BLACK-L Archives

From: Deborah Owens <>
Subject: [BLACK-L] Re: BLACK, MITCHELL
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 19:02:34 -0500

> Hello again,
> In way of explanation to my apology:
>
> My mistake with Mitchell Black was in the subject line:
> "BLACK, MITCHELL THE SECOND b. abt. 1785 wife Sarah ???"
>
> My correction: I made it in the subject line: (that I did not explain
> well)
> "BLACK, MITCHELL BORN ABOUT 1785DE (digest #150)"
>
> I refered to Mitchell as Mitchell Black the Second and he is only
> MITCHELL BLACK, not a Jr. This was brought to my attention by a
> fellow subscriber, Marcus, in a private e-mail. He had been searching
> for the father of Mitchell Black and it appeared as if I had more
> information on Mitchell by referring to him as "Mitchell Black the
> Second".
>
> Marcus was very polite and was interested in my information on
> Mitchell---this I thought is a good example of how to handle a query
> in question, without causing flared tempers between researchers.
>
> This has been a learning experience for me and I am sorry that I
> caused so much confusion. Thank you Jim and I hope this helps clear
> up my blundered apology.
>
> sincerely a fellow researcher,
> Deb Owens
>
>
>

This thread:

• [BLACK-L] Re: BLACK, MITCHELL by Deborah Owens <>