Case Name: BAYLESS'S LESSEE v. RUPERT
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1834-07
Citations: 1 Wright 634
Docket Number: 
Parties: BAYLESS’S LESSEE v. RUPERT.
Judges: JUDGES-WRIGHT AND WOOD.
Reporter: Reports of cases at law and in chancery, decided by the Supreme court of Ohio, during the years 1831, 1832, 1833, 1834.
Volume: 1
Pages: 655–656

Head Matter:
SHELBY COUNTY,
JULY TERM, 1834.
JUDGES-WRIGHT AND WOOD.
BAYLESS’S LESSEE v. RUPERT.
Ejectment — act of congress — errors—section lines — quantity.
The act of congress of 1805, makes the lines and corners of the government surveys, as now established and recorded, the true line of the survey, and the quantity of land the true quantity, whether accurate or not.
*The courts cannot change this law nor correct errors in the survey, [635 by which they deviate from the directions of the law under which the public lands were surveyed.
Ejectment. The plaintiff claimed under a patent for section 20, t. 2, r. 13, dated January, 1813. The defendant claims under a patent for section 26, in the same township. It appeared in evidence that there were two marked lines several rods apart between these ■sections, one called the west and the other the east line.
Good and Schenck for the plaintiff.
Young and M. Corwin for the defendant.

Opinion:
WRIGHT, J.
to the jury. The real question in dispute is, where Is the line between sections 20 and 26 ? The act of congress, of February, 1805, (29 O. L. 38) provides that the lines run, and corners marked and returned to the surveyor general's office shall be the true lines and corners, and the quantity of land so returned shall be esteemed the true quantity. Good policy required the passage of this law. The laws required the lines of the government surveys to be run to the cardinal points of the compass. But was this always done? Were the instruments used always accurate? Neither. Lines were, however, in fact run, and returned, and recorded. To these all had access — by these sales were made — and by these this law requires all to be bound. The real question is, then, where was the line which is returned as the boundary between these two sections run on the ground ? Not where it should have been run. If the line run and returned is ever so erroneous, it must govern, because the law so provides : we have no power to correct it. The parties bought of the government to this line, and so they must hold. You have a copy of the record and field notes, and have heard the evidence. If the west line as claimed is the line returned and described in the record, the plaintiff is entitled to your verdict, if not the defendant should have it.
Verdict for the plaintiff.
[Surveys — lines as actually run, and not as should have been run, constitute boundary; Reed v. Marsh, 8 O. 147, 158.]