The Commissioners to John Cooke.

Wilkesbarre, June 20, 1801.

John Cook, Esq., Northumba, Northumberla County: Sir: It appears that as Executor Cum test annexo of William McCord, you have released to the State certain tracts situated on Lacawanna, surveyed for James Parr, W. McCord, William Wilson, Sam. McClay, Casp. Weitzell, James Moore, W". Foster, David Meade, Alex'. Templeton, John Weitzell and Russel, Jacob Smith, John Lugar; All these tracts have been released also by James Moore and Wife, who have procured and transmitted returns of Survey of most of them. Is this a joint Concern? or is it a Contested Claim? Without further informat" it is impossible for the Commissioners to certify respecting them.

By order of the Comm'rs.

THOMAS LLOYD, Clerk to the Comm'rs.

The Commissioners to Thomas Grant.

Wilkesbarre, June 20, 1801.

Thomas Grant, Esq., Near Sunbury, North County: Sir: It appears that you have released to the State of Pennsylvania a tract of land of 307 or 308 acres and Allowance, for there are 2 Surveys in the name of John Wolf. I am directed to request you would give them further information, whether this be the same with one returned by Aaron Levy, as warranted in the same name, and, if so, whether this be a joint Concern or a contested right.

THOMAS LLOYD, Clerk to the Commiss's.

The Commissioners to James Rose.

Mr. James Rose, North:

Wilkesbarre, June 20, 1801.

Sir: I am direct by the Com'rs appoint to carry into effect the Act of April 4, 1799, Offering, &., to mention that in the release made by you to the State of Pa, of a tract, warranted in the name of Wm. Thorp, It does not appear how you are entitled under M'. James Rose of Philadelphia. If by testament, an authenticated extract of the Will should be set forth. The release is in other respects very incorrect. Neither does

it appear in an' release how you are entitled to act as Attorney for R. H. Rose. They beg farther Information on these points.

I am, Sir,
Yours,

THOMAS LLOYD.

The Commissioners to Alex. Hunter.

Wilkesbarre, June, 1801.

Mr. Alexander Hunter, near Sunbury:

Sir: It appears that you have released to the State of Pennsylvania certain tracts of land, as follows, viz: 150 acres allotted to be surveyed for Thomas Osborne, also of lands containing 3,3833 Acres, Situate on or near the Waters of Lacawanna, held in partnership with James Rose and Wife.

The Commissioners beg to know whether Thomas Osborne's tract has been surveyed; If so, they request an Office Copy of the Survey.

They desire also to be informed more particularly where the 3,3833 acres lie, and they wish you to transmit Office Copies of the Surveys, and also whe' James Moore's share be thereof, and whether a Survey of Alexander Templeton of 326 Acres be part of them.

Also whe McCord or Laughlin McCartney have any, and what share in said Lands.

Sir: It appears that you have released to the State of Pennsylvania, as Executor of James Scovell, deceased, No. 30 in the Manor of Stoke, stated as containing 100 acres, the return is 88 Acres 82 perches. Qu. Is there any encrease to that quantity by subsequent Survey?

No. 24, in Sunbury Manor, Allotted to William Armstrong, appears to contain only 85 Acres, but the release states it to have been encreased to 150 by Charles Stewart. The Commissioners possess no Office Copy of the Survey, and therefore no

regular evidence of the contents of William Armstrong's Survey, and they beg you to transmit them any evidence you have or can procure of the addition suggested in the release, which makes that allotment 150 acres. There is also a release of a Warrant, but apparently without any Survey in the name of William Hamilton, 300 acres and Allowce; but if this be on Red Bank creek, it is out of their Jurisdiction.

Sir: It is impossible for the Comm'rs to proceed with any certainty, Satisfaction or effect in valuing the lands claimed and released by the late proprietors of Pennsa in their Manors in Luzerne County, without farther and accurate Acc' of the lands therein, which have been disposed of heretofore to other persons, either under absolute Deeds of Sale or Executory Devises still binding. They beg, therefore, therefore, that immediate information, and such as they can act upon, be transmitted without delay upon these points, that they may be enabled to do justice to the proprietaries. The list of allot mts by Messrs. Tilghman, Shippen and Lukens in 1771, does not supply the inform" required. In hopes of an early reply, I am, Sir, &c.,

Yours,

THOMAS LLOYD, CIK.

The Commissioners to James Rose.

Wilkesbarre, June, 1801.

James Rose, Esquire, Attorney-at-Law, near Williamsport, Lycoming County:

Sir: The Commissioners appointed for putting in execution the Act of 4th April, 1799, For offering Compensation to the Pennsylvania Claimants of certain Lands within the 17 Townships, &., request you to furnish them with information on the following points, without which they cannot do justice to the Claims of the deceased M'. Galbreath Patterson, and the other heirs of M'. W. Patterson, Esq'.

Is the release of a Moiety of a tract warranted in the name

of Robert Wood, the same with one claimed by John Ewing and Wife? The Survey of M. Ewing's states the tract to Contain 229 Acres. Mr. Galbreath Patterson has not sent, as he should, an Office Copy of M'. W. Patterson's return of Survey of the tract in question. The above tract is stated to be held in partnership with R. Stewart, but he does appear to have noticed his Share in his release to the State.

There appears also to have been an agreement between M'. W. Patterson and Mr. John Cox, dated Jany 20, 1774, for tak ing up lands in partnership, of which M'. Cox was to have the 1a. The tracts so taken up are in the names of John Vansant and others. Can you furnish the Comm's with any transcript or Abstract of the Agreement with Cox to this purpose. The Agreement, of which no more than the date is Stated by the heirs of Cox, is of 20 Jan’y, 1774.

Are the Warrants taken out by Cox, in the names of William Smith and Thomas Smith, returned or not? if they are, the Comm'rs should have the Office Copies of Surveys, and any other inform" that can be given respecting the Situations. Quere. Is there any title to part of these two last mentioned tracts in Dr. W. Smith, who returns Warants in the same names?

Again, there appears to have been an agreement to take up lands in the now County of Luzerne, between W. Patterson, Joseph Wharton and Matthias Slough. What lands, if any, were taken up under that Agreem't? if any be pleased to transmit the Office Copies of the returns of Survey, if they have been surveyed. W. Patterson was to have }.

Your early attention to these queries will promote the Interest of the heirs of W. Patterson,

Sir: It appears that the tracts of Land which you have re-, leased to the State of Pennsylvania under the Act of 4 April, 1799, For offering Compensation to the Pennsylvania Claimants of certain lands within the 17 townships, in the County of Luzerne, &c., in the names of John Pryor, George Dudley and Conrad Appleman, is Warrantees have also been released by

Mr. Daniel Montgomery, of Northumberland, The Commissioners beg to know whether this is a joint or contested Claim. I am, &c.,

Yours,

THOMAS LLOYD,

Clerk to the Commission.

The Commission to Daniel Montgomery.

Wilkesbarre, June 24, 1801.

Mr. Daniel Montgomery, Danville, North County: Sir: It appears that by your Attorney, Robert Montgomery, you have released to the State of Pennsylvania certain tracts, warranted in the names of John Pryor, George Dudley and Conrad Appleman, patented and named respectively “Dullage," "Durham" and "Sydenham." M'. Elias Boudinot hath also released the same lands. The Comm'rs beg to know whether this be a joint Concern or a contested Claim.

I am, &c.,

THOMAS LLOYD, Clk., d.ca.

The Commissioners to Jesse Fell.

Jesse Fell, Esquire:

Wilkesbarre, July 2, 1801.

Dear Sir: I understand that many of the Connecticut Claimants in this town, who are otherwise ready to adduce evidence of their Claims, are apprehensive that the Certificate of the Commissioners is not likely to be final, and that they may perhaps be called upon for the Same Evidence before the Board of Property, and that this opinion is founded on some Conversation of mine. I do not recollect having expressed any other opinion than that which I hold, namely, that altho' in case of a Caveat entered against the reception of the Commissioners, the Board of property will have a right to Construe the Act for themselves, and determine whether in such a Case they will admit the Certificate as Conclusive Evidence; yet in my opinion there is no probability that such a Certificate will be rejected or objected to, especially in Cases where no Contending Claimant stands forward to impeach it. THOMAS COOPER.