TASMANIAN LAND GRANTS - MAKING SENSE OF REFERENCES, based on information supplied by Brian J Rollins, L.S., M.I.S. Aust. (Registered Land Surveyor)

(with particular reference to the 1822/3 Blackstone Heights Grant to Samuel Baker)

This set of notes came about after investigating a reference to land grants in the Port Dalrymple (Launceston) area, early in the history of Van Diemens Land. Samuel Baker, a freed Third Fleet convict, was said to have been locatee of land on the South Esk, then later on Brisbane Street.

1. The Archives Office of Tasmania, for the greatest volume of material of historic interest (references are prefaced by AOT).

2. The Lands Department for old surveys that give significant detail, such as dwellings, not found in the Archives Office.

3. The Deeds Office, not so much for surveys, but for Transfer Documents (Conveyances).

Original plans and charts were usually used as a convenient base to which all sorts of information, as well as other boundaries, could be added. It takes some experience (and skill in determining the differences between the handwriting of surveyors and clerks) to detect what is not part of the original drafting. For instance, references quoted might be those for acquisitions occurring decades later than the original grant.

Charts can be 'Town Charts' or 'County Charts', depending on the location. In the case of land granted to a particular individual – freed convict Samuel (Odken) Baker, who arrived in Port Dalrymple in 1813 – his rural South Esk block appears on the County Chart, and his two later small urban blocks, on Brisbane Street in Launceston, on the Town Chart. Surveys of both can be obtained.

The County Charts did not exist in the first few decades after European settlement. They were eventually compiled by the Lands Department as a management tool.

County Charts are a compilation of the original grants of land from the Crown. For each grant are listed the grantee’s (or purchaser’s) name, the area of the grant and the grant survey reference number. Some of these survey numbers will be shown as, for example '3/63' without the 'P' for 'Plan' prefix. In this case, the '3' is a book or volume number, and the '63' is a page or folio number. Each 'Land District' will be covered by a number of 'County' Charts (in fact, the two terms have even been interchanged over time).

Taking as an example, a grant made to Samuel Baker in 1820/21 (or 'location' – see further on for explanation) features on the 'Cornwall 3A' County Chart. It also happens to be in the Parish of Launceston. Each Land District is divided into a number of Parishes which may once have had some significance. Today, their significance is only historical.

There is no need to use the parish name as part of the identification for any plan.

Our understanding of these is that in the first decades of settlement, the demand for land grants exceeded the ability of the Survey Department (ie Lands Office) to survey the grants.

Hence the Location Orders were brought into being for the various recipients, although the exact boundaries could not be determined until surveyed. This must have caused boundless confusion for all parties, given the passage of time between occupation, improvement and eventual survey.

All land granted prior to 1862, when the Real Property Act came into being, was termed 'General Law' land. Documentary proof of ownership was the 'Deed', and when an owner sold his/her land a new deed, or 'conveyance', was drawn up by the owner's solicitor and the land 'conveyed' or transferred to the purchaser. This conveyance would have a unique number (no

duplication in other Land Districts or towns) – such as Conv. 12/1234. If the land transfer was subject to a mortgage (ie on the part of the purchaser) then that mortgage is usually given the next number in the series, ie Mort. 12/1235. When that mortgage is eventually paid off and released, the land is Reconveyed, and the document attesting to this is, for example, Re-

Conveyance 20/2345. If the owner died, the land is transferred under the terms of any will and is passed on by an Assent, eg Assent 23/4567.

Duplicates of these documents are housed in the 'Deeds Office' and there are Vendor's and Purchaser's Indexes.

If land was granted under the General Law (or 'Old System'), it remained general law land, unless somehow brought under the provisions of the Real Property Act. It was an imperfect system, and often very difficult to trace a chain of ownership, especially if land was subdivided.

Not all Deeds Office land was surveyed, or if it was, often not adequately cross-referenced. Thankfully, there is little general law land remaining today.

From the referencing perspective, all that one needs to quote is 'Deeds Office' or 'DO'.

The Real Property Act of 1862 introduced the 'Torrens Title' to replace the unwieldy and imperfect General Law system. All land granted from the Crown after its introduction automatically became 'real property'.

Earlier general law land could voluntarily be brought under the provisions of the RPA (which generally required a resurvey). This system, unlike the one it replaced, guaranteed indefeasibility of title and it is much easier to trace a chain of ownership by virtue of it. Unlike a 'deed', a 'title' always shows the title of the origin.

A piece of land can pass through many different owners over the decades. Under this system, the tile 'volume' and 'folio' number may remain unchanged. The change of ownership is effected by a 'Transfer' (with a separate registered number). If land is subdivided then new titles (and numbers) are created according to the number of new lots.

In earlier decades (after 1862) the CT volume and folio numbers were written in Roman Numerals.

Another name for this system of land title is the 'Torrens Title' system, named after Torrens, who developed it.

In studying the original grant survey (Plan 43 LO), a few things are worth commenting on. Unfortunately there is no date on the plan. Other very similar plans extend westwards to the Chudleigh area that also, frustratingly, have no date.

Given the location of the traverse lines, in some cases far removed from the river's bank that the survey was intending to map, it is as much a topographical survey as anything. By mapping the river, main creeks, ridge lines, improvements made by resident settlers, etc, it would be possible to plan how the country would be divided and granted to those entitled to it.

There are no small circles (representing surveyor's traverse stations) on the intersection of the traverse lines and boundaries plotted on the plan. This strongly suggests the boundaries were not physically measured as part of this survey.

Nearly all dimensions on the plan are to the nearest chain or ½ chain length (1 chain = 66 feet = 20.117 metres). Again this strongly suggests many of the boundary lines shown on the plan are merely plotted and scaled, ie as they were planned. It would be usual in this case for the planned boundaries to be subsequently run on the ground, but no reference to such a survey in this vicinity has been seen, although they appear elsewhere (on the similar plans to the westward.)

All this points to the survey being carried out pre 1820/21, being the date of his location/grant.

The description in this document could not have been made without benefit of the survey. It would take an expert in local history to pin down the date of improvements made on the various grants.

By contrast, improvements on one of Patrick Dalrymple's neighbouring grants (to the south east of Baker's) comprise huts, fences and cultivation. Note that there is no hint of such improvements on, or near, the land located to Samuel Baker.¹

This grant as plotted on the plan is 40 acres, not 30 acres. The similarity in size of Charles Edwards' grant of 40 acres is the 'give away', but the boundary dimensions confirm a nominal 40 acres. Someone, a long time ago, 'stuffed up' badly, given that the Deed quite clearly states the grant to be of 30 acres.

The Plan for Samuel Baker's (1821/22) grant of land on the South Esk is 'Plan 43 LO'. 'LO' stands for 'Lands Office', or as it was more commonly called, the 'Lands Department'. This is the same department that was earlier called the 'Lands and Surveys Department'.

Strictly speaking the office that now holds the vast collection of LO Plans is called the Central Plan Office (CPO) of DPIWE (the Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment).

If this seems confusing, this is mostly thanks to a succession of Governments that have had a penchant for changing departmental names. For generations, though, the survey profession has used, and continues to use, the term 'LO' in relation to plans from that office.

However, the plan reference 'Plan 43 LO' is not unique: the same plan number will be the unique reference for one other plan in every Land District (or County) in Tasmania.

In the case of Samuel Baker's land, the complete reference will therefore be: 'Plan 43 (Cornwall) LO'.

The same rule applies to land grants to the Lello family in the Frankford area: 'Plan 73 (Devon) LO'.

Land Data Registration Branch (Recorder of Titles, Land Titles Office, Deeds

1Editor's note: A survey is a 'snapshot' at a point in time. A temporary dwelling might be shown one year,

but not in another if it did not last. As Baker was shown in the 1818 Muster to be working land, and the date of

the survey is not known, it is not unreasonable to conjecture that he might have occupied his block, then

abandoned it, and taken away the material from his dwelling. He might even have been working for Patrick

Dalrymple, his next-door neighbour. His children, interestingly, were all three baptised together in 1826, which

suggests he might have been outside Launceston before then.