Janet, The legal age has always been 21. John Baugh, Jr. was still legally an orphan until he became "of age".  Maybe some of the lawyers on this list can point to the specific law or statute sourcing this but countless court order books imply over and over the age of 21 as the legal age. "Now of age" means 21+, so Jr. could have been older than 21 in 1766, though the way it's written, it sounds as if he has recently reached that age and that's why the suit is then being brought. 
Regards,
T Glover



From: Janet Hunter 
 In 1763, John Baugh Jr. chose a William Walthall to be his guardian, so he was 14 at least at that time.   In the chancery court petition, there is a statement that they are bringing the suit because John Baugh, Jr. is now of age, or something to that effect.  They apparently tried to settle the issue out of court but failed and the chancery court records have all these little scratches of papers where they arrange and rearrange the distribution of the slaves, with crossouts, etc., so there is an equitable division.

My question is:  Would John Baugh, Jr. have to be at 21 to be sued in 1766, or could he have been 18.   My gut tells me 21, but I could be wrong. Or was there an age requirement at all for this?   Related to this, when he chose his guardian in 1763, would he have been between the ages of 14 and 18, or 14 and 21.


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