Perth Amboy evening news., 1913-02-07
TRACE TITLE
BACK TO 1922
Lands at South River and in
Monmouth Co. Involved.
tFrom the NEWS Correspondent

tfTom the u HS CorreSpoHdene)
Trenton, Feb. Involving a
charge of fraud and presenting many
interesting aspects from historical
standpoint. Chancery Court suit
which has as its feature a dispute
over large tract of land in Central
Jersey, including the South River
mill properly, Is in progress before
Vice-Chancellor Lewis. The action
Is being prosecuted by heirs af the
late Mrs. Mary Walker of Freehold,
with the executor, Samuel C.Cowart.
OF Freehold. Lawyer Eldon r. Walk
er, Of this city, represents the COM
plainants. The question of title in
volved goes back to 1922 to the time
of the Old Board of Proprietors, of
East Jersey.
In 1894 Mrs. Mary Walker, to-
gether with other heirs of John P.
Walker, joined in executing a deed
to one Anderson Dourgois, by means
of which they sold all their interest
in the tract Of land In question,
which upon Burgois's representation
they agreed contained $50 acres.
Subsequently it was discovered that
this tract contained more than 1900
acres, but no effort was made to re-
claim it. In 1904 Mrs. Walker made
an agreement of sale with the Gar
field Land Company to sell to them
a tract of land owned individually by
her, known as the Steelman tract and
supposed to contain upwards of 81
600 acres. The Land Company paid
$1,000, the remaining $4,000 to be
paid within a specified time. The
Land Company had search made
and discovered that the description
of land sold by Mrs. Walker and
others in 1894 to Burgois had in
cluded 626 acres Of this separate
Steelman tract: thereupon the Land
Company refused to pay the remain
ing $4,000 to Mrs. Walker, alleging
that her title was defective.
Mrs. Walker then filed a bill In
Chancery alleging that the deed OF
1894 had fraudlently included this
626 acres without her knowledge and
that Burgois having her executed
had praeticed fraud. Mrs. Walker
died In 1911, after specifying that
certain heirs, who are the complain
ants in this action. should have the
proceeds of the sale of these lands.
1t appears from the evidence that
Anderson Burgois himself drew up
this deed and had Mrs. Walker ex-
eeute 1T before him to his mother-in-
law, Mrs. Estell; further, that he
paid her an equal amount for her
deed as he did the other heirs, al
though he alleges that she was know
ingly selling 626 acres more.
''" 1t seems that in these days people
huvinr frorr tho Board Of Prcnrie-
tors, who had the grant of all these
lands from the King, were accustom-
ed to buy and pay for as the deed
specified 1000 acres more or less"
bounded and described as follows"
then would follow the description of
the outside lines of the land which
they would draw as wide as possible
so as that when actually surveyed
they would be found to include pos
sibly as much as 5000 acres The
man buying next to them would do
the same thing, SO that now great
numbers of these tracts are oerlap-
ping and disputed, and the only way
of settling the title is by taking 1t
back to the original grants from the
Board OF Proprietors.
In this case great multitude Of
deeds, surveys and returns and ori-
ginal grants were put In evidence
and were of great interest from a
historical standpoint. Among the
papers were old deeds of 1920 and
correspondence between persons at
that time, the moneys being specified
"a $50 pounds silver of New Jersey" s"
Almer ]. Earl. a surveyor OF Penn
berton, testified as an expert and
produced old original maps and sur
veys made by his great grandfather
before the Revolution. These maps
are almost priceless, as in many IN
stances they are the only authority
for the title to thousands Of acres Of
land.