The daily sentinel., 1908-08-14

Mesa in accordance herewith.
IN pursuance thereof meeting
was held in Grand junction to con-
slider the claims of each county, and
| have also received statements and
brifes from the county attorneys of
each county presenting arguments in
favor of their respective claims and
have made an examination of certain
portions of the Grand Mesa.
"A careful reading of the descrip-
tion of this common boundary line
between Delta and Mesa counties as
given in the statutes, viii show that
it may be divided into three parts,
the first describes the northeast
corner of Delta county IA point on
| the boundary line of Mesa county, :,
the second describes a divide be-
tween the first and third parts and
the third describes the southwestern
extremity of the Grand Mesa.
The point of intersection of the
meridian of 107 degrees 80 inches
west longitude and the divide be-
tween the waters of the Grand river
| is one of the specific callings in the
description of the boundary line, be-
ing the northeast corner of Delta
county and is easy of accurate deter
mination and location and therefore
would control as one point of this
|
Il do not believe it will be seri-
J ously contended otherwise than the
prong of the Grand Mesa, the rim of
! which terminates at or within Sec.
| "a. township 3 south, range 81 west
/ as shown on the maps, is the south
western division of the Grand Mesa,
when regarded as a typographical de-
| scription and that its determination
! is the extreme southwestern eXtrem-
/ ity of the Grand Mesa and also that
this point is susceptible of accurate
/ determination and location and it
| therefore should control as a point
or corner in the boundary line be-
| tween the counties.
THE part of the description OF
this boundary line that is so indefi-
mite as to cause dispute between
the counties, reads as follows:
Thence along (and WITH said di-
vide in a southwesterly direction to
a point on the extreme southwestern
extremity of the Grand Mesa
AN examination of the statutes
creating these counties shows that
there is an apparent intention to
have this portion of the boundary
line follow along and with a divide
and that such divide should connect
the two points accurately described
| in the description of the boundary
line, but the divide between the wa
ters of the Grand river and the north
fork of the Gunnison river extends
only to what may be called the south
| eastern extremity of the Grand Mesa
and not to the Southwestern extremity
of said mesa.
1t is my opinion that the bound
ary line in dispute should begin at
! the northeast corner of Delta county,
a well defined point and called for
| in the description of the line, thence
in southwesterly direction along
and with the divide between the wa
| ters of the Grand river and the north
fork of the Gunnison river, so far as
said divide may extend, then ii
| should follow a divide in south
| westerly direction onto and along the
Grand Mesa, regardless of what wa
ters said divide may separate, to the
southwestern extremity thereof.
which also is well defined point and
called for in the description of the
line. and situated at or near Sec. "a
T. 3 S. Il. 81 W., thence in a south
westerly direction to the south of the
Rio Dominques, etc. This opinion
sustains the claims of Mesa county
regarding the location of the pound
airy line between the counties.
IN reading this conclusion | have
only followed the rule that where
known and undisputed monuments
are found on the ground they should
govern and less definite description
of the line.
lit is required that the lines shall
be run out and established, and plain
| and substantial mound and marks
be erected so as to fix and define such
boundary line. which FORK shall be
done by the state engineer in connec-
| tion with the county surveyor of each
| county.
Il am prepared to proceed with
this work upon notification of the
readiness of the county surveyors of
| each county to participate therein.
Very reSpectfully