> > The following is an abstract I prepared of a deed found at Hartford > > Deeds, Book 3, p. 228 [FHL 4511]: > > > > I Richard Risley of Hartford Connecticut for and in consideration of > > the natural love and affection I do bear unto my loving son Samuel > > Risley have given granted and I the said Richard Risley for my self > > and my heirs do fully and absolutely give grant and confirm unto my > > said son Samuel Risley his heirs and assigns forever two ...parcels > > of land situated on the east side of the Connecticut River in the > > town of Hartford aforesaid. [description of first parcel omitted] > > also more one parcel of land lying or being part of the land that I > > bought of John Crow deceased butted north on land of Jeremiah Risley > > as may appear by a deed from his father and to begin as far west as > > the said Jeremiah Risleys land and there butt west on my own land > > south on land of Thomas Spencer east on common or undivided land for > > him my son Samuel Risley his heirs executors administrators and > > assigns to have and to hold. In witness whereof I the said Richard > > Risley have set my hand and seal this nineteenth day of March Anno > > Dom 1716/7 > > > > Does "his father" as used in "butted north on land of Jeremiah > > Risley as may appear by a deed from his father" refer to the father > > of Jeremiah Risley or the father of Samuel Risley? > > > > Ukes > > No. "his father" is John Crow, dec'd. > > "...that I (Richard Risley) bought of John Crow dec'd... as may > appear by a deed from his father." > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> Thank you for sharing your interpretation. It's interesting that four out of five people share that interpretation, because it's one that hadn't occurred to me before. I still don't think, based on the text, that it's the most plausible interpretation. Furthermore, the evidence shows that John Crow deeded 330 acres in East Hartford to Richard Risley in 1682. John Crow was the largest landowner in Hartford, and he died in 1686. http://tinyurl.com/klpcj So John Crow was living when he deeded land to Richard Risley. Jerry Ukes <[email protected]>

> > > The following is an abstract I prepared of a deed found at Hartford > > > Deeds, Book 3, p. 228 [FHL 4511]: > > > > > > I Richard Risley of Hartford Connecticut for and in consideration of > > > the natural love and affection I do bear unto my loving son Samuel > > > Risley have given granted and I the said Richard Risley for my self > > > and my heirs do fully and absolutely give grant and confirm unto my > > > said son Samuel Risley his heirs and assigns forever two ...parcels > > > of land situated on the east side of the Connecticut River in the > > > town of Hartford aforesaid. [description of first parcel omitted] > > > also more one parcel of land lying or being part of the land that I > > > bought of John Crow deceased butted north on land of Jeremiah Risley > > > as may appear by a deed from his father and to begin as far west as > > > the said Jeremiah Risleys land and there butt west on my own land > > > south on land of Thomas Spencer east on common or undivided land for > > > him my son Samuel Risley his heirs executors administrators and > > > assigns to have and to hold. In witness whereof I the said Richard > > > Risley have set my hand and seal this nineteenth day of March Anno > > > Dom 1716/7 > > > > > > Does "his father" as used in "butted north on land of Jeremiah > > > Risley as may appear by a deed from his father" refer to the father > > > of Jeremiah Risley or the father of Samuel Risley? > > > > > > Ukes > > > > No. "his father" is John Crow, dec'd. > > > > "...that I (Richard Risley) bought of John Crow dec'd... as may > > appear by a deed from his father." > > > > Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> > > Thank you for sharing your interpretation. It's interesting that > four out of five people share that interpretation, because it's one > that hadn't occurred to me before. I still don't think, based on the > text, that it's the most plausible interpretation. Furthermore, the > evidence shows that John Crow deeded 330 acres in East Hartford to > Richard Risley in 1682. John Crow was the largest landowner in > Hartford, and he died in 1686. > http://tinyurl.com/klpcj > So John Crow was living when he deeded land to Richard Risley. > > Ukes And thus *dead* by 1716, the date of the deed in which he was identified as "dec'd". Thus far the stated facts do not support anything beyond a similarity of surname for the Risleys you mention. However, your family, your research, your conclusions. Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>

>>>>The following is an abstract I prepared of a deed found at Hartford >>>>Deeds, Book 3, p. 228 [FHL 4511]: >>>> >>>>I Richard Risley of Hartford Connecticut for and in consideration of >>>>the natural love and affection I do bear unto my loving son Samuel >>>>Risley have given granted and I the said Richard Risley for my self >>>>and my heirs do fully and absolutely give grant and confirm unto my >>>>said son Samuel Risley his heirs and assigns forever two ...parcels >>>>of land situated on the east side of the Connecticut River in the >>>>town of Hartford aforesaid. [description of first parcel omitted] >>>>also more one parcel of land lying or being part of the land that I >>>>bought of John Crow deceased butted north on land of Jeremiah Risley >>>>as may appear by a deed from his father and to begin as far west as >>>>the said Jeremiah Risleys land and there butt west on my own land >>>>south on land of Thomas Spencer east on common or undivided land for >>>>him my son Samuel Risley his heirs executors administrators and >>>>assigns to have and to hold. In witness whereof I the said Richard >>>>Risley have set my hand and seal this nineteenth day of March Anno >>>>Dom 1716/7 >>>> >>>>Does "his father" as used in "butted north on land of Jeremiah >>>>Risley as may appear by a deed from his father" refer to the father >>>>of Jeremiah Risley or the father of Samuel Risley? >>>> >>>>Ukes >>> >>>No. "his father" is John Crow, dec'd. >>> >>>"...that I (Richard Risley) bought of John Crow dec'd... as may >>>appear by a deed from his father." >>> >>>Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> >> >>Thank you for sharing your interpretation. It's interesting that >>four out of five people share that interpretation, because it's one >>that hadn't occurred to me before. I still don't think, based on the >>text, that it's the most plausible interpretation. Furthermore, the >>evidence shows that John Crow deeded 330 acres in East Hartford to >>Richard Risley in 1682. John Crow was the largest landowner in >>Hartford, and he died in 1686. >> http://tinyurl.com/klpcj >>So John Crow was living when he deeded land to Richard Risley. >> >>Ukes > >And thus *dead* by 1716, the date of the deed in which he was >identified as "dec'd". Thus far the stated facts do not support >anything beyond a similarity of surname for the Risleys you mention. > >However, your family, your research, your conclusions. > >Cheryl Singhals <[email protected]> I'm talkin' to myself again ... John Crow dec'd by 1716 had land described in a deed from his father. This land was purchased from Crow by Risley and then deeded in 1716 to Risley's son. Cheryl singhals <[email protected]>