Thank you Kathy. This was very helpful.
Vanessa
> On Mar 6, 2017, at 2:24 PM, Westview <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Vanessa,
>
> The division of slaves by a Chancery court usually went like this: the court would appoint someone to appraise the slaves and assign a value to each. In cases with many slaves, the appraisers would then try to group them in lots that had a comparable value. Often families were kept together, but it was not a given.
>
> The total value was divided up by the number of heirs and the slaves would then be divvied out to each heir. This could be done by drawing lots like you say is the case in this instance, by mutual agreement amongst the heirs, or by the judge. The point of the chancery suit was to make sure each heir received his/her fair share. If the court decided that each heir would get an equal portion, it would go something like this:
>
> Let's say there are three heirs and five slaves appraised at $3300 total. The total value of inheritance each heir is entitled to is $1100. Heir A receives two slaves worth $1300, heir B receives two slaves worth $1200 total, and heir C receives one slave worth $800. In order for it to be an equitable split, heir A would pay heir C $200 dollars and heir B would pay heir C $100, so they each would have received $1100 value of inheritance.
>
> Sometimes the suit will specifically name who was to pay what to who to make it equitable. That can get really confusing when there are a lot of heirs but it gives you lots of information. If the slaves were sold, the money would just be divided as directed by the judge. It gets more complicated when the division is to be something other than an even split, such as when dealing with multiple generations of heirs, but, still, the same principle applies -- if you received property (and this could be horses, beds, farm equipment, although most often slaves) that was worth more than what another heir received, the court could direct you to pay the difference.
>
> Heirs sometimes "traded" slaves if there was someone they wanted specifically. If there was a difference in value, the difference was paid in cash or out of whatever else the person had inherited. With all of this it may sometimes look like the money is going to the "estate," but ultimately it would go to each heir to make them "whole." You sometimes see the same thing happen with a division of land.
>
> I hope this hasn't confused you even more.
>
> Kathy in Charlotte County
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Vanessa Crews
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 5:24 PM
> Subject: [VA-ROOTS] Slave Division
>
>
> RE: Powhatan County Chancery Cause 1861-001, William C. Netherland vs EXRS of Isham Ball
>
> This case settles the estate of Isham Ball and divides his 19 slaves among 6 groups of heirs. The slaves were appraised, divided into lots and “drawn” by/to individual heirs. Some heirs received slaves worth more than the value of their inheritance while other received slaves worth less than the inheritance value. Can someone help me understand exactly how this division of people was accomplished? Were the slaves appraised then sold and each heir just given cash? Or did this receiving high value slaves pay back cash to the estate? Was there a routine procedure for this? Thank you for your help.
>
> Vanessa Crews
>
>
>
> 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
|
