you made me look at the stone again:
Now I have to agree with you, without a doubt, this picture shows it better:
It does look like it was marked as an open and a closed 4 but clearly it is closed, the open part may just be part of the rock.
The guys working this area were apparently unfamiliar with writing numbers of any kind anywhere. I have found very few stones with markings and I believe all were in other counties. I have found some with numbers such as: 80,60,100,40 to indicate subdivisions of the original quarter section. Also, a few marked CS at the center set by county surveyors over 125 years ago.
Holy Cow, post: 370573, member: 50 wrote: The guys working this area were apparently unfamiliar with writing numbers of any kind anywhere. I have found very few stones with markings and I believe all were in other counties. I have found some with numbers such as: 80,60,100,40 to indicate subdivisions of the original quarter section. Also, a few marked CS at the center set by county surveyors over 125 years ago.
I think the coolest ones I've found are the stones with 1/8 marked on them for "8th" corners. I've only seen it for some 1884 original surveys.
And late in the GLO stone setting they would set the center of a township and mark the township and range on them.
The SE corner of Section 16.
MightyMoe, post: 370582, member: 700 wrote: I think the coolest ones I've found are the stones with 1/8 marked on them for "8th" corners. I've only seen it for some 1884 original surveys.
And late in the GLO stone setting they would set the center of a township and mark the township and range on them.
The SE corner of Section 16.
What would an "eighth" corner be? Would it be the same as a 1/16th? or is it the corner of a "square" that has half the area of a quarter?
Therein is the problem. Six of one and half of dozen of the other is equal. What one person views as standard nomenclature can still be confusing to others.
MightyMoe, post: 370582, member: 700 wrote: I think the coolest ones I've found are the stones with 1/8 marked on them for "8th" corners. I've only seen it for some 1884 original surveys.
And late in the GLO stone setting they would set the center of a township and mark the township and range on them.
The SE corner of Section 16.
That requirement first showed up (I believe) in the 1894 Manual (Page 35), and was carried forward into the 1902 Manual as well (Page 39). It said (in part):
When more than one-half of all the corners in a township are stone corners, the descriptions in paragraph 1 and corners therein described are established for cor. of secs. 15, 16, 21 and 22, will be modified as follows: after "marked," insert the words
"4 N. on N.E., and
3 W. on S.E. face."
Some of these stones that I have recovered over the years where absolutely beautiful (to me anyway).
Loyal
Tom Adams, post: 370586, member: 7285 wrote: What would an "eighth" corner be? Would it be the same as a 1/16th? or is it the corner of a "square" that has half the area of a quarter?
In this case it's the CE1/16, CW1/16, and the east and west 1/16 on the north and south section lines. So the section gets parceled up into 8 80ac tracts.
So, someone is subdividing the section into the W1/2 of the NW1/4, E1/2 of the NW1/4, etc, etc for all of the quarters. I would tend to call the monuments 1/16th corners, but I can understand the reasoning I guess. What if someone divided their 1/8th of the section in half, would those corner monunents need ti be restamped as 1.16th corners? (Just thinking "out loud" no need to respond.