The Survey Plan of Cornwallis Township, Kings County

E.L.Eaton

Originally published:

The Nova Scotia Historical Review
Volume 1, #2 1981

        The New England Planters who settled in Nova Scotia during the early 1760s brought with them their familiar pattern of land division, the town or township, which also became the unit of local government.  In general, the surveys for each township were made with precision, and reliable maps were drawn.  Unfortunately, the original map or plan for Cornwallis Township has disappeared.  There is a tradition that it was lost in a house fire, from which records of the Registry of Deeds were, happily, rescued.  These books are kept today in the registry office at Kentville, along with subsequent deed volumes and later maps of the country.

        Cornwallis Township, like Horton Township from which it is separated mainly by the Cornwallis River (Habitant River on early documents), was to contain one hundred thousand acres.  Cornwallis was assigned one hundred and fifty settlers, Horton two hundred, reflecting the importance given to the visible Grand Pre dyke. Only later did the Horton grantees realize that Cornwallis had practically as much dyke land, more widely distributed and thus more accessible.  A feeling of deception is said to have remained in Horton for many years.

        Beginning at the mouth of the Cornwallis River, following the river to Kentville, then south-westerly in a line parallel to the Horton-Falmouth line to the Aylesford Township border, thence northerly to the Bay of Fundy, then east and south by the Bay of Fundy and Minas Basin to the place of beginning, Cornwallis Township indeed possessed many advantages.  Divided among one hundred and fifty individuals, each proprietor was thus given the theoretical allowance of six hundred and sixty-six and two-thirds acres.  The general survey is said to have begun in 1759.  Louisburg had been captured the year before; Quebec and Montreal were still in French hands; hostile Indians and French were a very real threat; and so, protection of the new settlers was essential.  The typical township was composed of a compact town site that could be easily defended, with ten-acre lots nearby for food production, farm lots slightly removed, remote wood lots, a common field for pasture of milk cows, a parade ground, and land allotted for a church and school.

        The earliest Cornwallis book in the Registry of Deeds is largely filled with transfers of property among the original grantees.  The motive seems to have been a personal one, for the most part, as there is little evidence of land speculation, and few, if any, new names appear.  Such transfers were commonly expressed as "on the draught of," giving the grantee's name, and the land was usually further described by a numbered "lot" in a numbered "division," the latter terms not being defined in the document and therefore evidently being well understood at the time.  It is naturally assumed that these numbers refer to a missing master plan or map, without which it is very difficult to be precise in individual locations.  Many persons, in their search for family links, have interpreted the inclusion of the word "homestead" in subsequent documents in same way it applies to the settlement of the prairies in the past century, only to discover that such loving descriptions go back only two or three generations, or in  other words, less than half the period since the first allocations were made.  Obviously the ancestors lived, but where?  Here, then, was a problem to challenge the skills of even the most ardent crossword or jigsaw puzzle fan.

        A more detailed study of the early deed records revealed that the divisions were numbered from one to fifteen, and the lots from one to ten.  Thus when the owner of, say, lot four in the fifth division was shown as the immediate neighbor of the owner of lot five in the fifth division, it became evident that the division must be the larger unit and that it was made up of lots.  With this hint, the search moved to the Department of Lands and Forests and the Public Archives of Nova Scotia, both in Halifax, and each eventually became something of a gold mine of information.

        In the Department of Lands and Forests was found a neat, well-preserved book, entitled "Cornwallis Land Survey 1761," 1 a rare item and treated as such.  A visit to the carefully indexed files in the Archives turned up the original 1765 assessment roll for Cornwallis. 2  The former bounded each projected farm lot in detail and assigned a division and lot number.  The latter listed, for the most part, the names of the original grantees as given by Eaton. 3  However, although Eaton had arranged the names alphabetically, there was no such attempt evident in the assessment roll.  Surely they must have been drawn up in some sort of order, but what?  They proved to have followed division and lot.  A comparison with a modern assessment roll showed one surprising difference which provided a useful clue.  In the assessment roll for 1765 the acreage or value was not given and the amount of the taxes revealed marked uniformity.  The great majority of grantees were billed for 4s.4d., a few for half this, several for 6s.6d., and one for a whopping 13s.  A comparison with the land allocations as given by Eaton, 4 showed that 2s.2d. was the tax on a half share, 4s.4d. was for one share, and 6s.6d. for a share and a half.  Later it was discovered that the 13s. was a three-share lot, held jointly by two persons.

        Curiosity now thoroughly whetted, a drafting board and tools came into play.  Actual dimensions were taken from the land survey book mentioned earlier.  Soon there emerged fifteen beautiful jigsaw pieces, but, unlike the usual jigsaw parts, each had three straight sides.  It was the fourth, irregular side which finally led to their exact position.  Each was known to face a tidal estuary and this irregular side was the shore line.  Where on a present day map of the same scale could a corresponding shore line be found?  As every puzzle fan knows, there is only one place for a moveable piece and patience is usually rewarded.  There was a place every one of the fifteen divisions.  After this it became relatively simple to fill in the space allotted for each lot within the divisions and Registry of Deeds provided the name of each owner.  Thus was recovered the long lost plan of the Cornwallis Township farm lots.  Attention could now be given to the master design for the township.

        In Cornwallis the town plot, consisting of half-acre lots, was near the ferry to Horton, at the mouth of the Cornwallis River.  There were three parade grounds, spaced within convenient walking distance from the farms, for quick assembly in case of attack.  One was at the town site, the house presently (1981) occupied by Mr. Jack Marriot being the old officers' quarters; another was at Chipman Corner, across the road and to the south of the old cemetery; the third was at Upper Canard on the site of the present Baptist Church.  The ten-acre garden plots were located from Starrs Point to the present village of Port Williams, while the 44-acre farm lots faced the tidal estuaries of the Little Habitant, Canard and Cornwallis Rivers.  Dyke lots in these tidal areas were divided in an attempt to give each settler a fair share of what was described as "dyke, bad dyke, broken dyke and salt marsh."  The land classed as dyke was still protected from the sea and was immediately ready for crops. Bad dyke referred to poorly drained areas, covered by the sea at very high tides and supporting an unattractive cover of stunted trees, alders, viburnums, rushes, sedges and coarse grass.  Broken dyke was land formerly reclaimed but no longer protected from the sea.  Salt marsh had never been reclaimed.  All were measured and laid out with great precision.

        The actual allocations were made by drawing lots, with three men as supervisors:  Captain Eliakim Tupper Jr., Captain Stephen West and Captain John Newcomb.  Each of these three received a share and a half, perhaps because of the added responsibility.  Naturally, a few of the farm lots which were found to have wet or poor land and were thus not attractive were rejected, so that additional lots were laid off beyond the boundaries of the original divisions, notably at the west ends of Belcher Street and Church Street, and between Kingsport and Pereau.  Since the drawing of lots took place in 1761, when the Seven Years' War was coming to a close, there was no longer so great a need for elaborate protection for the settlements.  As a result, the ten-acre plots and the half-acre town lots were rapidly consolidated into holdings of more appropriate size, while many settlers proceeded to establish themselves on their 44-acre farm lots.  Land between Canning and Sheffield Mills, originally designated as woodland, was recognized as desirable for clearing, as was land west of Kentville, west of Centreville and between Kingsport and Pereau.

        It will be seen from the attached list of grants that only 125 of the intended 150 farm lots in the fifteen divisions were taken up by the original grantees, while 140 names appear on the assessment roll for 1765.  Of these 125 occupied lots, four were not taxable and were therefore omitted from the assessment roll: the glebe, the first minister's lot, the school and the common.  The remaining 19 persons were assigned land in areas previously intended as woodlots.

        A few other changes appear between the land survey of 1761 and the assessment roll of 1765.  The name of John Bartlett, who received lot 5 in division 7, a single share, is gone from the 1765 list and "a part of Bartlett's" appears for each holding of Simon Porter, John Newcombe and Handley Chipman.  There are two persons by the name of Hammond on the assessment roll, John Arnold and Archalaus, although only the latter is listed by Eaton among the grantees, as receiving a share and a half.  The tax of 4s.4d. for John Arnold and 2s.2d. for Archalaus would have covered that area and suggests a relationship between the two men.  The allocations of a half share, division 6, lot 6, to Thomas Handley Chipman, the adjoining full share, division 6, lot 7, to Handley Chipman and the remaining half share, division 7, lot 1, to Handley Chipman, together with "the part of Bartlett's" earlier mentioned, are consolidated on the assessment roll as the property of Handley Chipman and taxed for two and a half shares.  No ready explanation can be found for the Wickwire allotments.  There is only one person of this name, Peter Wickwire Jr., on Eaton's list of grantees and only one is in his "Family Sketches". 5  However, according to the survey plan, Peter Wickwire Sr. received a one share farm lot, division 4, lot 2, while Peter Wickwire Jr. received a one share farm lot, division 1, lot 2.  On the assessment roll, only one Peter Wickwire appears and he is assessed on two shares.

        The approximate location of the 19 names on the assessment roll for 1765 but not on survey plan for 1761 has been traced with difficulty.  Although apparently recorded at the time, many of these additional lots lack boundaries that are easily recognized today.  None of the settlers of that time were strangers to each other, and to be bounded by a neighbour on one or more sides would have been thoroughly clear.  Originally intended in whole or in part as woodland, compared to he carefully surveyed farm lots, these additional allocations seem irregularly laid out and poorly described.  A further variable was introduced when extra acres were added to make up for what was regarded as poorer land.  The numbers assigned to these additional lots are of little help in locating the properties, since they were scattered around the perimeter of the previously surveyed area, and were often at a considerable distance from each other.

        The assignment of wood lots was entirely different.  Each man was free to search for a suitable block, and if no one else had claimed it, he could then engage a "lot layer" 6 to mark the boundaries.  Any one "pitch," as the procedure was known, was limited to two hundred acres, but many were for much less.  Later, the grantee might select another lot and have it bounded in the same way.  Such marks as "a popple tree," "a clump of birches," "a sloping willow," or a "spring at the head of a vault" became vague with the passing years and it is not surprising that some lots were lost in the next few generations.  It is probable, too, that many people did not bother to acquire their entire allotments.  After all, the timber had little value, and frequently the only available land was at least a day's journey from home.  According to Eaton 7 the last "pitch" was made by the Hon. Samuel Chipman on Cape Blomidon in 1873.

        A generation after the Planters, when the sudden influx of Loyalist settlers arrived, very little unoccupied good land remained and the grants the newcomers received, generous as they may have seemed on an ordnance map of the time, offered little advantage for permanent settlement.  This was true not only in Cornwallis Township, but also in the other townships surrounding the Minas Basin, the Annapolis Basin, and down into the more arable parts of the south shore of the province.  Those who succeeded in becoming established on farms did as others have done in our generation: they worked, saved, rented and finally purchased.  Notable among the few who did so was Henry Gesner, father of Dr. Abraham Gesner, inventor of the distillation of petroleum, who assembled land near Chipman Corner, and Abraham, twin brother of Henry, who located in Granville Township, Annapolis County.

        There have been both consolidations and sub-divisions of property in Cornwallis Township during the past two centuries.  Nevertheless, many of the property lines laid out in the 1760s remain distinct, well-recognized boundaries.  From these it is possible to locate, with some certainty, many of the sites chosen by the original Planters for their first dwellings.

        The long tables which follow present in consolidated form information on the 121 grantees and 4 non-taxable properties, derived from the sources earlier mentioned, which were covered by the land survey of 1761.  The shorter table refers to the 19 additional persons mentioned in the assessment roll of 1765, who did not receive land in the fifteen divisions.  Following these tables is a series of five maps showing farm lot divisions in Cornwallis Township.  These diagrams were prepared from the author's draft copies through the courtesy of Michael J. Power, research technician, and Frederick Gibson, cartographic draftsman, Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forests.



  1.   Cornwallis Land Survey, 1761.  Unpublished manuscript, Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forests.

  2.   Assessment Roll for Cornwallis Township, 1765. MGI, Vol. 181, No 183, Public Archives of Nova Scotia (hereafter PANS).

  3.   A. W. H. Eaton, History of Kings County (Salem, 1910), pp, 74-76.

  4.   Ibid...p. 82.

  5.   Ibid...p. 868.

  6.   Cornwallis Township Land Survey, 1761-1973.  The early lot layers were Amos Bill, Samuel Starr, David Bentley, etc. MG4, Vol. 19, PANS.

  7.   Eaton, History of Kings County, p. 82.


Grants and Survey Maps    |    Tax Assessment Roll, 1765


                                        Return To:
The Nova Scotia Eatons Home  E. L. Eaton Archive