i 



■^T* 



s\ 



I , 



I 



r 





Figure 31. — Wall D, looking east toward Potuiiuic River from Structure E (kitchen). 



( Texl cnnlinued from page 73) 



been torn oflF from the plow, pt-rhaps was left on the 

 bricks where it fell. 



HISTORICAL DATA AND 



INTERPRETATION OF WALL SYSTEM 



John Mercer commented with exasperation in his 

 Land Book about the unresolved discrepancies be- 

 tween the Buckner survey of 1691 and the missing 

 ''jregg survey of 1707 (p. 14). There are as many 



disparities between Buckner's plat and the plat 

 resulting from the Savage survey of 1731. In the 

 latter a new row of lots is added along the western 

 boundary, pushing the Buckner lots eastward. 

 Where in the Bucknei plat the lots and streets in 

 the lov\'er \y<u\. of the town west of George Andrews' 

 lots turn westerly 1° from the indicated main axis 

 of the town, paralleling the 30-pole fourth course of 

 the town botuids which runs to the creek's edge, the 

 Savage map shows no such change, ^'et Savage, in 

 describing the courses of the survev in a wi itten note 



