Let's all take a moment to be thanful for those ancestors who wrote things
like "my son Robert has already been provided for so will have no further
part of my estate."
Mickey
-----Original Message-----
From: Research and writing about Virginia genealogy and family history.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Janet Hunter
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 2:15 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Illegitimacy and Inheritances 18th century
Renee, Paul, Eric and everybody!
Thank you so much for all answering. Well, I believe I have my answer, and
it is that IF Davenport Kennedy were an illegitimate son of Charles Kennedy,
he
would not have had legal standing/rights as an heir in subsequent disputes
over the distribution of estate property. As I said in my initial query we
HAVE
done item 2 in Renee's suggestions below, and identified the time period as
1783 in Hanover Co. VA.
We have only recently received copies of all the documents in the two
chancery court records, and Davenport Kennedy is not involved at all nor
mentioned,
nor are his heirs mentioned as Davenport was deceased by then (and they are
identified in their own chancery court case, and Davenport had an estate no
much
smaller than Charles).
Further, three sons not mentioned in Charles Kennedy's will are clearly
involved as sons in the chancery suits (2), and they were also identified as
sons
in a brother's will (Garrett Kennedy 1796, Louisa Co). One of the suits
revolves around the fact that that brother's widow (no children) should
return
slaves of his father Charles Kennedy that her husband had been using but did
not
own, as well as their increase, to the estate as they were not lawfully
hers,
but the estates. (Sorry Paul, this makes the total number of sons six.).
I also would posit, separately that the involvement in the chancery court
case of the three brothers not named in their Charles Kennedy's will, but
identified in their brother's will, bears out my interpretation of two
clauses in the
will which boil down to all my remaining estate is to be divided amongst all
my surviving children. And this included also one more daughter, not
identified in the will, but sharing in the chancery case. Charles Kennedy
identified
only one daughter, Anne wife of William Wash, but uses the phrase
"daughters"
in the will. There is no list of children, nor reference such as "above
named". Hence, all six sons and two daughters were involved in the chancery
case,
and obviously understood whatever reason they had not been named in the
will,
the possibilities of which have been outlined here earlier. I personally
think that children weren't named in wills more times than the impression
has been
given here, and the primary reason being that they had already received
their
portion, and the lawyer or other person writing the will did not incorporate
any clause to that effect. It also seems to occur frequently when there are
many children with a wide age span, or two separate sets of children by two
wives, with more concern over the fate of the youngest set.
The background on my initial query is trying to figure out the relationship
between three Kennedy's found in Louisa and Spotsylvania Co. Records (and
who
undoubtedly were in Hanover Co. records but they are gone) in the
mid-1700s --
Patrick, Davenport & Charles. They are all in records together or with
in-laws, same gang (Davenports mostly), etc. Because Charles Kennedy is
married to
Crotia/Croshe Davenport, it was for a long time felt that Davenport was a
son
of Charles, illegitimate or perhaps by a first marriage because otherwise
Croshe would have been bearing children for something like 39 years.
Because records indicate Davenport is probably much younger than Charles it
was for along time assumed that he was a son. However, the uncovering of
the
Hanover will (in a burned counties mirofilm, and it also appears in the
Chancery Court papers), and the chancery court cases, this is being
rethought.
I personally think after all of this he is probably a younger
brother/cousin,
however the answers undoubtedly went up in smoke in Hanover County (or King
William, King & Queen, etc.). Footnote: Davenport and Charles Kennedy are
identified as neighbors in John Pettus 1770 will in Louisa Co.VA.
I have read all the emails sequentially, and can't remember who raised the
question of bastards in intestate cases. However, I am very familiar with a
case involving Samuel Bentley's estate in Nottoway Co., formerly Amelia Co.
He
had a daughter, Sarah, to whom he gave land, and was her security in a
bastardy
case. When he died 1794, she was in Georgia, but still owned the land in
Nottoway in the mid 1800s (1800-1810). He died intestate, and his chancery
case
involves his legitimate siblings, but not Sarah or her children. The case
is
quite complicated because a father and son died within months of each other,
so there were many minors, and apparently lots of hard feelings amongst the
eldest grandson (Samuel Bentley III) because the land was divided up. The
only
record we have of this is the Nottoway Court Orders, however.
Finally, we owe a great debt to the Library of Virginia's Chancery Court
Case
website. While one of the researchers found almost by chance the will of
Charles Kennedy in the burned counties microfilm (I think it was a
microfilm), we
tracked down the chancery cases at the LVA's database, which I heartily
recommend everyone study. It also mentions that there was a will involved
that is
on file. I only wish you could search the whole state in one fell swoop,
and
not have to do several searches by region. Here is the website:
http://www.lva.lib.va.us/whatwehave/local/chancery/index.htm
With my best regards,
Janet (Baugh) Hunter
In a message dated 1/29/2004 8:46:09 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
> So...the answer to Janet's question is...we don't know because we still
> don't have enough information. Given the little bit that we do know, I
> would assume that her Davenport fit one of the three categories listed
> and not illegitimacy. To learn more, Janet is going to have to do two
> things:
> 1.) Find exactly what laws applied at the time and in the jurisdiction
> 2.) Hire a researcher who can go to Louisa Co courthouse and get
> permission to search for the actual case papers and to copy everything
> that relates to the case: docket, jackets, pleadings (complaints and
> answers), depositions, testimony...anything, to see if they shed further
> light on the case.
>
> Boy, I hopes this helps and doesn't just make things murkier!
>
> Renee L. Dauven
>
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
|
