
    Scipio Pernam versus William Wead.
    Where the boundaries of land, as mentioned in a conveyance, are fixed, known, and unquestionable monuments, although neither the courses, nor distances, nor the computed contents, as described in the conveyance, correspond therewith, the monuments will govern.
    In a writ of entry sur disseisin, the demandant declared on his own seisin, and on a disseisin by the tenant. The tenant claimed under a levy of an execution extended upon the demandant’s land, issued upon a judgment recovered against him by one Edmund Sawyer.
    
    On the trial, which was had before Sewall, J.“, at the sittings here after the last November term, upon the general issue, the only question in dispute was, whether the land, which the tenant claimed to hold, was included within the bounds of the land, on which the execution was extended. Upon the evidence, the judge was of opinion with the tenant, and so directed the jury ; but they found a verdict for the demandant. The tenant thereupon moved for a new trial, because the verdict was against evidence.
    [ * 132 ] *From the report of the judge, it appears that the land on which the execution of Sawyer was extended, was bounded south-westwardly by Drury Lane, thirty-five feet; northeastwardly by the land of Sanborn and Collins, ninety-nine feet; north-westwardly by other land of the demandant, about thirty-five feet, by a line parallel to Drury Lane; and south-westwardly by land of Fletcher, ninety-nine feet; and this parcel is said to contain thirteen rods.
    From a plan which had been taken under an order of the Court, the line on Drury Lane, extending from the land of Sanborn and Collins to the land of Fletcher, appears to be thirty-five feet three inches and a half; and by the same plan, the line on the demand-ant’s other land appears to be forty-two feet nine and a half inches: and this last extent of line is preserved for twenty-eight feet six inches from the said other land of the demandant towards Drury Lane, where the length of the line is thirty-seven feet three and a half inches.
    The demandant insisted that, as there was an over-measure oi three and a half inches on one side, he ought to recover on that side a strip of that width the whole length of the parcel extended upon ; and as, on the other side, there was an over-measure of five feet six inches, extending twenty-eight feet „six inches, in the form of a parallelogram, he ought also to recover that parallelogram. But it was agreed that Drury Lane, the land of Sanborn and Collins on one side, and the land of Fletcher on the other side, are all fixed, known monuments, about which there was no dispute; and that there was no question between the parties as to the other land of the demandant’s parallel to Drury Lane. The demandant relied not only on the admeasurement, but also on the contents, which give the tenant thirteen rods and two fifths, instead of thirteen rods, the contents stated in the extent of Sawyer’s execution.
    There was no argument, and the opinion of the Court was de livered to the following effect by
   * Parsons, C. J.

Upon considering the facts in this [* 133] case, we have no doubt as to the motion. It must prevail, and a new trial be granted. When the facts were agreed by the parties, or proved at the trial, the result was a mere conclusion of law. And on these points the law has been long settled.

When the boundaries of land are fixed, known, and unquestion able monuments, although neither courses, nor distances, nor the computed contents, correspond, the monuments must govern. With respect to courses, from errors in surveying instruments, variation of the needle, and other causes, different surveyors often disagree. The same observations apply to distances, arising from the inaccuracy of measures, or of the party measuring ; and computations are often erroneous. But fixed monuments remain: about them there is no dispute or uncertainty; and what may be uncertain must be governed by monuments, about which there is no dispute.

In the present case, Sanborn and Collins’s land on one side, and Fletcher’s on the other, are fixed monuments. The land is bounded on them, and must extend in width from one to the other. If the contents had proved less than thirteen rods, yet the tenant could claim only to those monuments; and where the contents are found to be greater, he still shall hold to the same monuments. The jury therefore mistook the law; and the cause must be sent to another jury to correct the mistake.

New trial ordered.  