I recently ran across a document involving one of my ancestors, Mary Herman, that raised some interesting questions: In 1813, Mary Herman and her husband, William Herman Jr., had sold some land to her brother George Kaylor. This was land Mary had inherited from her father, Henry Kaylor. For whatever reason, they waited 13 years to complete the process. Then in April Court of 1826, Daniel Hoke, one of the justices of Lincoln County, was appointed by the court to personally examine Mary Herman, separate and apart from her husband, to ascertain if she voluntarily approved of the sale. Daniel Hoke determined that she did approve of it and the deed of sale was duly registered in July of 1826. My question is this: Was it normal practice to examine the wife separately in such cases, at least if it involved land she had inherited, or was there likely some unknown special circumstances involved. I'm not familiar with the laws and customs of that time regarding such things, but I just found it curious. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Dave Kaylor wrote: > I recently ran across a document involving one of my ancestors, Mary Herman, that raised some interesting questions: > > In 1813, Mary Herman and her husband, William Herman Jr., had sold some land to her brother George Kaylor. This was land Mary had inherited from her father, Henry Kaylor. For whatever reason, they waited 13 years to complete the process. They sold the land when they wanted to do so which happened to be thirteen years. > Then in April Court of 1826, Daniel Hoke, one of the justices of Lincoln County, was appointed by the court to personally examine Mary Herman, separate and apart from her husband, to ascertain if she voluntarily approved of the sale. Daniel Hoke determined that she did approve of it and the deed of sale was duly registered in July of 1826. My question is this: Was it normal practice to examine the wife separately in such cases, at least if it involved land she had inherited, or was there likely some unknown special circumstances involved. I'm not familiar with the laws and customs of that time regarding such things, but I just found it curious. > Not a curious event at all. It was the law for everyone not just for William and Mary Herman. How the land was acquired was not relevant under the law because in 1826, a married woman could not own real estate in her own name.

Okay, that does make sense. Thanks for your input. I guess what made me wonder is I don't remember seeing that kind of thing mentioned with other land transactions. --- sully1@carolina.rr.com wrote: > Dave Kaylor wrote: > > I recently ran across a document involving one of > my ancestors, Mary Herman, that raised some > interesting questions: > > > > In 1813, Mary Herman and her husband, William > Herman Jr., had sold some land to her brother George > Kaylor. This was land Mary had inherited from her > father, Henry Kaylor. For whatever reason, they > waited 13 years to complete the process. > > They sold the land when they wanted to do so which > happened to be > thirteen years. > > > Then in April Court of 1826, Daniel Hoke, one of > the justices of Lincoln County, was appointed by the > court to personally examine Mary Herman, separate > and apart from her husband, to ascertain if she > voluntarily approved of the sale. Daniel Hoke > determined that she did approve of it and the deed > of sale was duly registered in July of 1826. My > question is this: Was it normal practice to examine > the wife separately in such cases, at least if it > involved land she had inherited, or was there likely > some unknown special circumstances involved. I'm not > familiar with the laws and customs of that time > regarding such things, but I just found it curious. > > > > Not a curious event at all. It was the law for > everyone not just for > William and Mary Herman. How the land was acquired > was not relevant > under the law because in 1826, a married woman could > not own real estate > in her own name. > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > to NCLINCOL-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Even today, a few of these somewhat?archaic laws are still in effect.? For instance, in South Carolina where I live, regarding?real estate transactions, it is necessary for married women to be "examined" privately as to their intentions and to sign what is called a "Renunciation of Dower". Alta Mitchem Durden ? -----Original Message----- From: sully1@carolina.rr.com To: nclincol@rootsweb.com Sent: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:23 pm Subject: Re: [NCLINCOL] Question concerning old land deal and certain procedures involved Dave Kaylor wrote: > I recently ran across a document involving one of my ancestors, Mary Herman, that raised some interesting questions: > > In 1813, Mary Herman and her husband, William Herman Jr., had sold some land to her brother George Kaylor. This was land Mary had inherited from her father, Henry Kaylor. For whatever reason, they waited 13 years to complete the process. They sold the land when they wanted to do so which happened to be thirteen years. > Then in April Court of 1826, Daniel Hoke, one of the justices of Lincoln County, was appointed by the court to personally examine Mary Herman, separate and apart from her husband, to ascertain if she voluntarily approved of the sale. Daniel Hoke determined that she did approve of it and the deed of sale was duly registered in July of 1826. My question is this: Was it normal practice to examine the wife separately in such cases, at least if it involved land she had inherited, or was there likely some unknown special circumstances involved. I'm not familiar with the laws and customs of that time regarding such things, but I just found it curious. > Not a curious event at all. It was the law for everyone not just for William and Mary Herman. How the land was acquired was not relevant under the law because in 1826, a married woman could not own real estate in her own name. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NCLINCOL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ________________________________________________________________________ Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com

Hi Alta, It's a shame there aren't more of these types of records available because it would be a great way, in some cases, to determine the name of the wife. That information can sometimes be very difficult to find with these early pioneers. --- "Alta M. Durden" <altamdurden@aol.com> wrote: > Even today, a few of these somewhat?archaic laws are > still in effect.? For instance, in South Carolina > where I live, regarding?real estate transactions, it > is necessary for married women to be "examined" > privately as to their intentions and to sign what is > called a "Renunciation of Dower". > Alta Mitchem Durden ? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sully1@carolina.rr.com > To: nclincol@rootsweb.com > Sent: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 10:23 pm > Subject: Re: [NCLINCOL] Question concerning old land > deal and certain procedures involved > > > > Dave Kaylor wrote: > > I recently ran across a document involving one of > my ancestors, Mary Herman, > that raised some interesting questions: > > > > In 1813, Mary Herman and her husband, William > Herman Jr., had sold some land > to her brother George Kaylor. This was land Mary had > inherited from her father, > Henry Kaylor. For whatever reason, they waited 13 > years to complete the process. > > They sold the land when they wanted to do so which > happened to be > thirteen years. > > > Then in April Court of 1826, Daniel Hoke, one of > the justices of Lincoln > County, was appointed by the court to personally > examine Mary Herman, separate > and apart from her husband, to ascertain if she > voluntarily approved of the > sale. Daniel Hoke determined that she did approve of > it and the deed of sale was > duly registered in July of 1826. My question is > this: Was it normal practice to > examine the wife separately in such cases, at least > if it involved land she had > inherited, or was there likely some unknown special > circumstances involved. I'm > not familiar with the laws and customs of that time > regarding such things, but I > just found it curious. > > > > Not a curious event at all. It was the law for > everyone not just for > William and Mary Herman. How the land was acquired > was not relevant > under the law because in 1826, a married woman could > not own real estate > in her own name. > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > to NCLINCOL-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in > the subject and the body of > the message > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check > out free AOL Mail! - http://mail.aol.com > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email > to NCLINCOL-request@rootsweb.com with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and > the body of the message > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com