The Punta Gorda herald. [volume] (Punta Gorda, Fla.) 1893-1958, 1919-04-24

tshrubs, which Stone agreed to do
Stone was to have the row OF lots
to obtain his title from those who
owned it, and to pay all debts
connected with the building of the
Iseawall The town never guar
anteed Stoneis obligations, and
never made itself liable in any
manner, and the plaintiffs in the
suit against the Town for the pay
ment of the cement have about as
much chance of sticking the
Town as broken-winged bat has
of exploring hades without ben
singed. As a matter of fact, the
council and every. one connected
with the enterprise seemed to be
acting in good faith for the ben
eft Of the town generally, and no
one will deny that the seawall
and the filling in have saved
Retta Esplanade and the parks
and removed from view some very
unsightly places along the then
edge of the parks.
After the completion of the sea-
wall and the filing in, questions
| of title arose, and the attempt to
dispose of the 80 lots along the
seawall failed; so that the
trustee" gave up the project,
and turned the whole matter over
to A. X. Smith.
Smith undertook to go forward
with the project and did dispose
of two or three lots on contract
and by deed, but he was not finan-
cially equal to the job, it is said,
and later abandoned it. In the
meantime, the persons with whom
Stone had contracted to do the
dredging and furnish the mater
ial for the seawall, got uneasy
about their pay and filed liens on
all the land abutting the seawall.
These matters are still pending,
and some OF them are just claims
which should be adjusted in some
way, SO that the row of lots will
be free and clear.
Previous to the suit by the
property owners, Stone had con-
tracted to sell lots made out Of
the parks and fronting on Retta
Esplanade; and, when that
method of procedure was found
to be illegal, he endeavored to
protect the purchasers by assign
ing them lots on the seawall row,
but it is to be regretted that this
was a personal obligation on his
part and was not brought to the
attention of Smith, as it appears.
But those persons who are in good
faith made contracts with Stone
of Smith for lots on the seawall
front, have an equitable interest
in it, and should be protested in
the final apportionment of the
lots.
1t is apparent that the row OF
30 lots as delineated on Stones
plat cannot be conveyed, as his
plat norrowed the 66-foot streets
to an approach" of Is feet, thus
taking in parts of the streets,
which is absolutely illegal and
would cause a reversion OF that |
Ruch of each street to the origin
II donor. The remedy is very
simple. and it is to correct the plat
N this respect, make the streets
56 feet wide so as to be uniform,
md lay the lots off accordingly. |
Stone sought to make about 300
FEET Of land for lots by narrowing
he streets in his plat, and this
300 feet can be given back to the
streets and plenty room left for
he original 80 lots. 1t will
change the lines somewhat, but
zach person will get his lot. a lit
lie less in width perhaps, but well
worth the price paid.
The great thing to be desired
S that responsible persons will
axe up the lots not already taken
% that all can be placed on the
ak roll of the town, and the
own exercise jurisdiction Of the
.ddition, the same as it does in
ther additions. The remaining
ost of the seawall and dredging
hould be apportioned among the
0 lots and each owner, or pros
ective owner, pay his share.