The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1892-02-03
CARELESS TRADES.
WHAT IL Cost to Save Five Dollars
A Story From Which Others May
Learn n Lesson.

In the case OF Evans against Steltz the jury
last week rendered their verdict in favor OF
the defendant 1t seems that Mrs Steltz sew
eral years ago, sold to James Evans certain
tract Of land described by certain metes aud
bounds, which tract was said To contain 42O
acres more or less"
The tract consisted OF piece ofland on the
west side Of the road, supposed to contain 3S9
acres and u piece o land on the east side con-
tanning twenty-one acres-making 42o acres
In ALL
No survey of the land was made at the time
OF the SALE Neither Evans nor Mrs. SteltZ
knew certainly how much the tract really
contained, but IL was described by metes ana
bounds. 80
Some time after the sale was made this suit
was entered, demanding that Mrs. SteltZ
make good the shortage in the number OF
acres, by extending the l:ne far enough over
Mrs. StDltz land 10 give Evans the number oi
acres named in his title, ,'4CO acres
Mrs. SteltZ resisted on the ground that she
sold the land by "metes and bounds" and
that the actual number OF acres was an in-
material fact; that she conveyed the LAND de- de-
any error of Judgment as to the number ol
acres that she sold 1t by the tract.
In tho course OF the trial the Court ordered
a survey 10 be made, which cost Sl7, or about
twice as much as would have been the neces-
sary cost of surveying ii at the time OF the
sale.
That survey reported lo7 acres short OF the
400 acres, more or less.
allowed Il neighbor 10 encroach on his orgi.
nal line, which encroachment he admitted
was to the extent Of some 81 or 40 acres, put
which encroachment was really something
like tn acres.
Besid. being required TO make the survey
which should have been made at the time OF
the sale, the parties to this sui: have been
obliged TO attend two terms Of the Court,
while undergoing the veXation. the suspense
and the expense of u long continued suit, the
actual cost in Court expenses and lawyers
fees have been perhaps S2O0.
And unless he goes into Court 10 recover
the 60 acres, II Is probable that Evans Will
loss the land which he admitted was cut OF
or taken from him by neighbor.
In that event new Law suit, and addition
al costs will he incurred to get the property
about which there would have been no chance
for a dispute. ifthe survey had been made at
the time Of the sale.
are of interest chiefly, 10 point out the error
or mistake in the common carelessness OF
ira nsferring land.
II there ever was truth in the maxim of
penny wise and pound foolish" II Is found in
the act OF buying or selling land without a
survey and plat OF the ground.
In the case lust mentioned IL Is fair to pre-
sumo that the survey was not made because
of the trifiins expense incident thereto. The
result has been that Lhe parties 10 this tran
saction have expended In this law suit sum,
the interest of which wonld pay the cost OF
Surveying IL three times year from now un-
til the end OF time.
Let no wise man buy tract of land which
has not been surveyed, or If he does so foolish
n thing, then let him stick the closer to his
bargain There Is no way under the sun of
altering q sale VIII hich has been made by meies
and bounds. AS Judge Hudson said: IF Il
COW pen which contained only an acre were
sold by metes and bounds, and said TO con-
tain thousand acres, the buyer could get
only the land which he bought and which
was included within the metes and bounds"
In E,aking trade for land 1t Is safer, cheap
er and better 10 consult n ;awyear.
We were not in Court, but we believe the
statements above made in reference to the
aw 1t are true.