First I want to state, i made an error in my initial writings,
I believe however you are correct that by law if she was entitled to 1/3 of
the estate then that was more then he left her.
I went back and re-read the will and was that he had left the wife a few
slaves and that was it.
while he left most everything else to another woman _ no relationship is
mentioned in the will ......
however it is a substantial amount of property.............in north
carolina
so I guess you are correct she- the wife would have received more from the
law, then from the will.
and weird that someone owning as much property as he, (could he have
inherited it?) and he had to be young if people had to vouch he was over 21?
thank you all for your input, it has been very helpful
kristina
In a message dated 1/6/2015 8:47:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Don, she said people had to come to court and testify he was old enough to
write a will. He was probably not yet twenty. I’m not sure about laws in
1820, but in the colonial era minors over age 14 could write wills as long
as they did not convey real property. I am dubious that he owned in real
estate, since none was mentioned in his will. If by chance he did, and he did
not mention it in his will, the widow was entitled to a 1/3 life estate in
that land. I suspect the wife is also very young, and would soon be looking
for a new husband. It makes perfect sense she would renounce the will to
have a little something to bring to the new marriage.
Craig Kilby
Kilby Research Services
www.craigkilby.com
> On Jan 5, 2015, at 2:07 PM, Donald W. Moore <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
> He could have married late and had a child then. So the child did not
necessarily have to be 5 or less years old. You would have to look up Virginia
law in effect at the time to determine what the provisions are. It must
have been more advantageous to the widow to rely on provisions in the law
than to accept the will. Nothing prevents her from renouncing the will.
Perhaps the will made no provision for the upbringing and care of the child,
assuming it was a minor.
>
> ___________________
> Donald W. Moore
> Virginia Beach, Virginia
>
> On January 5, 2015 at 11:58:05 am,
[log in to unmask] ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
>
>
> in norfolk
> in 1820
> in a will
> the gentleman Jones left everything to his wife lydia and then after her
> decease to their son
> he (jones) had to be young- as people had to vouch he was over 21 in
> court and was old enough to write a will and so the child had to be 5 or
less?
> the wife told the court she did not want anything and was going to rely
> upon "the provisions of the act of assembly in such case made and
provided"
> my question is: what is the provisions act of assembly?
> and doesn't the mother need to accept the will so that she may care for
> the child?
> thanks
> Kristina
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
