sharing proprietorship of lot 62, from 1775, the question may be why would spry's heirs fail in their obligations of proprietorship for lot 62. there are two early possibilities, they being pressed by the legislative assembly of prince edward island, stemming from the principal conditions in the lottery. a first possibility is for failure to settle, the lot reverting to the crown, for their not arranging for the required number of settlers, within the laid down ten-year deadline; or forfeiting the lot, under conditions of distraint, for failing in the first four years to settle even one third of the lot. arguing for escheat, a text published by john stewart, in 1806, recalled that lot 62 had previously been the subject of no effort to satisfy the conditions of settlement; 1769: lot 62 – "nothing done", 1779: lot 62 – "nothing done" (report of settlement progress 1769 to 1779), and 1797: lot 62 – "not one settler resident there on" (house of assembly resolution notes).