Hi Sue-- I need to do more research on Virginia Colonial laws before I can reach a conclusion on this. However, please note that Nell Gwin is not being tried here--it is Katrin Queen who is charged with stealing the silver plate. It is not totally clear from Chalkley's abstract, but it would appear that witnesses are being called to testify to Nell Gwin's character because she may be a witness against Katrin Queen. Perhaps Katrin Queen in her defense accused Nell of stealing the silver plate, or at least being a liar. That would explain why witnesses would then be called to testify on Nell's character. Since the individuals being called appear to be friends, neighbors and possibly relatives, we can assume they were offering positive testimony in Nell's favor. Even if Nell is--let's say 10 years old in 1746--that's still borderline for her to be a daughter of Robert. That would take her birth back to 1736 and would probably mean that she was Robert's oldest child. However, there is no record of Robert, Sr. anywhere in Virginia before 1744 (at least to my knowledge). If she was much older than 10 she definitely could not be a daughter of Robert Sr. Best wishes! Ron Gwinn

Good Point. I'll continue to follow the lines as they untangle. thanks. Sue. ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 6:09 PM Subject: Re: Speculation on the Wife of Robert Gwin of the Calfpasture > Hi Sue-- > > I need to do more research on Virginia Colonial laws before I can reach a > conclusion on this. However, please note that Nell Gwin is not being tried > here--it is Katrin Queen who is charged with stealing the silver plate. It > is not totally clear from Chalkley's abstract, but it would appear that > witnesses are being called to testify to Nell Gwin's character because she > may be a witness against Katrin Queen. Perhaps Katrin Queen in her defense > accused Nell of stealing the silver plate, or at least being a liar. That > would explain why witnesses would then be called to testify on Nell's > character. Since the individuals being called appear to be friends, > neighbors and possibly relatives, we can assume they were offering positive > testimony in Nell's favor. > > Even if Nell is--let's say 10 years old in 1746--that's still borderline for > her to be a daughter of Robert. That would take her birth back to 1736 and > would probably mean that she was Robert's oldest child. However, there is no > record of Robert, Sr. anywhere in Virginia before 1744 (at least to my > knowledge). If she was much older than 10 she definitely could not be a > daughter of Robert Sr. > > Best wishes! Ron Gwinn > > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 >