Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/355

 HALL V. SCOTT OOUNTT. 343 �Louisiana was decided ought to cover the case. But the dis- tinction between the two cases is clear. �It is unnecessary, however, to pursue auch inquiries. Itis patent, from the terms of the deed, that the parties under- stood that no tract of land outside the county was to be con- Veyed, and all swamp and overflowed lands inside, with the express exception named, should pass. The terms of the deed are clear and precise to that effeet. The sale was in gross. The schedule annexed was admitted to be imperfect. The words of the deed are: �"Ali the lands in said county of Scott, wherever therein situated, belong- ing to said county of Scott, and known as the swamp and overflowed lands in said county, [except the lands known as the Cairo & Fulton Railroad lands,] all of which swamp and overflowed lands belonging to said county at this date are embraced, as it ia believed, in the schedule hereinbefore set forth; but all such swamp and overflowed lands belong- ing to said county [except, etc.] being embraced in this sale, and conveyed by this deed, whether contained in said descriptive schedule, or by error or oversight or otherwise omitted from the same, or erroneously described therein," etc. �The covenant relied on by plaintiff follows in the deed the. foregoing description, and must be held restrioted thereto. It is now ascertained that some of the tracts named in the schedule are outside of the county, and this suit is to recover the supposed value thereof, under the covenants of title. If the well-settled canons of construction are resorted to, it must be held that the plain intent of the deed was to convey no lands not belonging to the county, and none situate out- side of the county; also, no lands except swamp and over- flowed lands. There seems to have been some uncertainty as to what lands, according to United States survey, had passed by legislative grant, and hence the original bargainers and the county court expressed in the deed that despite omis- sions or inaccurate descriptions all such lands in the county, and belonging to the county, should pass. To give more definiteness as to the lands, a schedule of the tracts suppoaed to be embraced within the terms of the deed was made. �The covena,nt following the above-recited description as to what was embraced in the convevance is as follows : ��� �