This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Surnames: Trent, Burton, Murrell, Martin, Greene Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/rw/XeB.2ACE/3195.1.1.1 Message Board Post: Scott, We have agonized over this issue before. But, there is no other James Trent in Hawkins or Hancock counties in 1850, 1860, or 1870 who could be this James Trent (uncle of William Burton) other than James Burton Trent. We know from census data this William Burton was living with Samuel Trent and Rebecca in 1830 and that he was married as William Trent in the 1830s. We know that Samuel Trent alternately used the name Samuel Burton. We know that William Burton was going by William Trent in 1850 and William Burton in 1860. We know that he lived next door so to speak to Samuel Trent in 1840 and 1850. We know that William Burton married Lucinda Murrell who was the daughter of James Murrell Sr. We also know that James Burton Trent's half brother Alexander married Polly Martin who was the half sister of James Murrell. We know that James Burton Trent's daughter Susan married the Pleasant G. Murrell grandson of James Murrell. John Alfred Murrell married a Greene who was rel! ated to the Greenes married by the half brothers and sisters of James Burton Trent. We know that James Trent said he was the uncle of William Burton aka William Trent. We know that James Burton Trent died in 1867, so that isn't a problem. Now, I feel that the question that we really have to answer is what does it mean to be an uncle of someone? I do have a case in a pension file where a cousin removed was referred to as an uncle. It was the pension file of William Lawson and three Stapleton brothers testified for him. One brother said he was unrelated, the other said he was a third cousin, and the third said he was the uncle. The genealogy for both families indicates that they were cousins removed. So, if Samuel Trent/Burton and James Burton Trent were first cousins instead of brothers, then William Burton would be a cousin removed if I calculated correctly. But, we have two Trents who were both known or believed to be Burtons, and one of them indicated he was the uncle of a man living with the other Trent/Burton as a son (or stepson). Both Burton/Trents were associated with Burton/Osbornes who married Trents who were closely related to each other. So, it might take a more complex story to explain wh! y they were not related. I think that a more simple explanation, given all of the information that we have, is that they were brothers, half brothers or first cousins. Since there is no Hawkins County census before 1830, we may never know the truth. David