Ii, TO provide
for re-survey '0f the city OF Salem,
which said re-suryey is commonly
known as the 1.-THE new survey"
recorded in Sec. 25th, 1862, in
book of deeds, page l2l to l24, by Geo.
A. Edes, clerk of Marion county"
This survey, gives Leslie street as the
extreme southerly street of the city,
disposing OF the territory lying south
of Leslie, as follows: "The fractional
blocks lying along the south line of
the Wilson claim are of the following
widths, on the west side Of CONNER
clal street 298 feet, On the east side
POO feet on the west side of. f...........
street Liberty 303 It, In. and on the
east side 30l II in. OnIthe west side
of Church street 3l2 feet" thus giving
measurements extending these frac-
tional blocks the boundaries OF which
are the cause OF the present contro-
versy,) through 20 the Wilson line,
leaving no vacant strip for either
street or road; but as before stated, |
have placed my fences :upon a line
fixed by YOU 30 feet north of my south
line, the easement OF the public how
ever being restricted TO the use OF
said strip asa ROAD the fee remaining
In me.
The charter further authorizes the
Council Sub. div. 80. sec. TO provide
for the prevention and removal OF OBJ
structions from the Streets" This
must be done by ordinance not incon-
sistent with the laws of this state.
10 cannot try titles or fix or chanOa