In this report Murduck attempts to find references to Augustus Seeley in Canadian land records.

At the close of hostilities between Great Britain and rebelling residents of what became the United States, British officials in Quebec granted land in what remained of British North America to help compensate and accommodate anyone who had removed to British territory by 1783. Augustus SEELEY was granted several Lots of land in Lancaster Township (earlier known as Point Mullie, then as Lake Township) in what eventually became Grenville County, Ontario, Canada, in 1785. These grants were reputedly for his service with the King’s Royal Regiment of New York, during the American Rebellion between about 1775 and 1783. Prior to 1792, after a parcel of land was granted to an individual there was no provision for the person who held the right to occupy a particular parcel of land to transfer that right (i.e., title) to any other person. After 1792, when the province of Upper Canada was hived off from the larger province of Quebec (which became in smaller form the province of Lower Canada), a system of land titles registration was established. This system allowed for the formal transfer of title from one individual to another and afforded the option for either party to register the transaction with a county-based Land Registry Office. The option was entirely voluntary, however. Either the selling party or the buying party could opt to register the title transfer agreement or not. Of course, it was also possible for the selling and buying parties to agree to register the transaction and decide just who was going to register it. Beginning in 1850 it became imperative that each and every title transfer be registered with county officials. Registration became required, to be effected by either the buyer or the seller, as they each agreed.

Lancaster Township is in the eastern extremities of Ontario (as Upper Canada became with the establishment of the Dominion of Canada, on July 1, 1867) and borders on municipalities in the present-day province of Quebec to the east. Properties in the township have always been closest to the seat of government in Quebec or Lower Canada than they have been to the seat of government in Ontario. And while the first settlers along the north shore of the St Lawrence River were primarily soldiers of Scottish origin disbanded from the King’s Royal Regiment of New York and their families, lands set farther back from the river were more often than not taken up by settlers of direct Scottish or French origin. Legal and fiscal administration of elements of life in Lancaster Township was definitely on the fringe of recognition in early Ontario, and an earlier report tried to shed light on survey anomalies that appear to have been a constant source of discontent to the earliest settlers in the Township.

We will see below that Augustus SEELEY received a formal crown patent for perhaps eight hundred acres (four two hundred-acre lots) in Lancaster Township on September 1, 1797. Prior to the issue of the patent, ownership rights to any parcels on which Augustus SEELEY might have been located, occupied, lived, or worked would have remained within the Crown’s realm. A register of patents issued by the Crown in right of Ontario exists at the Archives of Ontario, recording the date each patent was issued in the province, the lands encompassed by the patent (that is, the lot, concession, and township of each parcel of land concerned), and the patentee’s name. This item has not been examined, as no more information would be uncovered than is readily obtainable from other sources. While the patent(s) issued to Augustus SEELEY is/are dated September 1, 1797, it is certain that he would have been occupying his land prior to this. Because the patent is the first in a continuum of land title records, there is no way to determine through provincially registered land records when he might have actually settled his land. The patent is the last of the Crown records which pertain to lands granted to any particular person.

Certainly, one record found at the Archives in Ottawa suggests that Augustus was granted the right to occupy one hundred acres within Lot 25, Concession 3, Lancaster Township, as early as November 1785. It is difficult to pin down today where the earliest land title transfer records would have been registered for Lancaster Township after 1792. Lancaster and westerly Charlottenburgh Townships were all that comprised Glengarry County in the late 1700s. The principal Lancaster Township administration offices came to be established in the town of Lancaster, north of the St. Lawrence River, on the border between Lancaster and Charlottenburgh, but the distinction of a formal municipal administrative unit known as the Township of Lancaster only appeared with the passage of the Municipal Act in Canada West (the province was known as Upper Canada, 1792-1841; Canada West, 1841-1867; and Ontario, 1867-present) in 1850.

To start looking for items of interest which pertain to registered title land ownership in Ontario, one needs first to survey the present-day Abstract Index to Deeds for Lancaster Township. What is the Abstract Index to Deeds? By 1869 officials in Ontario had recognized that it was becoming more and more difficult to trace legitimate ownership of one parcel or another in the province. If people wanted to establish that there were no mortgages or other encumbrances on a property they wished to buy, they had to know what mortgages or other claims to ownership had been registered against that property. But there was no way to know what those claims might have been. So provincial officials mandated that an Abstract Index to Deeds be established. Just like a nominal index in a book, where the name is found in the index with a page number, and the detail can be found on that page, in the Index to Deeds all deeds registered against a particular lot of land were indexed by their instrument number. So if one were looking for documents associated with, say, Lot 20, Concession 3, Lancaster Township, one would turn to the Abstract Index for Lancaster Township and page through until the entries for Lot 20, Concession 3, were found. The particular instruments or title transfer documents associated with each title transfer or claim are listed with dates, names of principals concerned, and other odd bits.

So in the first instance in the Abstract Index for Lot 20, Concession 3, Lancaster Township, found on page 97 of Book 1, the first entry clearly shows that the crown patent for all two hundred acres was issued to Augustus SEALY on September 1, 1797. The next entry shows that by Instrument No. 159, Book A, on March 12, 1802, Augustus SEALY assigned, turned over, or sold his patent to Lot 20, Concession 3, to Jacob SNIDER and George CLINE. The Abstract shows also that this agreement was registered on July 16, 1804, but it does not indicate by whom the agreement was registered. Page 98 of the same Abstract book gives details for Lot 21, Concession 3. This again confirms that Augustus SEALY was the recipient of the crown patent for the lot, also dated September 1, 1797. And the Abstract shows similar details for this lot, as it did for Lot 20, by the instrument that was registered in Book A as Instrument No 159. Augustus SEALY assigned the patent to this parcel to Jacob SNYDER and George CLINE on March 12, 1802. Jumping ahead to page 102, Book 1, we find details for Lot 25, Concession 3. The entries for this lot again confirm that Augustus SEALY was the recipient of the crown patent for the lot on September 1, 1797. But the subsequent transaction shows that an individual named James SEALY sold the full two hundred-acre lot to John McLENNAN with the agreement being both achieved and registered on the same day, April 16, 1807, as Instrument or Memorial No 449, Book B. Again, the Abstract does not specify who actually registered the transaction. Unfortunately, neither does the Abstract offer any clues as to how or by what means James SEALY came to be in a position to sell Augustus SEALY’s land.

Much farther along, on page 330 of Abstract Book 1, we find that Augustus SEALY also received the crown patent for all two hundred acres in Lot 25, Concession 9, on September 1, 1797, meaning that he had received crown patents for eight hundred acres in total. This in itself is unusual, as it seems that he was only entitled to receive grants totaling six hundred acres. The Abstract entries for this parcel show something additionally unusual and confusing as well. The next entry in the Abstract Index shows that the crown patent for all two hundred acres of this lot were issued to Norman McLEOD on November 19, 1803. Then the next entry (the third entry concerning this parcel) shows that James SEALY sold all two hundred acres to Norman McLEOD by an instrument that was registered as No. 448 in Book B, on April 16, 1807. No notations in the Abstract Index to Deeds shed any light on these mysteries. I can only surmise that for some reason the land was reclaimed by the Crown between 1797 and 1803 and re-issued (perhaps erroneously?) to McLEOD in 1803. Regardless, this third entry shows that the sale of this lot by James SEALY to Norman McLEOD was formally registered in 1807. This seems doubly curious, because it was my understanding that most of the “back” concessions, those beyond Concession 3, had not even been surveyed by 1803, let alone 1797.

Now that all of the instruments pertaining to Augustus SEELEY have been identified through the Abstract Indexes to Deeds, it is time to examine the title transfer instruments themselves. All of the registered transactions that came after the issuance of the crown patent were apparently dated between 1802 and 1807. Unfortunately, the earliest extant original land title transfer records pertaining to lands in Lancaster Township which exist at today’s Glengarry County Land Registry Office in Alexandria, Ontario, date only from January 7, 1811. There is, however, a single volume at the Alexandria Land Registry Office titled Book—Reference to Old Documents—Lancaster, Charlottenburg, Kenyon. I pulled this item, examined it, and henceforth will refer to it as the Old Book. The first entry in the Old Book identifies that the “within Book contains a statement of such titles of or relating to lands in the Townships of Lancaster Charlottenburgh and Kenyon between the thirty first day of March 1798 and the thirteenth day of March 1816 as were discovered in the Registry Office for the County of Stormont during the period.” This notation is signed by George C. MOORE, Registrar for Stormont. The following entries pertain to Liber [Book] A and appear to be basically abstracts of successive agreements. The abstracted details for Instrument No 159 can be found on page 15, Augustus SEALY Assignment to Jacob Snyder and George Cline, dated March 12, 1802, registered July 16, 1804, witnesses Joseph SEELY, Stephen BEACH, John ELLIOT, and David [LAKIN?], re Lots 20 & 21 in the 3rd Concession. The abstracted details for Instrument No. 448 can be found on page 31, James SEALY deed [sale] to Norman McLEOD, dated and registered April 16, 1807, witnesses J. Y. COZZENS and J. L. FARRAND, re Lot 25, Concession 9. And the abstracted details for Instruments No. 449 and No. 450 can be found on pages 3-33, James SEALY, deed to John McLELLAN, dated and registered 16, April 1807, rwitnesses J. Y. COZENS and J. L. FARRAND, re Lot 25 in the 3rd Concession. No. 450, James SEALY and John SNYDER, deed to John McLELLAN, dated April 15, 1807, registered April 16, 1807, witnesses J .Y. cozens and J. L. FARRAND, re Lots 20 and 21, 11th Concession. So we have added names of witnesses to the transactions indexed in the Abstract Index to Deeds for the parcels of interest. And we have turned up another pair of properties where James SEALY is the seller. It must be significant that James SEALY sold a parcel to which Augustus SEALY had been issued the crown patent at the same time and with the same two men as witnesses as he sold another parcel on the 11th Concession.

What can the Abstract Index to Deeds for Lots 20 and 21 of the 11th Concession of Lancaster tell us? By 1850, Lochiel Township had been created north of Lancaster Township, swallowing up Concessions 10 and 11 of Lancaster, and converting them to Concessions 1 and 2. So I was looking for Abstract Index to Deeds entries for Lots 20 and 21 on the 2nd Concession of Lochiel. I found them. The paper copies which you will find with the paper copy of this report are difficult to read, but the digital copies are quite readable. Entries on pages 58-59 of Book 1, Abstract Index for the Township of Lochiel, show that crown patents for both Lots 20 and 21, Concession 2, were issued to both James SEALY and John SNYDER on September 1, 1797. The grants were for two hundred acres per lot, so, presumably, each man held one hundred acres in each of the lots. The Abstract Index does indeed show that James SEALY and John SNYDER sold their interests in both lots to John McLENNAN on April 16, 1807. And here we have instances where the Abstract Index shows the purchaser’s name for some of the transactions as McLENNAN, but the Old Book entries show his name as McLELLAN. The Old Book entries were made in Cornwall in 1859, presumably from the old original transfer documents. The Abstract Index to Deeds entries began in 1869, and as the Abstract Books became filled up or otherwise unmanageable, new versions of them were created. This practice continued until after the World War II era, and I would suggest that the Old Book surname spellings might perhaps be the more accurate.

There also exists at the Glengarry Land Registry Office in Alexandria a volume titled “Alphabetical Index No 1—Township of Lancaster.” I surveyed this and found instances of Augustus SEALY and James SEALY on page 192. The principal names indexed are grantors, with grantees’ names shown in the second column. The names found in both columns all pointed to instrument nos. we knew of—159, 448, and 449 (but not 450, curiously, possibly because that was a Lochiel Township record by the time the Lancaster Alphabetical Index was created). The Lancaster Alphabetical Index is not dated in any way. I have included paper copies with the paper report, and digital copies can be downloaded. Otherwise there is nothing new or useful in this volume. So original documents dated prior to January 7, 1811, that might have been found in the Glengarry Land Registry Office in Alexandria have not apparently survived. But an Old Book created by the Registrar from the Stormont Land Registry Office in Cornwall in 1859 contains abstract details about transactions of interest. Might the original title transfer documents pertaining to these transactions be found in Cornwall?

Off I went. Unfortunately, no original title transfer documents created prior to January 1, 1810, have survived at the Stormont Land Registry Office in Cornwall either. What does exist for the period prior to January 1, 1810, are Registrar’s Copy Books. Copy Books were large volumes, slightly larger than current Canadian ledger-sized paper (11.5” x 17”), often about three inches thick, filled with heavy blank pages. The registrar would enter true copies of each and every title transfer agreement document that was to be registered. Often missing from the registrar’s true copy are declarations and affidavits that would have been submitted at the time of registration—things to the effect that “this man is the man he says he is,” signed by a local magistrate, or “this man is truly the eldest son and heir of the man who owned the property,” signed by a magistrate or friend/acquaintance/neighbor with long knowledge. The registrar would have made his true copy from the original agreement, more than likely within days of the transaction’s having been registered.

Nevertheless, on page 280 of the first Registrar’s Copy Books, Book A, can be found a true copy of the agreement between Augustus SEALY and the men to whom he assigned the crown patent for Lots No. 21 and 21 of Lancaster Township, four hundred acres in total. The agreement was apparently reached on June 25, 1804, which differs significantly from the date noted in the Abstract Index to Deeds for these parcels. The registrar’s copy shows that Jacob SNYDER and George CLINE both signed the original agreement as men who had purchased the crown patent for the parcels from Augustus SEALY. The body of the text shows that four men were present and witnessed the formal agreement—Stephen BEACH, John ELLIOT, David LAKIN, and Joseph SEALY, all of whom were said to be “of Elizabethtown.” The copy also shows that Joseph SEALY and Wm BRUCE also signed the original agreement as witnesses to the purchasers’ signatures. Further, it reveals that Joseph SEALY caused the agreement to be registered at 11:00 am on July 16, 804. The registrar also noted that Joseph SEALY had provided an affidavit outlining the reason he was registering Augustus SEALY’s crown patent assignment to others. This agreement was registered in Book A as Instrument or Memorial No. 159. The agreement, as copied by the registrar, implies that Augustus SEALY was himself part of the agreement he reached with SNYDER and CLINE on June 15, 1804.The text reads, “whereby the said Augustus Sealy, for the consideration of the sum of Thirty two pounds ten shillings, made over and assigned all his right and title.” There is no hint in the copy book detail as to how James SEALY might have signed any document associated with the instrument of agreement, nor is there any hint as to James SEALY’s relationship to Augustus SEALY.

The next Registrar’s Copy Book in the series, Book B, contains true copies of Instruments No. 448, 449, and 450. Instrument No. 448, page 254, shows that on April 16, 1807, James SEALEY of Matilda [Township], heir at law of Augustus SEALEY, deceased, agreed to sell Lot 25 (two hundred acres) on the Ninth Concession of Lancaster to Norman McLEOD. James SEALEY signed the original document with “X,” his mark. Witnesses were Joshua Y. COZENS and John Law FARRAND, both of Cornwall. COZENS is the man who registered the agreement. Instrument No. 449 on page 255 is almost identical. On April 16, 1807, James SEALEY of Matilda Township in the County of Dundas, heir at law of Augustus SEALEY, agreed to sell Lot 25, Concession 3, to John McLENNAN. James SEALY was again shown to have signed the original document, not with an “X” mark, but with a full signature. COZENS and FARRAND were again witnesses, and COZENS again registered the agreement. Instrument No. 450 on page 256 is also similar. James SEALEY, heir at law of Augustus SEALEY, and John SNYDER agreed on April 16, 1807 to sell Lots 20 and 21 in the 3rd Concession to John McLENNAN, same witnesses, same dates. This time, though, James SEALEY is said to have signed the original agreement with an “X,” which implies that the notation made by the registrar against instrument No. 449 was inaccurate. When James SEALEY sold various parcels of land in Lancaster Township that had been patented to Augustus SEALEY in 1807, he apparently described himself as heir at law of Augustus SEALEY, deceased.

Do any formal records exist which might build on this notion? As mentioned above, until 1792 there was no formal mechanism for land to be sold, once a crown patent had been issued. This created all sorts of problems for officials, because, of course, individuals sold their parcels, wishing to move on to better conditions, or men died and others became the “owners” of the land the deceased men had held. A commission was established in Upper Canada in 1797, the First Heir and Devisee Commission. It was tasked with the onerous job of trying to sort everything out and make judgments about who was in fact the actual owner of disputed lands. This commission ended in 1804. But tangled circumstances caused another commission, the Second Heir and Devisee Commission, to be established in 1805, and this body was kept active until 1854 with open case files until 1911. The records of the First Heir and Devisee Commission are held at Library and Archives in Ottawa [RG1 L5, Volumes 1 – 104]. I believe that I submitted copies of some parts of this series in my first report, as part of my undertaking to obtain copies of as many early documents as possible that pertained to anyone named SEALY (or variations). I submit copies again, and now some of the documents submitted earlier make much more sense than they did initially.

Volume 1 of the First Heir and Devisee Commission records is comprised of an “Index of Location Certificates Issued by the Land Boards—alphabetically arranged—n.d. (pre1804).” Page 36 of this index shows that the Land Board for the Eastern District had issued a location ticket or certificate in the name of August SEALY. The index shows this as No. 21. But this is nothing more than what it says it is, an index of location certificates that were issued by the Land Boards in this Province. A location certificate allowed a man to settle on, reside, and improve the parcel of land that was detailed on the certificate. It has no substantive bearing on the Heir and Devisee Commission, other than that the commissioners must have requested that a list of location certificates issued be received from the various district land boards in the early stages of their deliberations. Volume 5 of the First Heir and Devisee Commission records comprises “Notices of Claims (received but disallowed or unresolved), arranged alphabetically, with a list of names; c.1809-1841.” I found no instances of SEALY (or variations) in either the list of names or alphabetically within the volume. Nor did I find any names that matched those to whom either Augustus or James SEALY assigned or sold any parcels.

Volume 8 of the First Heir and Devisee Commission records comprises “Location Certificates submitted in support of claims, arranged alphabetically by name of claimant and numbered.” Luckily, the location certificate that was issued by the Eastern District Land Board in 1785 to Augustus SEILEY was misfiled in Volume 8. The certificate was apparently submitted by John McLELLAN in support of his claim that he was the true current owner of one hundred acres in Lot 25 on the 3rd Concession of Lake (later Lancaster) Township. This certificate should have been filed in the M’s, for McLELLAN, as he was the one submitting the claim, but it was instead filed in the S section and stamped with page No. 313. So the original location certificate was issued to Augustus SEILY with a wife and nine children, a U. E. Loyalist who was entitled to receive six hundred acres, who drew as part of his entitlement one hundred acres in Lot 25 on the 3rd Concession of then Lake Township. The certificate was drawn up by John COLLINS, the Deputy Surveyor General, on behalf of Henry HAMILTON, at that time the lieutenant governor of Quebec. The certificate bears the date November 24, 1785, and it would have been some time after this date, probably, though, not until the following spring, that Augustus would have officially entered on to Lot 25. The middle panel of the reverse side of the folded certificate, Page 313a, which was docketed to Augustus SEILEY, although the surname as written is not legible because of wax bleeding through from the lieutenant governor’s seal on the main face of the certificate, shows that Augustus SEILY “sold the within mentioned Lot consisting of Two Hun’d acres land to James Dunn.” Augustus gave “up into him the Certificate for the same,” and he made his “X” mark on the paper. There was a witness to the sale, but it is not been possible for me quickly to discern who that was. No date appears to be associated with this writing. The left panel of the back side of the folded Certificate shows another, later sale: James DUNN, who also signed the paper with his “X” mark, sold the lot to John McLELLAN and delivered the certificate to him. Walter SUTHERLAND and John DUNN were witnesses to this transaction, but, again, no date is associated. The right panel of the back side of the folded certificate shows, inverted to other notations, Justice [William Dummer] POWELL’s remark that the rights to Lot 25, Concession 3, Lancaster Township, were “allowed to John McLellan” on June 3, 1803.

No other location certificates were found within the alphabetical sections of the First Heir and Devisee Commission records at Library and Archives for CLINE, SNYDER, McLELLAN/McLENNAN, or McLEOD, or elsewhere in the S section, which appear to have any significance for either Augustus SEALY’s or James SEALY’s other land holdings in Lake/Lancaster Township. Page 312 shows a notation, not dated or signed, most likely an internal commission note, stating that “This Certificate is put into the Office by John McLENNAN who now possesses the lot & has made considerable improvement thereon.” The import of this is that McLENNAN/McLELLAN must have been on Lot 25 long before the Heir and Devisee Commission began deliberations with respect to his claim in order for him to claim that he had made “considerable improvements thereon.” It is a pity that there are absolutely no other dates of submission or decision associated with these documents. The records of the Second Heir and Devisee Commission are held at the provincial Archives of Ontario in Toronto [RG 40, Series 1 – 12]. I have surveyed the available indexes to the various case files that were opened and activated by this commission but did not find anything pertaining to either Augustus or James SEALY, however the surname might have been spelled, or to any of the others known to have been involved with Augustus and James SEALY in transactions concerning land in Lancaster Township.

After 1792 and until 1859, two provincial courts operated in Upper Canada and Canada West to gather evidence and prove wills, enabling a judge subsequently to issue either grants of probate or grants of administration where no will was found to administer the estates of people who died possessed of real and/or personal property in Upper Canada or Canada West. The Court of Probate handled cases where a deceased person died possessed of property in more than one district in the province. These records are indexed at the Archives of Ontario in RG 22, Appendix A1. The Surrogate Court handled cases where a deceased person died possessed of property in only one district. These records are indexed at the Archives of Ontario in RG 22. Appendix A25. I surveyed both sets of records for the existence of an estate file for either probate or administration in the name of Augustus SEALY, however the first and last names might have been spelled, written or recorded, whether CEILY, SEALY or ZEELY, etc. I found no instance where such a file could be deemed interesting. Some records of wills and grants of administration that were presented to or issued by the Surrogate Court for Glengarry County prior to about 1811 were retained separately at the county courthouse until well in to the twentieth century by the later Surrogate Court for this county. Today, these records are housed at the Archives of Ontario as a separate group from those found in the provincial RG 22 Surrogate Court set. A separate set of indexes was created in the county courthouse, which holds some information different from dhe provincial RG 22 Surrogate Court index.

At the Archives of Ontario I additionally surveyed the index to the Surrogate Court, Glengarry County, Register A (1800-1809) [GS1 R186], and the more broad index, Stormont, Dundas, and Glengarry County Surrogate Court Estate Files (1800-1821) [GS 1 R1251]. These items apparently index grants of administration records which were retained by the Glengarry Surrogate Court and are not reflected in the provincial RG 22 Surrogate Court series. Unfortunately, no even remote hints were obtained that might have pointed to a will, an estate file, a grant of administration, or any other document which might have bearing on Augustus SEALY’s death or survivors.

One other avenue is sometimes available for research. On occasion if the deceased person owned real property—land, in Ontario but little in the way of personal property possessions other than land—a will might have been registered as a land title transfer document. This approach was followed from early days to the 1950s. The primary driver in this approach was that it was less costly to register a land title transfer record than it was to file applications with either the Probate or Surrogate Courts with or without a will for formal letters of probate or administration. But ,as noted, no will or other document was registered against any of the parcels that Augustus SEALY is known to have owned in Lancaster Township.

Two maps are the last items in the copies that accompany this report. The paper copies are unclear. The digital copies offer much more clarity. One map shows the lots and concession lines in Lancaster Township and identifies each property owner as was the case in about 1879. The Lancaster map is oriented with north to the top of the page, Lots 20, 21, and 25 of the 3rd Concession a “few inches” above Point Mouille, the old “Point Mullie” location for the muster of some discharged soldiers of the King’s Royal Regiment in the 1784-86 period. Lots of the 9th Concession can, of course, be found at the top of the map.

The other map shows the lots and concessions and the circa 1879 property owners in Lochiel Township, which is immediately north of Lancaster County. This map is also oriented so that north runs up through the top of the page. So there is evidence in the form of a formal location certificate issued at Quebec City, the seat of British North American government at the time, to Augustus SEILEY on November 24, 1785, that he was granted the right to occupy one hundred acres in Lot 25, Concession 3, of Lancaster Township. Augustus was identified as a U. E. Loyalist with nine children in his family, who was entitled to six hundred acres of land in total. The existence of this document suggests that other similar certificates must have also been issued in Augustus’s name for the other parcels for which the crown patents ultimately were issued. There is evidence that Augustus SEALY received crown patents for eight hundred acres of land in Lancaster Township on September 1, 1797, as Lots 20, 21, and 25 of the 3rd Concession, and Lot 25 of the 9th Concession.

First Heir and Devisee records show that at some time after November 24, 1785, Augustus SEALY sold his location certificate for either one hundred or two hundred acres in Lot 25, Concession 3, of Lancaster Township to James DUNN, who in turn sold the Certificate to John McLELLAN. The commissioners confirmed John McLELLAN’s ownership of this parcel with a notation on the certificate, dated June 3, 1803. Augustus himself reached an agreement with Jacob SNYDER and George CLINE on June 25, 1804, whereby he assigned the crown patent for Lots 20 and 21, Concession 3, to them for a set amount of money. Joseph SEALY of Elizabethtown Township, whose relationship to Augustus at that time was not stated, caused this transaction to be registered in Cornwall, Stormont County, on July 16, 1804. The date of the agreement differs from the date that was recorded in the Abstract Index to Deeds for these parcels many years later. But by August 16, 1807, Augustus SEALY had died, and Joseph SEALY of Matilda Township, heir at law of Augustus SEALY, caused all of the remaining lands supposedly in Augustus’s hands at that time to be sold. The confusion that arises because of James SEALY’s sale to John McLELLAN of a parcel that provincial officials had already recognized as being rightfully owned by John McLELLAN points to the very disjointed record keeping that then operatied in Lancaster Township, indeed, throughout the Province of Upper Canada, at least until the beginning of the War of 1812. No will or other estate documents have been found which might pinpoint the date of Augustus SEALY’s death more precisely. We know that he was alive on June 25, 1804, and that he was deceased by August 16, 1807. That is the best that we can do with provincial land registry records of Ontario.