 The position of that line being known, it controlled the survey only in respect to that line, which required the second line to be extended sufficiently to reach it.But if the two hackberry trees in that line were also identified as the true northeast corner, then the position of the north line and the length of the first course would be controlled by those trees.The court thought there was error in not putting it to the jury with sufficient distinctness that the course and distance of the first two lines of the survey must govern if the evidence was not sufficient to fix the location of the northern line by identifying the two hackberries with those called for in the field notes for the northeast corner of the survey or by some other marks or monuments.