A British agent at Port Sainte-Marie to Newcastle, coded report, 1729

TASK: take a partial decipherment further: A British agent at Port Sainte-Marie to Newcastle, coded report, 1729
This page: https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/further/portstemarie1729.html

You are helping a public research project finish reading historical cipher letters. This one is read in part:
the key works, but some pieces are still open. Your job is to close one or more of the open gaps below.

THE READING
  Write-up:   https://dbourdeau.github.io/cyphersolver/portstemarie1729.html (read it first: how the text was read, the key, the reading)
  Date:       1729
  Outcome:    key from adjacent plaintext · partial
  Read now:   82.3% of the deciphered cipher tokens give sense (pieces below may be untouched)
  Files:      https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/tree/main/targets/portstemarie1729 (NOTES.md, key, transcription, reading, scripts)

OPEN GAPS (from NOTES.md, "## Remaining gaps")
  1. [open-codes: doable now] 18 tokens (15 codes) filled from context only, counted as holes: 805 obligation, 585 ig (2), 275 dans (2), 222 conduite, 816 ordre (2), 666 lu, 1118 (trouver or tain, see above), 689 m, 460 fe, 84 apres, 1152 vos, 1210 six, 285 di, 711 maine, and 1250 as separator - blocker: open-codes; none is glossed in the siblings transcribed here; the duplicate folder finds glosses for 84 and 816 in other letters (not re-checked on the images), for 275 and 666 by reading a digit differently or from a blotted group, and none for the others
  2. [open-codes: doable now] 7 groups with no value: 6 (a number, date of Newcastle's letter), 274 (a name or d-word after "départ du"), 254, 937, 1052, 726, 836 - blocker: open-codes; not glossed in any sibling here, alphabetical neighbours narrow them only to a letter range (the duplicate folder reads the digits of 60919 L11 as 937 = monsieur, which this folder reads 737; not settled on the image), mssBLA 184 and 186 are unglossed

ALREADY TRIED (from NOTES.md, "## Escalation")
  [x] siblings: all glossed letters in mssBLA 187-191 used here (60887, 60907-60909, 60917-60920, 60963); mssBLA 185, 194 and 179 are glossed too and are used in `../newcastle1729/` only
  [x] clear-pages: the 21 July clear letter and the 4 Aug clear copy (60903-60904, `../newcastle1729/`) checked; nothing from the report
  [x] known-keys: no other key of this series is known (not on DECODE); the siblings are the key source
  [x] print: none found, no printed edition; the duplicate folder searched HMC Polwarth, Coxe's Kings of Spain and Walpole and the TNA and BL catalogues, 11 Nov 2026
  [x] key-rebuild: alphabetical bracketing of every gap (`pairs_zinf.tsv`; `../newcastle1729/slots.py`); it gives the 18 context-filled tokens, which count as holes
  [x] retry: decode re-run on the strict count 12 Nov 2026 (116 of 141); retry possible if further Port Sainte-Marie letters are digitised (mssBLA 185-195 not all)

STEPS
0. Set up. If you can run a shell, fork and clone the repository and work inside it:
     git clone https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver.git
   Then read, in this order: CONTRIBUTING.md (how a contribution is sent and credited); README.md, sections
   "Repository layout" and "Conventions" (how readings are measured and named); targets/portstemarie1729/NOTES.md in full, and the
   key, transcription and reading files it names; lang/README.md (shared language models).
   Work in targets/portstemarie1729/. Add your findings to NOTES.md under a dated heading without rewriting what is there, and
   update the "## Remaining gaps" line of every gap you close. Keep WORKLOG.md there: one dated line per step
   (hypothesis, value tried, solver run, crib, control), failures included. Do not edit docs/ (the site is generated).
   If you cannot run a shell, fetch the files from the links above and keep your work in files you send with the issue.
1. Pick a gap. Start with the ones marked "doable now" (open-codes, not-attempted, left-open): the images and the key
   are online, so they need only work. A gap marked "needs a new source" (no-key-material, too-short, illegible,
   needs-physical-access) can be closed only by something new: a key
   or a deciphered sibling found elsewhere, a better image, a printed edition or calendar, a photograph from the archive.
   For those, search for that material first, and say where you looked even when you find nothing.
2. Start from the existing key and transcription in the folder. Do not rebuild the key from scratch, and do not
   re-read parts that are already read unless you find an error in them.
3. For a code group or sign value: list every place the group occurs, show how each reads with the value you propose,
   and say what still does not fit. For a passage: re-read it at the image and give the folio and line. For a missing
   letter or leaf: say where it is held and how it can be reached.
4. Measure again. Apply the key to the whole text, write the reading file, and count the share of cipher tokens that
   give sense (not an estimate). The reading is "complete" only when (1) at least 95% of its cipher tokens give sense;
   (2) no gap is left untried; (3) every letter in it is covered; (4) what stays open is scattered code groups or names,
   or pieces blocked from outside. Otherwise it stays "partial": say which gaps are still open and why.
5. Be honest. Mark every uncertain word with [?], leave unread groups as their numbers or signs, and never fill a gap
   with a plausible guess. A gap retried and still open, with what was ruled out, is worth reporting.

REPORT BACK
With a clone: open a pull request with your changes to targets/portstemarie1729/. Say in the description which gaps you worked on,
  the share read before and after, and how you want to be credited (name, initials or handle, and a link).
Without one: open an issue: https://github.com/dbourdeau/cyphersolver/issues/new?template=further-reading.yml&title=Further+reading%3A+portstemarie1729&page=portstemarie1729.html
  Give the write-up, the gap you worked on (its line in Remaining gaps, or the code group, folio and line), what you
  propose, the evidence (every occurrence, the images or sources), the share read before and after, your step log,
  and the tools and AI model you used.
If you cannot open issues or pull requests, write this report for your human to send. Credit goes to the person who sends it.