Voorzorg No. 24 (Oudtshoorn)

Farm number: No. 24
Also recorded as: Voorzorg
On the cadastre: 24, whole farmregistered as VOORZORG
Modern surveyed area: 801.3 ha

Why this farm is here

In the model from the cadastre pull only, nothing in the record yet says who held this ground or why it belongs here. 16 km from Klaarstroom.

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.

NE Uitkyk No. 12 (Oudtshoorn)

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Research notes

Named on SG diagram 2920 of January 1911 as bounding UITKYK No. 12 (PAR-000285) to the south-west, in the FIELD CORNETCY OF CANGO EAST, Division of Oudtshoorn. That is the Cango valley above Oudtshoorn, the country SG 2440 OB of 1877-79 covers (SRC-493).

NO POLYGON, AND THAT IS A DECISION RATHER THAN A GAP. The name is read off SG diagram 2920 (SRC-496), which is a document; the LOCATION is not established. The Oudtshoorn cadastre extract holds no farm names at all - its P_FARMNAME column carries a numeric code, 6457 for Uitkyk itself - so the polygon cannot be found by name.

Adjacency was tried and does not settle it. Four modern farms share a boundary with Uitkyk No. 12: no. 11 to the W, no. 24 to the SW, no. 261 to the S and no. 13 to the E. The 1911 diagram names its neighbours NE, SE, SW and W-and-SW, so THE DIAGRAM'S NORTH-EAST NEIGHBOUR HAS NO MODERN COUNTERPART and its south-east is my south or east. A hundred and fourteen years of subdivision and renaming sits between the two, and a bearing to a centroid is crude on an irregular shape.

5: an unresolved place gets no pin, because a wrong pin is worse than a missing one. Same treatment as Drooge Kloof. [TO VERIFY]

*** FOUND ON THE 1879 PLAN AND STILL UNNUMBERED THERE, WHICH IS ITSELF THE ANSWER. *** SG 2440 OB sheet 2 (SRC-493, DOC-0318), the 1879 Plan of the Division of Oudtshoorn, read 20 Aug 2026 after being filed unread on 19 Aug. 'Voorzorg' is written in the F.C. Lower Oliphants River, east of 44 Dyselsberg Lot 55 and south-west of 75 Welgevonden, with NO FARM NUMBER beside it while every neighbour carries one. That fits: SG 2811/1911 (SRC-501) is a Registration General Plan OF THE VACANT FARMS of this division, so ground still vacant in 1879 is exactly what 1911 went out to survey. STILL NO NUMBER HERE. What would give it one is the 1911 plan's own areas table, which lists eighteen farms and does not include a Voorzorg - so it may have been numbered between the two dates, or under another name. LEAD-0241.

*** CORRECTION, SAME DAY: VOORZORG IS NO. 24, AND THE NOTE ABOVE SAYING IT CARRIED NO NUMBER IS WRONG. *** That reading came off a crop whose frame cut the number away. A wider tile of the same sheet shows '24 Voorzorg' plainly, between 25 Rust en Vreede and 23 Groot Kruis. The lesson is the one this project keeps relearning: A CROP IS NOT THE PAGE, and an absence seen through a window is not an absence. Pinned, 801.6 ha.

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

Open questions

Which cadastral polygons are Annex Uitkyk, Blaauwpunt, Voorzorg and Spitzkop? priority 2 · LEAD-0241
SG diagram 2920 of 1911 names four farms bounding Uitkyk No. 12 in the Field Cornetcy of Cango East. All four are in the model as NO-POLYGON. Which modern farms are they?

What would settle it Any one of the four neighbours' own diagrams, or the 1879 regional sheet read at the Cango East.

What the record is missing

Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Voorzorg No. 24 (Oudtshoorn) 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.