An interesting way to differentiate among multiple people with the same 
name.  "each in right of their wives" simply means that the wives were 
due the distribution but it was paid to the husband and since it was 
cash he controlled what happened to it. Real estate was the only thing 
that the wife could retain an interest in. The land would descend to her 
children after her husband's death if he outlived her (he kept it and 
the profits until he died). She could "agree" to sell the land during 
her life (the husband, not the children, got the money).

Barbara Vines Little, CG, FNGS, FUGA, FVGS
PO Box 1273
Orange, VA 22960

540-832-3473
[log in to unmask]

CG, Certified Genealogist, is a service mark of the Board for Certification of Genealogists, used
under license by board-certified genealogists after periodic evaluation; the board name is
registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office.

On 1/12/2024 9:08 AM, Karen Rowlett wrote:
>   From what I understand from other Bedford researchers, there were so many Leftwich men in Bedford with the same name that they took to referring to each other in writing by the color of their hair. The W.H. would be "white head". There is also R.H. for "red head" and B.H. for "black head". It makes sense. Hope this helps.
> Karen RowlettDeputy ClerkBedford Circuit Court
>      On Friday, January 12, 2024 at 08:26:49 AM EST, Douglas Burnett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>   
>   In the following transcription I have two questions.
> 1. Following several of the recipients are the initials W.H. These are new
> to me. Any suggestions as to what they stand for?
> 2. Again following several of the recipients is the term " each in right of
> their wives".
> This is from the father, Augustine Leftwich to six recipients and those
> whose last name is Leftwich are his sons.
> I am unable to find this phrase in any of my research books. Thoughts on
> this.
>
> Augustine Leftwich
>
> Bedford County Virginia
>
> Will Book 9
>
> Divide the Estate
>
>
>
> p171
>
> Agreeably to an order of Bedford November Court 1835 we did on the
>
> 22nd day of December 1835 proceed to divide amongst the distributees of
>
> Augustine Leftwich deceased Nineteen slaves and the sum of four hundred
>
> dollars in cash as exhibited to me by the administraters in the following
>
> manner. There appearing to be six distributees the sum of sixty six dollars
>
> and sixty six and two third cents each delivered to David Saunders Wil
>
> liam Leftwich  W.H. each in right of their wives and also the same sum
>
> was delivered to Peyton Leftwich & James Leftwich R.H., each the two
>
> sons of said deceased, and also the like sum of $66.66 2/3 was delivered
>
> to Thomas Davis as a purchaser of one sixth part of said decedants estate
>
> which purchase it appears was made of Jessee Leftwich son of said decedant
>
> and fully ratified by said decedent in his life time and the like sum of
>
> sixty six dollars and 66 2/3 cents way retained by the administrator for
> the heir
>
> of Robert Leftwich decd also a son of said Augustine deceased we also
>
> alloted to Thomas Davis as aforesaid Lot No 1 of said slaves consisting
>
> of Isaac at $200 Harriett & child Mary at $700 and Jack at $500
>
> making the sum of $1400:__ To Peyton Leftwich Lot No 2 consisting
>
> of Silvey & child Bob at $500. Sam at $750. and Emelina at $150 making
>
> also $1400. To William Leftwich (w.h.) in right of his wife Lot No 3
> consisting of
>
> Suckey & child John at $ 700. and Burwell at $700 making $1400. To David
>
> Saunders in right of his wife Lot No 4 consisting of Brenden at $400 Stephen
>
> at $725 and Awanda at $275 making also $1400 To James Leftwich
>
> Lot No. 5 consisting of Edam at $750. Jane at $425 and James at $275
>
> making the sum of $1450 legte James paying to the heir of Robert Leftwich
>
> the sum of $50. To the heir of Robert Leftwich decd Lot No. 6 consisting
>
> of Lieghman at $750 and Louisa at $600 and to receive of James Leftwich
>
> $50 excess in Lot No. 5 making to all the sum of $1400 in slave. There
>
> still being left an old and very infirm negro man named Ben and his wife
>
> named Peggy and an old woman named Amy thought leg_ to be a charge
>
> to the estate and of no value, and all of the distributees being present and
>
> consenting except the heir of Robert who was absent the said three old
> slaves
>
> were not placed into the division, but were placed into the posession &
> keeping
>
> of William Leftwich (w.h.) at a charge to the estate of said Augustine of
> the
>
> sum of three hundred dollars to be paid or allowed him for keeping & of said
>
> three slaves for and during their life and burial.
>
>                                                  Wm Leftwich
>
>                                                  Jas A. Walker
>
>                                                  William Dickinson Jr
>
>                                                  Reaves Scruggs
>

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
https://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).