T&P Block 34 Twp 3-S

I am working in T&P Ry Co Survey Block 34, Township 4 South in Glasscock County, Texas. There is quite a bit of conflict on the ground both between occupation and section lines as well as the 3+ surveyors who attempted to resolve and correct the block. (I have one corner in particular that has 5 different monuments and a fence corner). I am very impressed with Strahan's recovery of original rock mounds on both the east and west block lines which seems to throw questions into Seay's reconstruction of the common south corner of Blocks 34 and 35 Twp. 2-S and Morris's re-establishment of the west line of Block 34 Twp 3-S based on Seay's corner.

On Strahan's plat, recorded as Glasscock County Rolled Sketch VS, C.F. Blucher noted that "This construction should not be recognized unless all affected owners agree thereto." Seay patented several sections in the northeast side of the block along with Morris and Kellis. Between these patented sections, the dueling construction and the completely random surface occupation and fencing, this Block is a mess. I have been looking at Block 35, Twp. 3-S for some kind of guidance along the east line but so far in my research it looks like all the additional, filed correction work that has been done was Estes on the west side of the block. The notes for the east side are the original railroad surveys all being 1900 varas square and perfect 90° layout.

I am still doing research but I have prepared the working sketch and search ties in order to begin field work. The discrepancy between the west line of 34 and the east line of Block 35 is interesting based on Seay's apparently incorrect re-establishment of the common corner. I'm curious what W.C. Wilson did in this area as he seems to have been solely concerned with the original block configuration when he remapped the whole area for Texaco. I don't think I've seen a Wilson plat for this Block, though. Is there a resource where one can get copies of Wilson's work?

This is a pretty interesting retracement survey over about 100 square miles. Most of it is in Seay's rework in Township 1 and 2 which is a little screwy but it seems to work with what I am finding on the ground. His method of apportioning excess to the state sections is a little more complicated than Estes (since Seay held the railroad to 1900 varas on the north-south and the east-west as opposed to Estes only varying the east-west distances to arrive at 640 acres) but it does work. The occasional section corners broken apart into 3 separate corners is weird, but like I said, the monuments on the ground fit great and it's patented so it holds.