> I suppose the four pole chain theory would sound right.
Well, the fact that the map has a scale of 1 inch = 40 chains is a pretty good clue as to units. If you consider how much more computationally difficult the acreage calculations would have been in varas, measuring in chains was a no-brainer.
The actual survey of the West part of Galveston Island that R.C. Trimble and Wm. Lindsey made was in the summer of 1837 and was supervised by the Treasury Department. The General Land Office hadn't even opened, let alone issued instructions for the survey of the public lands, so the surveyors worked in convenient units.
The same thing happened when the Republic of Texas hired a surveyor in 1840 to subdivide the thousands of acres of land, the so-called Government Tract, that the Republic had acquired from private owners upon which the 640 ac. site of the original City of Austin was laid out in 1839. Those surveyors weren't obligated to survey in varas and chose chains to simplify acreage calculations.
and make that also:
> No, the lot areas are calculated as parallelograms trapezoids.
So 18000 acres were surveyed on the summer of 1837 in what time frame before the first lots were sold... I mean auctioned.
Sounds like a lot of buffoons were pushed.
> > No. The idea that the surveyor should have a hobby instead of playing brain games with a 177 year old survey isn't amusing at all.
>
> Okay, we'll mark you down as not interested in the problem, regardless of whether it is relevant to a lawsuit or not. Next. :>
Yes, please do mark me down as not terribly interested in working out the heavy mental lifting for your paying job. 🙂
Which Button Do I Push? We asked Trimble & Lindsey.
> So 18000 acres were surveyed on the summer of 1837 in what time frame before the first lots were sold... I mean auctioned.
> Sounds like a lot of buffoons were pushed.
The most valuable property on Galveston Island was that at the East end near the channel where the harbor was situated. The West end of the island was just something that the Congress of the Republic of Texas thought might be sold to raise some quick money. Trimble and Lindsey's survey to subdivide the West end was made in the summer of 1837 and the first sale of the lots was in November that same year.
Mssrs. Trimble and Lindsey then moved on to better things in San Antonio, where R.C. Trimble was the first County Surveyor of Bexar County and William Lindsey worked as one of his deputies. Lindsey then moved on to San Marcos where he died in 1852 as a wealthy man.
Which Button? The Answer
In case it isn't obvious, the measurements that the 1837 surveyors would have made were all either
(a) to the nearest 0.1 chain (where tags would have been on the chain) or
(b) to the nearest pole (0.25 chain, at the swivel on the 2-pole chain)
The 0.25 chain units on the length of the leg of the stairstep traverse show up crossing Lot 40 and Lot 59. The rest are, of course to the nearest 0.1 chain.
[pre]
Line Acres Length
(chains)
1 20.5
10.50
1&20 21.5
11.02
20 22.6
road
21 22.6
11.58
21&40 23.7
12.04
40 24.45
road
41 24.45
12.55
41&59 25.75
13.06
59 26.5
road
60 26.5
13.60
60&75 27.9
14.10
75 28.5
road
76 28.5
14.60
76&89 29.9
15.10
89 30.5
road
90 30.5
15.65
90&101 32.1
16.25
101 32.9
road
102 32.9
16.65
102&113 33.7
17.15
113 34.9
road
114 34.9
17.70
114&125 35.9
18.20
125 36.9
road
126 36.9
18.70
126&139 37.9
19.25
139 39.1
road
140 39.1
19.80
140&151 40.1
20.12
151 40.4
road
152 20.5
10.5
152&166 21.5
11.0
166 22.5
road
167 22.5
11.5
167&182 23.5
...
[/pre]
> Yes, please do mark me down as not terribly interested in working out the heavy mental lifting for your paying job.
Hey, you didn't really think that I didn't already know the answer when I asked the question did you?
I posted that problem for the surveyors who have inquiring minds and might like to know how to deal with a case like that should they ever come across it. It wasn't as if it was some sort of heavy math exercise that would require a super computer. The secret lay in putting on one's surveyor hat, approaching the question as a retracement problem, and knowing what the right answer would look like.
> > Yes, please do mark me down as not terribly interested in working out the heavy mental lifting for your paying job.
>
> Hey, you didn't really think that I didn't already know the answer when I asked the question did you?
>
> I posted that problem for the surveyors who have inquiring minds and might like to know how to deal with a case like that should they ever come across it. It wasn't as if it was some sort of heavy math exercise that would require a super computer. The secret lay in putting on one's surveyor hat, approaching the question as a retracement problem, and knowing what the right answer would look like.
No I knew that (A), you already had an idea and (B) didn't give all the information. That's why my answers were less than inquisitive. You always dangle a bit of bait to get people to bite. That's been your Modis Operadi as long as I've known you Kent. 🙂
Good luck with your math problem. 🙂
> No I knew that (A), you already had an idea and (B) didn't give all the information.
As I thought. You didn't actually read the problem. All of the information was provided. Now, it's true that I didn't post a photo of a 2-pole chain, but that should be something any surveyor would have already seen. So the exercise was simply one of applying deductive reasoning to surveying experience. Was that the real problem you were having? If so, I'm tremendously sorry to hear it.
> > No I knew that (A), you already had an idea and (B) didn't give all the information.
>
> As I thought. You didn't actually read the problem. All of the information was provided. Now, it's true that I didn't post a photo of a 2-pole chain, but that should be something any surveyor would have already seen. So the exercise was simply one of applying deductive reasoning to surveying experience. Was that the real problem you were having? If so, I'm tremendously sorry to hear it.
Actually, you didn't give a reason why this would be important until later, so I'm still right. Couple that with "actually having a life" and not needing to work your math problem, and I'm still confident that I've made an excellent choice. 🙂
"Well, the fact that the map has a scale of 1 inch = 40 chains is a pretty good clue as to units."
I'm amazed they were able to print the calculated acreage into that tiny a space.
> Actually, you didn't give a reason why this would be important until later, so I'm still right.
Yes, any problem that involves actually thinking should always be avoided whenever possible. I mean, if the answer to a problem doesn't promise to provide a surveyor with a faster way to RTK a fence post or a tree in the woods, it can't really matter in Deepest East Texas practice, right?
Looking at the island on Google Earth it doesn't appear that much of the original survey pattern remains. How much original evidence remains? How were the corners marked?
> How were the corners marked?
They were almost certainly marked by wood posts or stakes. An early survey made in 1900 reported finding posts with Roman numerals corresponding to lot numbers in place at various lot corners that would be consistent with the report of a survey made in 1840, only three years after Trimble and Lindsey's work.
The positions in which various corners were found marked in early 1900 can be re-established with relative certainty since the 1900 surveyor was competent and careful and a sufficient amount of evidence remains from which his work can be reconstructed with quite good certainty. I was able to find a couple of his monuments set in earlier work he did in connection with a lawsuit in 1894.
The 1900 surveyor was hardly the first resurveyor after the original survey in 1837. His work followed a resurvey made in 1881 by another competent surveyor who was both Galveston County Surveyor and City Engineer of Galveston to retrace and re-establish what was the initial line or baseline from which the 1837 survey began. That baseline was the West line of a senior grant upon which the City of Galveston was originally laid out. In 1881, that boundary was the City Limit Line of Galveston and it remained so in 1900.
> > Actually, you didn't give a reason why this would be important until later, so I'm still right.
>
> Yes, any problem that involves actually thinking should always be avoided whenever possible. I mean, if the answer to a problem doesn't promise to provide a surveyor with a faster way to RTK a fence post or a tree in the woods, it can't really matter in Deepest East Texas practice, right?
I agree with you, in part, that problems postulated by someone for self aggrandizing purposes, should be avoided whenever possible. I mean, it's not like we are here simply to look silly, with poor and incomplete information, for your comic relief, right? LOL! 🙂
> I agree with you, in part, that problems postulated by someone for self aggrandizing purposes, should be avoided whenever possible. I mean, it's not like we are here simply to look silly, with poor and incomplete information, for your comic relief, right?
Wow. I posted a problem that I could provide the solution to and apparently that's a bad thing? For some fellow who indicated that he had no interest in the problem posted, you're working overtime to convince yourself that you're right.
Obviously, if you haven't considered the problem, you won't have any basis for knowing whether there was or was not sufficient information provided. If a surveyor had some minimal background knowledge that I'd think any surveyor doing retracement work in Texas should have, there was more than adequate information to work the problem.
> > I agree with you, in part, that problems postulated by someone for self aggrandizing purposes, should be avoided whenever possible. I mean, it's not like we are here simply to look silly, with poor and incomplete information, for your comic relief, right?
>
> Wow. I posted a problem that I could provide the solution to and apparently that's a bad thing? For some fellow who indicated that he had no interest in the problem posted, you're working overtime to convince yourself that you're right.
>
> Obviously, if you haven't considered the problem, you won't have any basis for knowing whether there was or was not sufficient information provided. If a surveyor had some minimal background knowledge that I'd think any surveyor doing retracement work in Texas should have, there was more than adequate information to work the problem.
Yes, when you post your problems, they typically leave the reader wondering and then some comment about how you used a superior intellect to solve it. That is the self-aggrandizing portion that I mentioned.
As far as working overtime, you are well known for "having the last word" on the subject and me checking a few times a day, to post a remark, has you working overtime on thinking about it. 🙂
Obviously, I considered the problem and solved it. No math was necessary in determining where the East line of those lots would be. That was elementary and determining what the side lines were "maybe" was, in my opinion, a bit of an excercise in futility from a boundary standpoint. Replace the Gulf of Mexico with a river, and my answer is the same. 🙂
However, allow me to give you a virtual "pat on the back" and a "good show" for solving a problem that has no bearing on where the East lines of those lots are. 🙂
