But there’s Land on the Other Side of the Gully, too!
Now back to the purchase of 1,900 acres by Thomas Haynes from Edward M. Glenn as record in Book 1, page 228. Especially confusing in the deed is the description of the land in the vicinity of the Thomas Haynes house and “enclosure”:
"Thence up said river with its meanders to mouth of a deep ravine or gully some hundred varas (about 90 yards) above the enclosure and some 700 or 800 varas (about 750 yards) above his dwelling house;
"Thence with right angles with the river through bottom timber a sufficient distance so that a line at right angles shall include with the present improvement one hundred acres of what was and is timber and bottom land; ..."
Use this map and zoom in on the green area across the gully. (Just double-click on it until it's magnified enough.) Every descendant of Thomas Haynes for the past 100 years or so has probably believed that the Haynes place ended on the south side of that gully just above the house, just around the big bend in the river. But like most other settlers, the Haynes family needed bottom land for firewood and for timber. The deed provided for it by including perhaps as much as 100 acres, on the other (north) side of the gully. The wording “what was and is timber and bottom land” implies that Haynes had already cut some of the timber.
(I still remember a fairly well-built bridge across that gully that we used to visit and play around when we were kids. I never realized that Thomas Haynes probably had the original version of it built for his family’s use. Thomas even referred to that “old bridge” in one of his deeds in 1857.)
The description of the bounds of the land across the gully is so vague as to be unusable in locating the land on a map today, and it is even possible to argue that the deed does not necessarily say that the 100 acres are all on the other side of the gully. But according to subsequent deeds, Thomas Haynes eventually sold a total of 170 acres over there to his neighbor, Elizabeth Ann (Lytle) Stockdale, as will be described later. Apparently, Haynes and Glenn just marked off an area of bottom land they thought would be appropriate, not realizing that it was much larger than it was supposed to be. But then, why get picky over fifty or so acres when thousands of acres are involved in other situations?
While we’re discussing the land around “his dwelling house,” notice that the house was “some 700 or 800 varas” from the gully (or about 750 yards away). But Grandma Haynes’s house was much closer to the mouth of the gully than that – I would estimate less than 150 yards or so. This means that what we have always considered to be the location of the traditional Haynes place home site probably wasn’t. This is not to say that there was no house where Grandma Haynes lived before she moved there; there probably was; but the “main” house where the Thomas Haynes family lived was farther away. In which direction, I cannot say for certain, but a later document we found strongly suggests that the main house was farther down the river, on the bluff overlooking the Lavaca River valley.
Now back to the purchase of 1,900 acres by Thomas Haynes from Edward M. Glenn as record in Book 1, page 228. Especially confusing in the deed is the description of the land in the vicinity of the Thomas Haynes house and “enclosure”:
"Thence up said river with its meanders to mouth of a deep ravine or gully some hundred varas (about 90 yards) above the enclosure and some 700 or 800 varas (about 750 yards) above his dwelling house;
"Thence with right angles with the river through bottom timber a sufficient distance so that a line at right angles shall include with the present improvement one hundred acres of what was and is timber and bottom land; ..."
Use this map and zoom in on the green area across the gully. (Just double-click on it until it's magnified enough.) Every descendant of Thomas Haynes for the past 100 years or so has probably believed that the Haynes place ended on the south side of that gully just above the house, just around the big bend in the river. But like most other settlers, the Haynes family needed bottom land for firewood and for timber. The deed provided for it by including perhaps as much as 100 acres, on the other (north) side of the gully. The wording “what was and is timber and bottom land” implies that Haynes had already cut some of the timber.
(I still remember a fairly well-built bridge across that gully that we used to visit and play around when we were kids. I never realized that Thomas Haynes probably had the original version of it built for his family’s use. Thomas even referred to that “old bridge” in one of his deeds in 1857.)
The description of the bounds of the land across the gully is so vague as to be unusable in locating the land on a map today, and it is even possible to argue that the deed does not necessarily say that the 100 acres are all on the other side of the gully. But according to subsequent deeds, Thomas Haynes eventually sold a total of 170 acres over there to his neighbor, Elizabeth Ann (Lytle) Stockdale, as will be described later. Apparently, Haynes and Glenn just marked off an area of bottom land they thought would be appropriate, not realizing that it was much larger than it was supposed to be. But then, why get picky over fifty or so acres when thousands of acres are involved in other situations?
While we’re discussing the land around “his dwelling house,” notice that the house was “some 700 or 800 varas” from the gully (or about 750 yards away). But Grandma Haynes’s house was much closer to the mouth of the gully than that – I would estimate less than 150 yards or so. This means that what we have always considered to be the location of the traditional Haynes place home site probably wasn’t. This is not to say that there was no house where Grandma Haynes lived before she moved there; there probably was; but the “main” house where the Thomas Haynes family lived was farther away. In which direction, I cannot say for certain, but a later document we found strongly suggests that the main house was farther down the river, on the bluff overlooking the Lavaca River valley.