Thomas Haynes Sells 612 Acres to James M. Stanton (Area S2 on the Lavaca River)
On March 31, 1851, for $306, Thomas Haynes sold James M. Stanton 612 acres of land (area S2) on the Lavaca River, immediately below the Haynes place. So by this time, Haynes had fairly well determined how much land he would retain for himself and his family, since he was fixing his southeastern boundary along the river. The Stanton land was surveyed, and the metes and bounds were fairly clearly specified in the deed (Book D, page 136).
This is the third instance I found in which the buyer of some land was already living on it when the buyer made the purchase. The land description starts out with:
"Beginning at a large post oak near the bluff above Stanton’s house and marked with three hacks (horizontal cuts in the tree bark); thence …"
Stanton had been living there long enough to have a house built and a field under cultivation. According to another deed, there was a lumber mill nearby on the Haynes place (though perhaps not this early), so lumber may have been readily available.
On March 31, 1851, for $306, Thomas Haynes sold James M. Stanton 612 acres of land (area S2) on the Lavaca River, immediately below the Haynes place. So by this time, Haynes had fairly well determined how much land he would retain for himself and his family, since he was fixing his southeastern boundary along the river. The Stanton land was surveyed, and the metes and bounds were fairly clearly specified in the deed (Book D, page 136).
This is the third instance I found in which the buyer of some land was already living on it when the buyer made the purchase. The land description starts out with:
"Beginning at a large post oak near the bluff above Stanton’s house and marked with three hacks (horizontal cuts in the tree bark); thence …"
Stanton had been living there long enough to have a house built and a field under cultivation. According to another deed, there was a lumber mill nearby on the Haynes place (though perhaps not this early), so lumber may have been readily available.
Stanton's 612 Acres (S2) with Other Tracts
Despite the relatively good description of the metes and bounds in the deed, I still found it difficult to place the land precisely on the Google map and still yield 612 acres. The closest I could achieve early on was about 575 acres. Perhaps the river has changed course? Eventually, I shifted the southwestern boundaries (it’s not a straight line; there are two of them) a little more to the southwest. That moved the adjacent (S3) area (also Stanton’s, eventually) to the left a little, which squeezed the adjacent small, triangular (M) area (eventually traded to Menefee) down a little, and that was good because the (M) area was too large (152 acres versus the 138 needed). Then everything fit nicely.
In modern terms, this land straddles FM 616 between Vanderbilt and Lolita in the vicinity of the first Lavaca River overflow bridge. Some of it is suitable only for grazing, since it floods easily when the river is up, so fifty cents per acre may have been a reasonable price for it.
In modern terms, this land straddles FM 616 between Vanderbilt and Lolita in the vicinity of the first Lavaca River overflow bridge. Some of it is suitable only for grazing, since it floods easily when the river is up, so fifty cents per acre may have been a reasonable price for it.
North 50° East Property Lines are Introduced, in Addition to North 45° East
Prior to this sale to Stanton, all of the major “east-west” property lines were parallel to the upper line of the Musquiz Grant itself and thus had bearings of South 45° West (which is the same as North 45° East, of course). But now, Thomas specified (or allowed Stanton to specify) that Stanton’s upper line, and thus the new lower line for that part of the Haynes place along the river, would be North 50° East. There is nothing wrong with that, since the Earth’s surface is not a nice, rectangular grid, but it did introduce a complicating factor into the layout of the internal subdivisions of the Haynes place and led to some later confusion and errors in specifying the boundaries of various sub-tracts. In addition, the bearing of property lines frequently went unspecified in some deeds, leaving open the question of whether that line had one bearing or the other. It is likely that Thomas was carefully keeping track of everything, but after his death, apparent confusion led to errors.
Prior to this sale to Stanton, all of the major “east-west” property lines were parallel to the upper line of the Musquiz Grant itself and thus had bearings of South 45° West (which is the same as North 45° East, of course). But now, Thomas specified (or allowed Stanton to specify) that Stanton’s upper line, and thus the new lower line for that part of the Haynes place along the river, would be North 50° East. There is nothing wrong with that, since the Earth’s surface is not a nice, rectangular grid, but it did introduce a complicating factor into the layout of the internal subdivisions of the Haynes place and led to some later confusion and errors in specifying the boundaries of various sub-tracts. In addition, the bearing of property lines frequently went unspecified in some deeds, leaving open the question of whether that line had one bearing or the other. It is likely that Thomas was carefully keeping track of everything, but after his death, apparent confusion led to errors.