287
#
"The late Governor (Sir George Bonham).
12
Го Jo me
such
aw e
rin 1855 seems
Gammer
Sev
expression by the perfectly careluarios,
when he directed that statement to be mãos he had but the are record to refer to aiz: the plan approved by Sir George Bonham in 1853, which plan does not whibit any Itt fet contour, as part of the Southern Boundary.
113.
Now against the above simple
and convincing induction from admitted facts what has Coloured Sevell to allege,
#
say it is true
د
the actually is drrion to "That on accountofils paper not being " sufficiently large the plan does not show! The Boundaries quite up to the 300 feet
"Contour 15"
14.
This is the first time that I won
heard of a
recorded, agreement for transfer of
property or definition of boundaries being
held to include
the
mare
or the
agreement because if the paper
chan
represented
mi
map annered thereto, on which it was drawn.
had been larger, a greater
area could have
been shown, and would doubtless have been included in the transfer!
1.
I do not thrust it necessary
Spary to deal finiter with such an argument repecially
as it has not been advanced till 1866,
whilst it is opposed to the direct averment
of the Ordnance Offices in 1855- that such
was
not the
cool-
but that on the conti
contrary
the Boundary Bandaries of the Ordnance limits, and
Stones were then the actual