Map

A transcript of the region which it portrays, narrowed in compass so as to facilitate an understanding of the original.

Banker v. Caldwell, 3 Minn. 103 (Gil. 46).

When a deed conveys a lot as Indicated on a recorded plat, the latter may be consulted in aid of the description in the deed; City of St. Louis v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 114 Mo. 13, 21 S. W. 202. A map in a deed should be treated as a part of the description, when evidently Intended to be so treated, though it is not expressly referred to therein; Murray v. Kllnzing, 64 Conn. 78, 29 Atl. 244. Where the owner of land lays it out In lots and streets, and in the map thereof filed with the public records de.signates certain portions as a park and afterwards conveys lots with reference to such map, it operates as a dedication of the land for a park; Steel v. City of Portland, 23 Or. 176, 31 Pac. 479. The mere recording by public authority of a map of a proposed system of highways does not of itself entitle the owner of the land to damages; Bauman v. Ross, 167 U. S. 548, 17 Sup. Ct. 966, 42 L. Ed. 270; so with reference to the streets on such a map; Western Ry. of Alabama v. R. Co., 96 Ala. 272, 11 South. 483, 17 L. R. A. 474; Wolfe v. Town of Sullivan, 133 Ind. 331, 32 N. E. 1017; Winter v. Payne, 33 Fla. 470, 15 South. 211; but see People v. Kellogg, 67 Hun 546, 22 N. Y. Supp. 490. Maps and surveys are not competent evidence unless their accuracy is shown by other evidence; Johnston v. Jones, 1 Black (U. S.) 209, 17 L. Ed. 117; as by the testimony of the surveyors who prepared them; Curtiss v. Ayr^ult, 5 Thomp. & C. (N. Y.) 611; but a map of public land, made by a public surveyor and duly certified and filed in a public oflice under a statute, is admissible for that purpose; People v. Denison, 17 Wend. (N. Y.) 312; and so are ancient maps to show matters of public and general right; Missouri v. Kentucky, 11 Wall. (U. S.) 395, 20 L. Ed. 116; but an ancient map of partition among private owners is not evidence; Jackson v. Witter, 2 Johns. (N. Y.) 180. In an action for the recovery of real estate, a map not dated or signed but shown veyors testlfled that they had tested it in their own work and that it was the earliest known survey of the district in question, and which was shown to have related to an actual transaction, was held admissible as an ancient map. Other maps made in 1820 and 1823 by the same surveyor and showing in detail certain of the lots in the vicinity of those in dispute were admissible as showing accuracy of the ancient map. The testimony of other surveyors as to the use of the map in their own work was admissible for the purpose of showing general accuracy of the map and deeds executed shortly after the map was made conveying the tracts described therein were admissible as ancient deeds to show that the map was made in an actual transaction; Whitman v. Shaw, Lfifi Mass. 451, 44 N. E. 333. A map or plan of land referred to in making conveyances thereof is evidence to show boundaries or location, or to explain the contract; Clark v. Trust Co., 64 N. Y.. 33; and so in dedicating land to the public; Town of Derby v. Ailing, 40 Conn. 410. Filing a map and profile of a proposed railroad' line is a sufficient Inchoate appropriation to prevent its appropriation by another company; Southern Ind. Ry. Co. v. Ry. Co., 16S Ind. 360, 81 N. E. 65, 13 L. R. A. (N. S.) 197.