Notes and Comments by Steven James Coker, made September 15, 1998.

The following is a working transcription made by me from the original 1691 deed
of sale for "Lott 90 in the original Draught of Charles Town" made by Mary
Brigaud to Maturin and Francis Guerin.  I am offering this working draft
transcription for three particular reasons.  First, because this transcription
presents unique problems, I welcome any helpful analysis others may wish to
give.  Second, this document is of special importance to the DuBose family
because it is the earliest known record of Isaac DuBose and his wife Susan being
in South Carolina.  Third, the document is in very fragile condition and needs
conservation work to mitigate further damage.  Donations from descendants of the
persons mentioned in the document, and others who may wish to help, may be
needed to arrange the needed conservation work.  

Transcribing the original document is difficult because of its poor and fragile
condition.  Many parts of the document are missing, some pieces are laying loose
as fragments, other parts are folded over thereby obscuring the text. The
document is in too fragile a state to attempt manipulating or unfolding the
obscured parts.  It is apparent that several of the holes in the document have
occurred following the pattern of the ink used in the writing.  In a few places
it is still possible to deduce some of the missing characters because the
outline of the hole matches closely with the ink lines.  

Happily, the largest parts of the missing sections occur near the upper middle
portion which is mostly perfunctory language describing the conditions of the
sale.  Much of the beginning and ending parts which mention the names and
familial relationships are still intact.  But, most unhappily, the place where
Isaac DuBose signed his name is one of the portions which looks as if the ink
has "burned" through the paper.  Thus, his actual signature is missing.

One fact of great interest to me is that the original contains the wax seal
impressions of Mary Brigaud, Peter Couillandeau, Isaac DuBose, and Susana
DuBose.  I have studied these at some length.  The seal of Peter is
significantly damaged and may be indecipherable.  The other three are largely
intact and considerable detail of the impressions can be discerned, with great
and patient study.  I have arranged with the archivist to have them photograph
the seals, signatures, and marks for preservation and further study.  These
seals appear to be miniatures of heraldic Coats of Arms showing the Shield,
Crest, and perhaps more.  The seal of Mary Brigaud shows what appears to be two
shields, which would be proper as the shields of both husband and wife were
normally place next to each other.  It also appears that Isaac and Susana had
identical or similar seals, again this may be the normal display of both husband
and wife's shields together.  This is a VERY preliminary evaluation, and upon
further study and research may prove to be an incorrect interpretation of the
meaning or form of the seals.  However, at this point, the arms shown on these
DuBose seals do not appear similar to the DuBose Coat-Of-Arms as shown in either
the 1972 MacDowell book or the 1972 Konopa article.  If anyone reading this has
expertise regarding 17th century wax seals, in particular French or English, I
would appreciate comments and suggestions.

Another item of interest on the original is the marks made by Mary Brigaud and
Susana DuBose.  Mary's mark appears to be a pattern of three trefoils similar to
that shown on her seal.  Susana's mark appears to be a Large S with one or two
horizontal marks across the middle.

There are other differences noted between the original document and the copy
From the State Archives which was shown by McDowell in her book DuBose
Genealogy.  A few of these are itemized here.

1. The original shows Peter Couillandeau signed his name where the transcribed
Archives copy indicates he made a mark.

2. The original shows the spelling DuBosq in places where the transcribed
Archives copy shows DuBose.

3. The original shows the spelling Susana DuBosq in a place where the
transcribed Archives copy shows it as Susanna Dubose.

4. The original shows the spelling of names as Maturin Guerin, Francis Guerin,
Houry Hughs, Isaac Mazicq, and Peter Poinset.  Whereas the transcribed Archives
copy shows these as Martin Guerin, Ffrancis Guerin, Henry Heughes, Isaac Mazicy,
and Peter Poynsett.

5. The original shows the name Selies biset as a witness.  This name is omitted
on the transcribed Archives copy.

It must be noted that these comments, and the transcription offered below, are
WORKING drafts.  I intend to study the document further to transcribe additional
portions and restudy those portions which appear to contain discrepancies from
the transcribed Archives version.  Until I have fully studied the document and
re-checked all discrepancies, I will not claim this as an accurate or true
transcription.

I have also met with the archivist to see about having the document conserved in
a more protective manner to minimize further damage.  To have this done in the
best possible manner, and in the near future, private funding may be required..

Spelling and capitalizations all sic, forgiving any transcription errors.

Underlining indicates missing parts of the document and indecipherable portions. 

WORKING DRAFT TRANSCRIPTION FOLLOWS:
------------------------------------


To al _______ to whom these (presents ?) ______________ Mary Brigaud of the
County and Province above written (send ?) (greeting ?) ______________
______________ Houry (should be Henry ?) Houghs late of the County and Province
aforesaid Taylor by his certaine writeing of sale Under his hand and seale
beareing date the one and thirtieth day of May in the yeare of our Lord One
Thousand six hundred Eighty and Eight did sell and mak_____ _____ Unto me the
said Mary Brigaud One Towne Lott att Charles Towne which the said Houry Hughs
obtained of the Lords (___olute or ___olube  ?) Proprietors of this Province as
may appear by the _____out or grant and or _____ _____ appoint _____ _____ _____
_____ _____  one thousand six hundred Eighty and One (____eals ?) and grant unto
Houry Hughes one Towne Lott att Charles Towne, which said Towne Lott is
distinctly known by this number of (90) in the Platt and draught of the said
Charles Towne, butting and bounding to ye Northward upon a Lott not yet layd out
to the Southward upon the Lott of Mr. Richard Dearboy (should be Dearsley ?) and
butting to the Eastward upon the great streete that Leadeth from the Oyster
point to the marsheth (splace ?) and to the westward upon the Lott of Mathew
English which said Towne Lott the said Houry Hughs his Heires and assignes shall
have and hold for ever and by the said grant now att large appeared ________
Know you that I the said Mary Brigaud, for and in consideration of the sum of
fourteen pounds of good ________ _____eny of this Province to me in hand payd
before the (enseabeing ?) and delivery of these presents by Maturin and Francis
___er____ ________ the county and Province above
________________________________________________
Doe hereby ________ ____dge, and (thereoff or these of ?)
________________________________________________ hereby (a_qiiett ?) and
__________________________ said ________ (geurin ?) (Heires ?) _____ ______s
______s (____minr ?) s_______ _____ghes by these presents have, de_ised grant
and sold and by these presents doe de__ise, grant bargain and sell, unto the
said Maturin and Francis Guerin their Heires Executors and assignes, all
________________________________________________ and uldings and all ________
appurtenances thereunto belonging _______________________ (Tarvie ?) lott with
all and singular those (wenissed ?) and every parte thereof with every
offic___________ members

[transcibing jumps at this point towards end of document]

whereof I the said Mary Brig____ together with my son (Peter or Perer ?)
Couillandeau and my son in Law Issac DuBosq and my Daughter Susana DuBosq his
wife doe hereon sett our hands ______________ seaventeenth day of March in the
year of our Lord One thousand S________ hundred Ninety and one.

                                                 *             
                                      (marie ?) * * (Brigaud ?)      {SEAL}
[Witness Signatures]                       the marke of 
[Not Yet Transcribed]                 
                                        P_______ Couillandeau        {SEAL}

  
                                        _________________            {SEAL}

                                         the marke of 
                                       Susana ƒ (DuBoc or DuBos ?)   {SEAL}



[On Reverse Side]

Memeranoum that full and ______________was given dell________ with ________
DuBoc unto the within Named Marurin and Francis Guerin of all the within
mentioned (Lan_ ?) and the houses Tenements Houses and appurt_______ within
mentioned allowing ________ __________ beu______ and ___________
__________ateenth day of March Anno Dom 16yr (AnniqE ?) Regni Regis et Reginæ
(Niiuc ?) (_c ?) (quac_ ?) in the presence of us whose names are here under
subscribed.

 _______ oins___t                    This Day Personally appeared before 
                                     me Mr. Peter Poinset _______________ 
 Isaac Mazicq                        and upon ________ oaths on the Holy 
 Selies biset                        ______________ Doe Declare that they 
                                     were personally present and _____ and 
Registered this 9th Day of           here the within named Mar__ Brigaud 
August 1699 _________                Peter Couillandeau  Isaac Dubos & 
       Dept. Regt of                 & within Bill of Seale as their 
                                     acts and deeds
                                     Capt ______ before mee     Henry Nobles
                                       Agust 17th  1699


----------------
Additional Notes:

The following can be stated with some confidence based on personal knowledge of
Charleston, and a review of the 1725 Platt of Charles Town with the accompanying
list of Town lots and Grantees given in the SC Hist. and Gen. Mag, Vol IX, Jan
1908, No.1 p.12.

"the great streete that Leadeth from the Oyster point to the marsheth (splace
?)"

The great streete is modern day Meeting Street.  

The Oyster point is now White Point Gardens at the Battery.  

The "marsheth splace" may mean market place or muster place.  I suspect it means
market place.  The 1725 Platt of Town Lots shows three places that might fit for
this. At the intersection of Broad and Meeting streets there used to be an open
square which I believe was originally the market place.  This place was within
the old Walled City. So, if it is referring to the market place, that would be
at broad and meeting.  The City Market was moved to modern day Market Street
circa 1841.  Originally, Market Street was a marsh which flooded with the
tides.  So, if it is referring to a marshy place, then it would be the modern
day Market Street area. I'm not sure where the Muster Place would have been in
1691. But, it would seem logical that it would have been where there was open
space to gather and conduct military drills.  That might have been at Broad and
Market inside the old Walled City.  Or at Skenckingh's Square which was at Queen
and Meeting Streets.  Or outside the City proper somewhere.  

"Towne Lott ... known by this number of (90) in the Platt and draught of the
said Charles Towne"

This is shown on the 1725 Platt of Town lots and accompanying list of grantee's
as having originally been granted to Henry Hughes on March 23, 1681.  John
Ladson is listed as granted lot 90 on May 10, 1695.  

Lot 90 on Meeting Street is located at the site now occupied by the Federal
Judicial Center next to the Post Office.  Also shown on the list of original
grantees for bordering lot 89 is George Dearsley granted lot 89 on January 11th,
1694/5. Also, the "French Church" is listed with Lots 93 and 94 which face onto
King Street immediately behind Lot 90 which faces Meeting Street. Bordering Lot
108, where the Post Office now stands has no grantee listed.

One final note, from Transactions of the Huguenot Society of SC we have an
article titled "Vincent Guerin of St. Thomas and St. Denis" in which we are told
that Mathurin Guérin (wife Marie Nicholas) and Francis Guérin (wife Anne Arriné)
were brothers with Peter Guérin and were from St. Nazaire, en Xaintonge.

==== SCROOTS Mailing List ====