umcrnn sums v. MAXWELL LAND-GRANT 00. 23
· able to the othcers of the government. I do not think that principle,
when fairly construed, extends to the case at bar so far as to support
the claim of the defendants. It is obvious that surveys may be made
in two very different classes of cases. In the one class the surveyor
may be directed to survey a tract of a given number of acres. In
such a case, there being no special provision as to the form or loca-
tion of the tract, a discretion must be left with him. He may survey
the tract in a square form or with irregular boundaries, or locate it
anywhere within the prescribed out-boundaries. Thus, in the case at ~
bar, if the claim had been confirmed to the amount of 22 leagues
only, it might fairly be held that the surveyor had a discretion whether
to locate these 22 leagues in a square form or in a tract of irregular
shape, and anywhere within the out-boundaries, and that when he
had made a survey and plat of such number of leagues, and a patent
had been issued therefor, the matter was beyond inquiry in the _
courts. Yet even in such cases, at least before the issue of the pat-
ent, it would seem, from the remarks of Mr. Justice MILLER in the
case of U. S. v. Vallejo, supra, there might be circumstances which j
would justify a review of the surveyor’s action in the courts; and,
on the other hand, if he included in his survey a tract larger than
he was authorized, his error ought to be correctible in the courts
even after the issue of the patent. Thus,,if he were directed to make
a survey of 22 leagues, and, in fact, surveyed and jplatted a tract of.
44 leagues, I think the error one that could be corrected even after
the issue of the patent, and that the principle heretofore referred
to could not be invoked to sustain his action. His action would be .
beyond his jurisdiction, which was limited to 22 leagues, and there-
fore not binding on the government, for the action of no tribunal or
oihcer beyond the limits of the jurisdiction conferred is binding. The
other class of cases exists where the surveyor isrequired to survey,
not a tract of a given number of acres, but a tract of certain specihed
general boundaries. In that case he has no general discretion. He
may not run the lines where he sees fit, or include within his survey
any land outside of those general boundaries. It is, perhaps, true _
that where the calls in sucha general description can be upon the
configuration of the ground answered in two or three different ways,
his judgment as. to the true answer, when conhrmed by the depart-
ment at Washington and followed by a patent, may be beyond the
challenge of the government. But when.these calls arein fact dis-
regarded and the lines run far outside the general description, I think
it must be held that he has gone outside his jurisdiction. Of course, s
no trifling departure would, after the solemn act of the issue of a pat-
ent, justify the interference of a court of equity; but when such de-
parture is a gross one, and a large body of land not within the speci-
hed out-boundaries is included within the survey, it seems to me a
case is disclosed for the interposition of the courts. All the cfficers
. of the government, from the highest to the lowest, are but agents j