(1) As is frequently the case in early days in the colonies and the states in respect to names of non-British origin, the family surname appears in various spellings. It is spelled Richebourg in historical references to CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG and in the wills of his sons Charles Richebourg, Rene Richebourg, and John Richebourg. It is spelled Richborough in the census of 1790, and Richbourg in the census of 1800 and the wills of CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG’s son Claudius and his grandson James. It is spelled Richburgh in the census of 1810. During succeeding generations the surname has ordinarily been spelled Richbourg or Richburg. The writer spells it according to the way in which it is spelled in a particular context or in the way in which a particular individual preferred to spell it. Although a number of the descendants of CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG were undoubtedly living in Clarendon County in 1790 only two of them, James Richborough, Sr., and William Richborough are listed as heads of families in the census. This fact and the omission of ownership of slaves in some instances indicate that the census of 1790 for Clarendon County is incomplete either as taken or as preserved. Henry Richborough, Sr., Henry Richborough, Jr., James Richbourgh, Sr., Nathaniel Richborough, Sr., Nathaniel Richborough, Jr. and William Richbourgh are listed a heads of families in the census of 1800 for Clarendon County and Claude Richburgh, Richburgh, Henry Richburgh, Sr., Henry Richburgh, Jr., Louisa Richbourg, Nat Richburgh, Jr., Renna Richburgh, Samuel Richburgh, Thomas Richburgh and William Richburgh are listed as heads of families in the census of 1810 for Clarendon County. The National Archives Service does not have in its possession the census of Clarendon County for 1820, 1830, 1840, and 1850, and for this reason the census of the County for each of these years is presumed to be lost.
(2) Charles Washington Baird: HISTORY OF THE HUGUENOT EMIGRATION TO AMERICA (Baltimore, Md., 1966) Vol. 2, page 105. This history is hereafter cited as Baird. As we shall see, CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG was pastor of the French or Huguenot Church at Jamestown on the Santee–not of the French Church at Charleston.
(3) Dr. George Howe: HISTORY OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN SOUTH CAROLINA (Columbia, S. C., 1870), Vol. 1, 166. This history is hereafter cited as Howe.
(4) Howe, Vol. 1, 166.
(5) Howe, Vol. 1, 166: Baird, Vol. 2 105-106, 177. See, also, Bishop William Meade: OLD CHURCHES, MINISTERS, AND FAMILIES OF VIRGINIA, Baltimore, Md., (1966).
(6) Howe, Vol. 1, 166.
(7) Howe, Vol. 1, 166.
(8) Howe, Vol. 1, 166-167. Dr. Arthur Henry Hirsch has much to say concerning Richebourg in his history of “The Huguenots of Colonial South Carolina,” which was published in 1962 and is hereafter cited simply as Hirsch. See pages 19, 62, 76, 81, 133-134, 137.
(9) Hirsch, 15-18, 60-61.
(10) Hirsch. 15, 60.
(11) Howe, Vol. 1. 168: Elizabeth W. A. Pringle: THE REGISTER BOOK FOR THE PARISH OF PRINCE WINYAW (Baltimore, Md., 1916), pages i-vii: Hirsch, 15.
(12) South Carolina Historical and Genealogical Magazine. vol. 45. page 65; see, also, Hirsch pages 14-15.
(13) Howe, vol. 1, 166.
(14) Howe, Vol. 1, 166-167: The Judge of Probate at Charleston has informed the writer that the will of CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG cannot now be found in his office.
(15) Howe, Vol. 1. 169.
(16) Hirsch, 133-134.
(17) as Dr. Hirsch concedes, the Huguenots “were foreigners of a race other than that of the most numerous class in the community and spoke a language not only very different than in general as in the Province, but also held in contempt outside of English court circles. They came in want from a country that for centuries had been the political enemy of Great Britain. They were religious refugees and ardent advocates of a faith dissimilar to Anglican.” Hirsch, 138.
(18) Hirsch, 132, 134.
(19) Howe, Vol. 1. 168-169.
(20) Howe, Vol. 1. 167.
(21) Hirsch, 19. Baird, Vol. 1, pages 105-106. It is obvious that he was living on June 2, 1718, because on that day Pierre St. Julian of Berkeley County made his will, which gave a legacy of twenty pounds to “Monsieur CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG, Minister.” Caroline T. Moore and Agatha Aimar Sunmons, ABSTRACTS OF WILLS OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1670-1740 (Columbia, S. C. 1960), Vol. 1. page 60.
(22) Will of Isaac Porcher, which is recorded in Will Book 1726-1729, Vol. 2, page 374, on file in Probate office at Charleston, S. C.
(23) Will of Charles Richebourg, which is recorded in Will Book 1 1747-1752, pages 461-462, on file in the Probate Office at Charleston, S. C. By his will Charles Richebourg devised his 200-acre plantation on which he resided to his brother Rene Richebourg on condition that Rene convey his 250 -acre plantation known as Long Acres to his brother John Richebourg made specific legacies of one negro slave to each of his Brothers, Rene, John, James, and Claudius, and his sister, Elizabeth, and his niece, Catherine Richebourg; and left the remainder of his estate in equal shares to his brothers, Rene, John, James, and Claudius, and his sister Elizabeth. See, also, ABSTRACTS OF WILLS OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1740-1760, Vol. 2, page 140.
(24) Will of Rene Richebourg which is recorded in Will Book 1740-1747, page 170, on file in Probate Office at Charleston, S. C. By his will, Rene Richebourg devised his plantation to his son Charles, subject to the right of his wife, Catherine, to reside on it during her widowhood, and bequeathed his personal estate in various proportions to his wife, Catherine, his daughters. Catherine and Elizabeth, and his sons, Charles, Rene, and Samuel. The will shows that the children were under the age of 21 years at the time of its execution. See also, ABSTRACTS OF WILLS OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1746-1760, Vol. 2, page 30.
(25) Will of John Richebourg, which is recorded in Will Book 1740-1747, page 150, on file in Probate Office at Charleston, S. C. By his will, John Richebourg devised to his nephew, Rene Richebourg, the eldest son of his “late brother, Rene Richebourg”, a 300-acre plantation lying on Magate Swamp in Berkeley County; bequeathed to his “loving sister Elizabeth Richebourg one Negro woman by name Nancy and her daughter by name Silvia”; bequeathed to his nephew, Charles Richebourg, son of his late brother, Rene Richebourg, his gun; and left the remainder of his estate in equal shares to his surviving brothers James Richebourg and Charles Richebourg” and his “loving sister Elizabeth Richebourg: See, also, ABSTRACTS OF WILLS OF THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 1740-1760, Vol. 2. page 23.
(26) Hirsch 18. Craven County was created in 1682 and originally included all of South Carolina lying between Berkeley County and the North Carolina line.
(27) After the writer had completed this sheet, Mrs. J. W. T of Atlanta, Georgia a descendant of CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG a copy of a manuscript relating to DE RICHEBOURG compiled by the late Dr. Robert Wilson, of the Citadel at Charleston, S. C. whose existence had been unknown to the writer prior to that time. The manuscript is in complete with the research of the writer with respect to DE RICHEBOURG’s family. It states that he married ANNE CHASTAIN and that their sons Charles and John died unmarried that their sons, Rene and Claudius married and left issue, and that no indication as to what because of their son, James and their daughter Elizabeth has been discovered. The manuscript surmises that ANNE CHASTAIN was probably the daughter or sister of Dr. Castaing or Castayne one of the two surgeons who accompanied the Huguenots to Manakin Town. The manuscript accepts the that DE RICHEBOURG took Anglican orders and asserts that Baird’s “statement that Dr. Isaac Porcher was a Richebourg and was descended from the Count de Richbourg and his surmise that CLAUDE PHILIPPE DE RICHEBOURG was of the same stock are equally without foundation.” further states that the maiden name of Rene Richebourg’s wife was Catherine Peyre that they resided at a plantation on the Santee known as Sandy Hill that daughter Elizabeth married Thomas Pamer of Gravel Hill whose Anglicized as Palmer. The writer is constrained to take issue with the statement of the manuscript that Charles Richebourg the son or Rene Richebourg and his wife Catherine Peyre, died in 1792. This Charles Richebourg was the grandson of the original Rene Richebourg. The records of St. Stephens Parish in Craven County show that Rene Richebourg’s son Charles died before May 4, 1771, and that on that day the Court of Ordinary granted a citation to Elizabeth Richebourg. Rene Richebourg the brother of Charles and Joseph Palmer administer his estate, SOUTH CAROLINA HISTORICAL AND GENEALOGICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. 44, page 250. Moreover, the same records disclose that Rene Richebourg’s sons Charles, Rene, and Samuel were active officers of the Anglican Church which served that portion of St. Stephen’s parish lying in Craven County north of the Santee River. SOUTH CAROLINA HISTORICAL AND GENEALOGICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. 45, pages 162-167, 170-217, and Vol. 46, pages 40, 174.