Hi, Michael.

I am really interested in the answer you find to your riddle.

While no "certified" historian, I do have some comments.

The Rev War ended in 1783 and the Articles were in control until late 1789 
when all thirteen states ratified the Constitution. That would account for a 
six year period (at least) when the colonies were free states (not under any 
conjecture caused by a state of war). I sincerely doubt that the two 
colonies/states had such "different" legal systems that a marriage would be 
in doubt simply because of location. Afterall... I am sure that folks arrived 
"married" who left England as "single" folks, with/without benefit of clergy 
interference. People simply showed up as a married entity and society had 
very little recourse but to believe them. Or... could I be that far off 
target? I know of an Eastern Shore case where there was a multitude of 
"marriages" for a person who only went through the ceremony ONCE!

I am curious as to whether there were:

1.  any legal suits in place in Mechlenburg that created 
    the impass in recognizing the land as legally that of 
    the wife/widow (regardless of her residence);

2.  any questions as to the legality of her subsequent 
    marriage to the second husband that could have been
    squelched by the civil ceremony you mentioned (I don't
    know WHO was recognized by the government of Va as
    certified to perform or ratify marriages);

3.  any stipulations in the will or intent of the first
    husband that bound the land, excluding his widow 
    if she married this particular husband afterwards, 
    encumbering her if she married at all, etc. You 
    mentioned no will probate or testamentary proceedings 
    of estate. So... I wonder. My contention here is that the
    will, if not probated, may have left the land "technically"
    in the name of the first husband.

Again, I am neither a "certified" historian... nor a lawyer. So... my 
questions are just my mental meanderings.

Hope any of this either helps or feeds the conversation toward finding a 
possible path.

Good luck.

Jon
Atlanta

Michael Flanagan wrote:
    
The following statements by Harold Forsyth and John Maas may hold the keys
to a riddle I've been trying to understand for a number of years:

HF: "The second regime was under the Articles of Confederation (1781-1788).
Under that constitution, the states were declared to be sovereign."

JM: "I argue that the 13 colonies WERE in fact separate states albeit for a
short period of time. For ex., there was a brief period after the
Revolutionary war when NC refused to adopt the Constitution; for 7-8 months
NC was not a member of the new union, but then in a second convention at
Fayetteville NC decided to join.
. . .
The riddle:  A wealthy young widow/mother of 4 (Martha), raised in
VA/Sussex-Dinwiddie but lived her married life in VA/Mecklenburg, was
married 2nd in mid-1783 to an equally well-heeled widower/father of several
(John) who had grown up in VA/Brunswick but lived at the time of the
marriage (and after) in NC/Warren. For some reason, it was not until August
1792 that the marriage of John and Martha was also made a matter of record
in VA. The 1783 marriage year is unmistakable. Nonetheless, for several
years, the widow's land by her former husband (just across the state line
from where she and 2nd husband John lived in NC) was reported in the
Mecklenburg tax lists under her former married name (initially as the
"Estate" of her former husband). Only after the marriage to her 2nd husband
was formalized in 1792 did the property lists change to the name of her 2nd
husband. Neither the premarital agreement between John and Martha, nor the
will and estate records of John and Martha, shed any light as to why
VA/Mecklenburg did not recognize her surname by her 2nd marriage, or why
John & Martha opted to have their marriage formalized in VA after having
been married and living just across the state line in NC for 9 years. Even
after the VA ceremony, they continued to live in NC, and are not found in
any of the VA land or property tax lists, with the exception of the property
of Martha's first husband. One exception to this: A son from Martha's first
marriage did show up in the Mecklenburg tax lists for one year, in 1787,
about the time he came of legal age, but he, too, returned to live in NC.

In trying to understand the WHY of this, I have assumed that there must have
been some post-Rev.War statutory differences in property and inheritance
laws between VA and NC that would be significant enough to account for this.
I further assume that something happened in 1792 to precipitate the August
civil ceremony in VA, probably to protect the interests of the
yours-mine-ours family structure of John and Martha.

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