; State v. Humble Oil Ref. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 128 S.W.2d 424, writ ref.; Gill v.Peterson, 126 Tex. 216, 86 S.W.2d 629; Gill v. Grimes, Tex.Civ.App., 238 S.W.2d 989.Hurr v. Hildebrand, 388 S.W.2d 284, 288 (Tex.Civ.App. — Houston 1965, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

When this cannot be done with reasonable certainty due to the lapse of time or the obliteration of the evidence of the original locater, it is not only permissible, but, out of necessity, required that the courts resort to any evidence tending to establish the place of the original footsteps of the surveyor which meet the requirement that it is the best evidence of which the case is susceptible. Leone Plantation, Inc. v. Roach, supra; Taylor v. Higgins Oil & Fuel Co., 2 S.W.2d 288 (Tex.Civ.App. dism'd); Gill v. Grimes, 238 S.W.2d 989 (Tex.Civ.App. n.w.h.). We hold that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the findings of the jury.

State v. Sun Oil Co., Tex.Civ.App., 114 S.W.2d 936, writ ref.; State v. Humble Oil Ref. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 128 S.W.2d 424, writ ref.; Gill v. Peterson, 126 Tex. 216, 86 S.W.2d 629; Gill v. Grimes, Tex.Civ.App., 238 S.W.2d 989. From the evidence it seems clear that the figure '1400', which is merely a point in a distance call, was written in the original field notes of 1857 through error and that such figure should have been 1600, as if was in the patent issued only two years thereafter.