Hello all In reference to the statement below about the witnesses on old deeds please put the quash on this piece of information, it is far from correct, anyone who uses those names as proof positive of relationship is going to have a long and possibly unfruitful chase. Many times those witnesses were someone who just happened to be in the vacinity at the time or was an employee of the recorder of deeds because they were most likely to be able to read and write This misleading bit has been bandied about lately - I saw it too, but have too many deeds without such relationships showing up to believe it is anything more than coincidence if it happened. Dower rights had no part in this - not everyone bought or sold property to members of the family, and not all deeds have anything to do with property that belonged to the wife or her family. If anyone can prove to me without a doubt that such a practice existed, I will be most happy to eat my words in this forum. Agnes Cloninger agnes@macconnect.com >X-Message: #2 >Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1998 16:11:52 -0700 >From: "Pauline Blanchard" <pcblanch@swbell.net> >To: BLANCHARD-L@rootsweb.com >Message-Id: <199808232114.QAA09705@mail-gw3adm.rcsntx.swbell.net> >Subject: Witnesses >Content-Type: text/plain >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >I recieved this from a friend today. >Source Minnesota Genealogical Newsletter >"In the lower corner of most old deeds you find two to four witnesses. The >first one is always from the husband's side, the next two from the wife's >side. That is to protect her one-hald dower rights under the law. Nothing >you will ever use will give you greater clues to maiiden name." > >I have a couple of 1860 deeds from Pennyslvania and apparently this >prevailed there. Is this a uniform practice throughout our early history? > >Pauline Blanchard > >--------------------------------