It depends on what was patented.
If a patent was issued for the whole section or a half section containing the fractional lots, they would not be numbered and, as far as the owner is concerned, they never did exist because the owner could dispose of his land any way he wished.
The retracing surveyor merely finds the physical monumentation and then compares that to the record description. If they don't match, correct the description.
The acreage figures are not accurate anyway so, prevent a fraudulent land transaction by helping the owner correct the record.
Richard Schaut
so the proper legal is?
It appears to me the 1855 manual says that what in later years would be called the S1/2NE1/4 of a closing or fractional section is Lot 1. Lot 2 contains the two acreages shown on the plat north of Lot 1. What would later be called Lots 1 and 2. Reading the manual is confusing because it discusses numbering lots as I am used to with the first lot the farthest northest lot, then moving west, then droping south and moving east. However, it then discusses numbering the "interior" 80 acres of a 1/4 that abuts to the township line with #1 (as it shows on the plats) thereby creating two lot #1's in that section. Then numbering the remaining acreage in that 1/4 as Lot 2 creating two lot 2's in the section. Therefore, the south portion of the NE1/4 would be Lot 1 and the north portion which are the two returned acreages is Lot 2. Maybe I'm wrong. but that's what the plat and the manual is telling me.
Richard, those lots exist the minute that the GLO Plat was approved and signed, they still exist. The Patent was the document that conveys title to what the GLO Platted.
Those Plats and what they represent do not move around with changes in ownership. They are the base the system is built on, kick the foundation out and the whole system collapses. The areas shown on the GLO Plats are surprising accurate, some places better than others.
jud
> It depends on what was patented.
>
> If a patent was issued for the whole section or a half section containing the fractional lots, they would not be numbered and, as far as the owner is concerned, they never did exist because the owner could dispose of his land any way he wished.
>
> The retracing surveyor merely finds the physical monumentation and then compares that to the record description. If they don't match, correct the description.
>
> The acreage figures are not accurate anyway so, prevent a fraudulent land transaction by helping the owner correct the record.
>
> Richard Schaut
Not so... the patent would certainly state the Lots by number, as they were created by number when the plat was approved. They could not have been sold prior to the that...
I have seen government lots described as quarter of a quarter of a section in patents without mention of any existence of a government lot, even with the township plat clearly showing lot numbers.
The question was: "If the fractional sections are not actually numbered on the plats, is it wrong to designate a lot as a certain number?
The answer is that the fractional part of the section is not a lot unless it was numbered as a lot on the plat or patented as a lot. If it was not numbered on the plat and there was never a lot number mentioned in the patent as in the example above it would be wrong to designate one as a government lot. Of course local officials could and do number sectional subdivisions as numbered lots but that is not part of the official government survey, It is a local designation akin to "Brown's Subdivision". If we knew town and range we could look up the patent.
But they are numbered.
I realize the posted plat is numbered. The question was re unnumbered fractional parts. I want to see the patents.
That would be interesting-do you have some unnumbered Lots in your area? It's not something we see out here, but I imagine in the older PLSS things like that are probably common.
Unnumbered fractional parts are a dime a dozen here. about 50% statewide I estimate. When the lots are numbered the patent calls them out. When they aren't the patent calls them fractional parts. Since we neighbor NE I assume the same applies there. The Government surveys took place in the 1830's 40's and 50's. These are scanned plats in a GIS but you get the idea
That's really interesting. You can see the evolution of Lot numbering. The process described in the 55 manual as shown in J. Penry's post must have been an effort to allow a way to describe the Lotted areas which had been unnumbered. Then it continued to evolve into what is done today. I kind wish they would have kept the lotting for the 80ac. areas described in the 55 manual as: "interior lot of the northern and western tiers".
