Dear Mrs. Burkett: I have read, reread and studied your letter of Sept 21st and believe that I have a better concept of the events that we are trying to unravel. I will suggest that you probably overlooked the first law suit between Thomas Sisson and Eppes for it resulted in a judgment for Sisson. It gave him 348 lbs. of Tobacco out of the 1000 lbs. - the subject of the suit. The balance was an amount the Eppes had paid on a Sisson debt. Sisson apparently was not satisfied with the result and filed another case for the same subject in which he apparently tried to take a non-suit so that he could file it again but before he could complete his non-suit Eppes' attorney asked for a dismissal on the ground that the issue had already been tried and had gone to judgment which settled that particular issue. This is my interpretation of these notations based on my long time practice of the law. It makes no difference except that it puts the value of 348 lbs. of tobacco in Thomas Sisson's hands to use for the possible purchase of other interests as he might find. My only interest in trying to track him through Charles City and New Kent, Counties into Surrey was to see if he might have bought and sold some lands and in the sale a wife had joined him in the deed to release her dower, looking for the name of his wife. Ancestry.com (in which I do not put too much faith) reports that of his 7 children, the oldest Thomas (Jr) was born in 1701 in Surrey County and that William (I believe the youngest} was born in about 1714, also, in Surrey County. I take it that he, therefore, married sometime between 1693 and 1700. Although Ancestry.com suggests her name to be Elizabeth there is nothing to support it. He does name all his children in his will and appoints Thomas and William as his Executors. William does not appear as a party to any of the Estate papers that we have seen and I take it, that if he was born in 1714, he was not old enough in 1731, when his father died, to qualify as an Executor and so Thomas did all the work. . One of the male Sissons in our line has taken the DNA test and we have definitely been linked to the Thomas Sisson who died in Surrey County, VA, in 1731. We think he is one and same as the Thomas Sisson who migrated to America in 1683 but so far have not been able to prove it. By the DNA testing we have been linked to a Sisson presently living in Penrith, England and my wife, daughter, and I have been over there to visit him and his family. Our present problem, however, is more complicated. Thomas Sisson No. 1 had a son named William, born about 1714. Thomas Sisson No 2 had son named William, born about 1739. Which William Sisson was it who died in Union County, SC, in 1796? DNA wise it makes no difference since either way we go back to Thomas Sisson who died in Surrey County in 1731. But we would like to be able to trace the line by generations and to know which ones we go to directly. I have a map of what is now Greensville County, VA, carved out of Brunswick Çounty in 1781. It was drawn freehand by some one who drew in the approximate location of lands owned by various persons in the 1720s - 1750s. I do not know where I got it but all of this county would have been Brunswick County at the dates inserted in each ownership. Whether the deeds for these tracts are recorded in Brunswick or Greensville County I do not know. There are several tracts in the name of Thomas Sisson and from the dates I think this is Thomas No.1. There are also several tracts under the name of Joseph Shearin. There are no tracts under the name of William Sisson. The Joseph Shearin family and the Thomas Sisson family (or part of each one) lived neighbors in both Brunswick County, VA., and Granville County, NC. When Joseph Sisson died in Granville County, NC, in 1751 one of the witnesses used to prove his will was William Sisson. His will also provided that he bequeathed to his son-in=- law, Benjamin Kimball, a note owed him by William Sisson but does not refer to William as his son-in-law. Then during the 1750s a William Sisson bought and sold several tracts of land in Granville County, NC and finally bought a tract of land on the Pacolett River in in Union County, SC in 1768. I have traced his land purchases and sales generally along the road leading from SE VA to the Union County SC area and I think have sent you a copy. If I have not I will be glad to furnish you with one, In the Grantor's clause of the sales he is joined several times by his wife, Frances, I mention this because Ancestry.com names the 3rd child of Joseph Shearin as Frances. She is not otherwise identified in so far as I can tell. From the approximate land descriptions it appears to me that Jon Shearin and William Sisson lived neighbors in Granville County and the the Militia Records reflect that they both belonged to the same Mililtia Company in the 1750s. There is some indication in all of this that the Frances who signed as the wife of William Sisson was probably the daughter of Joseph Sheain but why would he have referred to Kimball as his son-in-law but did not do so as to William. Possibly because he was writing long hand and was tired and wanted to shorten the writing but, also, possibly because William was not.. The record reflects that Thomas No. 2 executed deeds for his father's estate and in some was joined by Hannah, his wife, to release her dower and the record also reflects that Thomas No. 2 and Hannah Parker Raines were married in 1736; that she was the widow of Raines with son in esse at the time of Raines' death. If this date of birth, 1739, is even close to correct then we can be certain that this William was not the William Sisson who witnessed to prove the will of Joseph Shearin in 1751 because too young. And I would seriously question that he was the William who was speculating in land in Granville County, NC in the 1750s. Our evidence of identification is only negative nothing positive. Our only interest in Charles City County and New Kent County records is to identify a marriage between Thomas Sisson and someone between 1690 and 1701. I have serious doubts that such a record exists. If so, it would likely be in the release of dower by a wife in a deed of conveyance. Likewise our interest in Surrey, Brunswick (Greensville} Counties is the same exscept that we have not searched Greensville County and I believe that we have not searched Surrey or Brunswick Counties for wills or administration of the estate of Thomas Sisson no. 2. We do not have any proof of the names of his children other than William. We do not have any evidence identifying definitely this William, the son of Thomas No. 2, after his birth in 1739. Incidentally the 1790 census of Union County, SC gives names of John, Joshua, William, and David Sisson as residents. William shows 1 white male over 16 years of age, 2 white males under 16 years, 2 white females including head of family, and 2 slaves. This does not sound like the family of a 76 year old man who died less than 6 years later. I can think of several possible explanations but they are all purely guesses. I would like to have your best judgment as to whether any further search of Middlesex, Charles City, or New Kent Counties might turn up any further evidence of the identification of Thomas Sisson and any of his activities and the name of his wife and the search of Surrey, Brunswick, and Greensville Counties might identify the Shearin family , Frances especially, and activity of Thomas Sisson No., 1 and his wife, and Thomas Sisson No.12 and Hannah, his wife,and the names of the latter's children. Thanks for listening to my ramblilng and for your information. If you think any additional search might avail some help please give me an idea of the time you might need and the amount of fee to forward. Yours truly Robert Hays Willliams rhaysw@cox-internet.com