Matthews v. Department of Conservation

This appeal arises out of a hill filed by plaintiffs, husband and wife, to quiet title to property ■deeded them by the department of conservation (hereinafter referred to as the department). The facts are not in dispute. The primary question for ■our determination is whether the word “mineral” as ■employed in the deed before us includes within its meaning sand and gravel. The purchaser says it does not. The State (seller) says it does.

On November 25, 1938, plaintiff Howard E. .Matthews made an offer to-the department, on-a-.printed form supplied by the latter, for the purchase <of a 40-acre…