Wit Poortje No. 16 Ptn 1 (formerly Portion A)

1/16 on the cadastre · show on the map

The farm's own history, the grant, the original survey, sits on that page.

Farm number: No. 16
Portion: 1
Also recorded as: Wit PoortjeDIAGRAM, deduction table on SG 765/1873, DOC-0259WitpoortjieSRC-436, 2023 valuation roll
On the cadastre: 1/16, portionregistered as WIT POORTJE
District: Prince Albert
Extent, as the diagram states it: 2584 morgen 150 square roods
Modern surveyed area: 2213.2 ha

The historic extent and the modern surveyed area are two separate measurements and are not presented here as confirming each other. The first is what a surveyor wrote on a diagram, usually in morgen. The second is what the modern cadastre draws.

Why this farm is here

A piece of a farm already in this model. 45 km from Klaarstroom.

parcel Cut out of Wit Poortje No. 16

What the record holds, in order

No dated record on this parcel yet. It is on the map because the Surveyor-General has a polygon for it; the history is not transcribed.

Also bordered by, as the modern cadastre draws it

Ground that touches this farm on the Surveyor-General's current polygons and that none of the diagrams held here names. Derived from the geometry, not read off a document.

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Surveyor-General diagram index for the whole farm — where the original survey of this ground sits.

Research notes

[9 Aug 2026, SRC-342] From the deduction table on the verso of SG 765/1873 (DOC-0259), which carries one row and no more: "Portion A", with the A struck through and 1 written in, 2584 morgen 150 square roods, deed 14.11.1938 - 11789. The Survey Records and Diagram No. columns are blank.

THE FARM WAS CUT EXACTLY IN HALF. Wit Poortje is 5,168 morgen 300 roods; this portion is 2,584 morgen 150 roods; the Remainder is 2,584 morgen 150 roods. The two halves differ by ZERO square roods. A division that lands on an exact half is a decision about shares, not a line drawn round ground somebody wanted. [TO VERIFY] who the two parties were, from deed 11789 of 14 November 1938.

"Portion A" is drawn on the face of the 1873 diagram. The copy this project holds was printed for the Surveyor-General on 11.8.1966, so that annotation is later work on an older sheet and is not contemporary with the 1872 survey.

[9 Aug 2026] THE MODERN POLYGON MATCHES THE 1938 FIGURE TO 0.014%. Pinned to W052C061000000000016000010 at 2,213.2 ha against 2,584 morgen 150 roods = 2,213.5 ha. A figure struck off a chain-and-compass survey of 1872, halved on paper in 1938, and a satellite-era cadastral polygon: three tenths of a hectare apart in two and a quarter thousand.

[13 Aug 2026] Renamed to the one form this model uses for every portion - the portion's own name, then the parent farm, its number and the portion in brackets - so that a name is legible in a list, a search result and a map popup without the reader having to know which farm number is which. It read "Wit Poortje Portion 1 (No. 16 Ptn 1, formerly Portion A)" before. Nothing about the ground changed.

The research behind this page, kept separate from it: dated working notes, open questions, and what is not yet settled.

What the record is missing

Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Wit Poortje No. 16 Ptn 1 (formerly Portion A) is in the model and drawn on the map, and carries no ownership record of any kind, not a grant, not a transfer, not an occupation.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's diagram for the farm number names the grantee and the date; the deed reference on it opens the transfer chain.

Found by breaks.py reading the model against itself, not written by hand, each one is a shape of missing record, not a fault in the data. The whole set is on the questions page.