I had the impression the number had been assigned to Widow Jack, not to anyone else. She was there earlier than Blunston's distribution of the licenses to newcomers - but I do believe her claim would have to be evaluated at that time and either confirmed by having a license issued, or denied if her land claim was not good or conflicted. Like you would eventually have to have a deed even if you had been "squatting" on a place for some time. Eventually you need that piece of paper. So if Blunston found you there he would eventually have to deal with you. He seemed to be in charge. Perhaps someone else has had experience with this situation. It is just the way it appears to me. Rita >From: "Hansen" <hansen8@burgoyne.com> >Reply-To: PACUMBER-L@rootsweb.com >To: PACUMBER-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: [PACUMBER] Blunston License- Widow Jack >Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:04:00 -0700 > >Rita - > I appreciate your help. I don't know exactly what License # 222 says >but I am guessing it may have been given to someone who was settling near >the Widow Jack as a part of a description of their property. She >apparently was there before they started giving out the licenses. I don't >know if #222 is her license or someone elses. Linda > > >==== PACUMBER Mailing List ==== > Search this mail list. > Just type in pacumber or PACUMBER. > http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl > >============================== >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 _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail