Hi everyone - I have just about finished transcribing the last of the Piddington vs. Piddington court case of 1682. (This is the case where Richard Piddington elder brother of Thomas was left out of his uncle's estate - the question was whether the estate had an estate tail.) I think that these last few lines may hold the judgement - but I don't know because it is in a script that I cannot read well at all. I have posted it here. http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec?htx=message&r=rw&p=surnames.piddington&m=29 I can only read a few words on each line - not enough to determine anything vital about the document. If anyone can help me I would appreciate it. Determining if there was an estate tail and when it first occurred will help me put more of these Piddingtons in the right families. Thanks again - Linda --------------------------------- Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo! Groups.

> >So Robert Spencer appears to be the son of William Chaffley's dead wife >by her earlier marriage and heir to her lands, and once Chaffley is dead >he will be able to enter into his inheritance - but he's transferring >his rights to his (presumably younger) brother. Ah, yes - that's another interpretation. If Robert was happy with soldiering and didn't fancy giving it up and waiting for William to die before he started farming, then cash in hand now leaves the lot to Edward. It is just odd that he doesn't call William 'my father(in law)/stepfather. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

In message <[email protected]>, Ada Ackerly <[email protected]> writes >Hello Listers, > >I need help on two expressions used in this conveyance of lands from Robert >SPENCER (soldier) to his natural brother Edward SPENCER (yoeman) for forty >pounds. > >"....which shall happen to come ...by and after the death of William >CHAFFLEY who holdeth the same for the term of his life by the Courtesy of >England... The Courtesy of England was the right of a widower of an heiress (of land) to hold that estate for his lifetime. It was only extended to men who had done their duty by providing said heiress with children. In many cases, the child or children would be very young, so their natural guardian was their father - and he would be making use of the rents and profits of the estate anyway, de facto, so he might as well have it as of right. After his death, the (land) reverted to the child/ren, or to the natural heir of those children from the mother's family. Had Wm Chaffey in fact married Robert Spencer's daughter or perhaps the daughter of an older brother od Robert? If they had had a child who had since died, the reversion would be to Robert (on William's death) and he was passing on his reversion to his (next?) brother, Edward for £40. > in the Parish of Dartmouth .... immediately after the decease of >the said William CHAFFEY of the Chief Lord of the Fee Someone held the manor (or group of manors) as a fief, and was Lord of the Fee. He, or his steward, collected the charges due on change of ownership. >of whom the permisses >are holden by such rent and service thereof due and of right accustomed.. " The customary tenancy would pass from William on death to Robert and from Robert to Edward. Each one who was admitted to the customary tenancy would pay a fine (final payment, usually of a few shillings, according to the value of the land etc.) and heriot (the best beast, or more usually, the monetary value of the best beast, set out as an amount in the early C16, when livestock prices were low, so a real bargain any time after about 1560. > -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Hello everyone, They're cracking the whip over me finishing writing my thesis, so I'm going to unsubscribe for a while. Back in two or three months, I hope. Best wishes, Matt Tompkins

I don't think anyone would be able to help with this as the photocopy is such a poor one. I have done the best I can with it, but it was in the Oxford Record Office and the wills are obviously in a book, and it is the words across the fold which are so dark it is very difficult to read them. this is the extract from the top of the page, and the words I am querying I have marked with **?*** . The other words are quite clear to read house goods and chattels during her life after her decease or marriage I give and bequeath to my daughter Jane wife to James BYE the **?**stafy mast as they lives in and barn joining to it and **?**fushovel they used to her and her heirs for ever I give to my daughter Frances that apartment that is called the **?**foushovel stable hovel above the barn and the hog stye and leanto joining to the barn and the garden to go as they do to her and her heirs forever but if she have no heir I give it to my daughter Elizabeth and her heirs forever. I have posted it to http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/board/an/topics.researchresources.translat ors under John Cocky Will 1810 So if any one has any idea of what a foushovel may be I would be pleased to know. best wishes Eunice in Queensland

Hello Listers, I need help on two expressions used in this conveyance of lands from Robert SPENCER (soldier) to his natural brother Edward SPENCER (yoeman) for forty pounds. "....which shall happen to come ...by and after the death of William CHAFFLEY who holdeth the same for the term of his life by the Courtesy of England... in the Parish of Dartmouth .... immediately after the decease of the said William CHAFFEY of the Chief Lord of the Fee of whom the permisses are holden by such rent and service thereof due and of right accustomed.. " Courtesy of England and Chief Lord of the Fee are the expressions I need assistance with. The conveyance seems to be from Robert who is passing his rights to lands to his brother Edward, who then takes the responsibility of rent and "service" inherent in the holding of the property. He concluded the conveyance "by delivering of one silver sixpence in the presence of witnesses Seth and Joseph GLADMAN." I would appreciate any input listers can provide. Regards, Ada Ada Ackerly. Melbourne Australia Formerly Ackerly Docusearch

<<So Robert Spencer appears to be the son of William Chaffley's dead wife by her earlier marriage and heir to her lands>> No, actually he doesn't have to be her son, does he - just her heir. But probably a close relation of some sort, and son is quite likely. Matt

<<I need help on two expressions used in this conveyance of lands from Robert SPENCER (soldier) to his natural brother Edward SPENCER (yoeman) for forty pounds. "....which shall happen to come ...by and after the death of William CHAFFLEY who holdeth the same for the term of his life by the Courtesy of England... in the Parish of Dartmouth .... immediately after the decease of the said William CHAFFEY of the Chief Lord of the Fee of whom the permisses are holden by such rent and service thereof due and of right accustomed.. ">> Hello Ada, 1. The curtesy of England was a legal principle which gave a widower the right to remain in occupation of his wife's lands after her death, for the rest of his own life (when he died they would go to her heirs). It only applied if children had been born of the marriage, however - if there were no children then the land went to her heirs immediately. It was abolished in 1925. You probably know that until 1882 when a woman owning land married her husband acquired full control over any land she owned for the duration of the marriage (it didn't become his absolutely - he couldn't sell it, for example, but he had complete control over it and its use and profits). If he died first then the land reverted to her full control, however (ie he couldn't leave it by his will, and it wouldn't be inherited by his heirs under the laws of succession). If she died first, on the other hand, then the land would pass immediately to her heirs, if it wasn't for the curtesy of England, which gave him a life interest. So Robert Spencer appears to be the son of William Chaffley's dead wife by her earlier marriage and heir to her lands, and once Chaffley is dead he will be able to enter into his inheritance - but he's transferring his rights to his (presumably younger) brother. 2. The chief lord of the fee is the lord of the manor from whom the lands are held. The owners of both copyholds and freeholds were tenants of the lord of the manor, and owed him rents and other obligations. By 1657 a freeholder's obligations were usually limited to a fixed annual rent (generally a small amount, having been set long ago before the inflation of the 16th century) and perhaps additionally the obligation to pay a relief whenever the property changed hands (usually equal to one or two year's rent). Copyholder's obligations were rather more onerous, but varied considerably in different parts of England, so I won't try to summarise them. Matt Tompkins

> >This is another rash guy, Eve, he's in perfect health making his will, 'I >thank god for it', but at least now I know, from previous replies on this >list, he's of a good age! Very likely he is 70 - often reaching this age was a trigger for will making, since 'three score years and ten' was the ration. Of course, he wouldn't have thought he was about to die because he had reached 70 ..........but there is no harm in being sure things are sorted, just in case. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Very informative response Matt (as usual). Thanks for the link, I have printed off the article and will read through it this evening. >>After the Dissolution many of these great tithes passed into private ownership In this case: "sometimes belonging to the late Monastarie of Shelford and graunted by the late kinge henry the eighth to Michael Stanhope Esquir" Regards Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tompkins, M.L." <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 8:13 PM Subject: RE: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > <<CD thought the last word might be els not ale, in which case it could > meane els[e] > ie: "when the same is eaten with cattell and not els[e]" (as in > otherwise)>> > > That makes sense to me. > > <<Also, a general question about tithes, I understand that they are a > form of taxation, but would they be payable by all the residents of > Elvaston, even those owning their own land such as my "John Richardson > of Thulston". How would they be collected/administered?>> > > > Tithes were complicated. By the time they were done away with in the > late 19th and early 20th centuries the law governing them had become > very complex, and difficult to summarise briefly. The 1911 Encycopedia > Britannica article at http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Tithes describes > the situation towards the end reasonably well (though not briefly!), and > there may be other good explanations of the pre-Tithe Commutation Acts > law on the web somewhere. > > Tithes were normally paid by all the residents of a parish (whether they > were C of E or not - the Quakers in particular deeply resented having to > pay them), and it was normally the actual occupier of the land who paid > them, not the freehold owner or landlord - ie they were paid by the > person who actually grew/raised/collected/caught the produce from which > the tithe was taken. > > The method of collection varied, but the basic system was for the tithe > to be set aside in the field as the crop was being harvested - every > tenth sheaf of corn, etc. Clearly that couldn't apply to every form of > produce though, and even where it was feasible some other system might > be developed locally. It became common for parishoners to agree a fixed > amount of cash due from each piece of land with the parson. > > In the medieval and early modern period it was common for the parson to > lease his tithes to some local entrepreneur, giving him a fixed income > without the bother of collection - the entrepreneur would expect to make > a profit by collecting more than the renthe was paying. It was also > common, where the parish had a vicar not a rector, for the parson only > to be entitled to the petty tithes, and for the great tithes of corn and > hay to belong to a monastery or some other ecclesiastical body or > dignitary. After the Dissolution many of these great tithes passed into > private ownership. So many parishioners, for one reason or another, had > to give up 10% gross of their income to lay men with no religious > connection at all. I'm always amazed that the objections to the system > weren't stronger and more widespread than they were. > > Matt > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > To contact the list administrator: > [email protected] > >

> word preceeding "tythe of corne" > Excepting I think that the next item on the survey backs up that the word is "Excepting" (Excepting the tythes of Corne and Haye) http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/documents/property/Survey_Page12_2.htm This item explains more about the "corne tythe" and the "rate tythe of hay", which seems to explain why it was excluded from item 1. Once again, some help with a few difficult words would be appreciated. Regards Kevin tythe of corne ----- Original Message ----- From: "c d" <[email protected]> To: "Kevin Richardson" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 10:46 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > > word preceeding "tythe of corne" > Excepting > > > On 17/07/2006, at 9:25 AM, Kevin Richardson wrote: > >> I am transcribing a Survey of the Manor of Elvaston which in parts is >> very hard to read. There are some words that I cannot make out, and >> others that do not seem to make sense. If anyone could help I would >> once again be very gratefull. >> >> 1) The last paragraph mentions tythes, and I cannot quite make out the >> word preceeding "tythe of corne" >> >> 2) "...and also the tythe herbage of one peece of ground called the >> breaches lying on Oseraston field in the said Countie of Derby, when the >> same is eaten with cattell and not ale." >> >> The part "eaten with cattell and not ale" does not sound right and I >> asume that I have not transcribed it correctly. >> >> http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/documents/property/ >> Survey_page12_1.htm >> >> Within the above web page link is another link to an image of part of >> the document. >> >> Regards >> >> Kevin >> >> >> >> >> ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== >> Going away for a while? >> Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! >> [email protected] >> >

Thanks Matt, > Herbage means grass or other greenery fed to livestock, so it wouldn't > be barley. > > I think the sense is probably that the vicar gets a tithe of the hay > from the Breaches unless the grass has been cropped by livestock instead > of being mown for hay. So the last word might be some synonym for > 'mown' - perhaps 'taken'? CD thought the last word might be els not ale, in which case it could meane els[e] ie: "when the same is eaten with cattell and not els[e]" (as in otherwise) Also, a general question about tithes, I understand that they are a form of taxation, but would they be payable by all the residents of Elvaston, even those owning their own land such as my "John Richardson of Thulston". How would they be collected/administered? Regards Kevin Regards Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tompkins, M.L." <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 6:42 PM Subject: RE: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > Herbage means grass or other greenery fed to livestock, so it wouldn't > be barley. > > I think the sense is probably that the vicar gets a tithe of the hay > from the Breaches unless the grass has been cropped by livestock instead > of being mown for hay. So the last word might be some synonym for > 'mown' - perhaps 'taken'? > > Matt > > -----Original Message----- > From: Norman Lee [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 17 July 2006 09:13 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > > Hello Kevin > > This would probably be barley which could be used to make malt which > would then be used to make ale or it could be entirely cattle feed, > rather expensive cattle feed. Perhaps the crop was poor, on the poorer > sort of land? > > Audrey > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin Richardson" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 12:25 AM > Subject: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > > >>I am transcribing a Survey of the Manor of Elvaston which in parts is > very >>hard to read. There are some words that I cannot make out, and others > that >>do not seem to make sense. If anyone could help I would once again be > very >>gratefull. >> >> 1) The last paragraph mentions tythes, and I cannot quite make out > the >> word preceeding "tythe of corne" >> >> 2) "...and also the tythe herbage of one peece of ground called the >> breaches lying on Oseraston field in the said Countie of Derby, when > the >> same is eaten with cattell and not ale." >> >> The part "eaten with cattell and not ale" does not sound right and I > asume >> that I have not transcribed it correctly. >> >> > http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/documents/property/Survey_page12_1.ht > m >> >> Within the above web page link is another link to an image of part of > the >> document. >> >> Regards >> >> Kevin >> >> >> >> >> ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== >> Going away for a while? >> Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date: > 14/07/2006 >> >> > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > SEARCHABLE archives for OLD-ENGLISH: > http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >

Thank you very much indeed, Nuala, Eve and Debbie, for your replies to my query. Would you believe, we've just started on another Sherlock line, and in a 1613 (tho not proved until 1621) will, Robert Sherlock, of Poulton cum Seacombe, mentions his grandson Robert. It's the earliest mention of the term I've come across yet. Only problem with this one is he doesn't actually say which of his sons is the father of Robert. Nothing's straightforward in family history:-(( This is another rash guy, Eve, he's in perfect health making his will, 'I thank god for it', but at least now I know, from previous replies on this list, he's of a good age! Probably that's why he can mention his grandson! I hadn't thought of that aspect earlier. Best regards, Yvonne (absolutely swealing with the heat)

<<Mensis Nouembris A'o d'ni mill'mo CCCC'o lxxxv'o quoru' Animalibus ...>> No! Not animalibus - it is animabus! (Assuming the word 'orate' follows in the missing section) it means 'for whose souls pray' - not for whose animals pray! Sorry - I work so much with agricultural records I just typed the familiar word without thinking. Matt

<<I have a copy of the inscription which appears on the monumental brass dedicated to the memory of John FRAUNCEYS and his wife Florence. The brass is in the floor of the church at Combe Florey, Somerset. It is only a brief two-line inscription but is in abbreviated Latin and is very difficult for me to read. I wonder if anyone might be able to help provide a transcription and translation. >> Hic jace't Joh'es Frawnceys armiger et Florencia uxor eius qui quid'm Joh'es o* Mensis Nouembris A'o d'ni mill'mo CCCC'o lxxxv'o quoru' Animalibus propiciu* * the end is cut off (scrolling across doesn't reveal anything). It means: Here lie John Frawnceys esquire and Florence his wife which John d[ied] ... month of November AD 1485 of whose souls ?mercy/clemency ... Matt

In message <[email protected]>, Norman Lee <[email protected]> writes >The teacher referred to as "a miss" was in a 19th century log book and so >teaching at a time when you could be dismissed if you married. Oddly, having a married woman as a teacher was common and allowed in the C19. Rural schools often had a married couple as head - he of the main school, she of the infants. And educated wives of tradesmen of various kinds may teach also..... And fairly obviously, many of these were pregnant during their employment - which was later cited as a reason why a married woman ought to resign, so that the children would not be embarrassed. I think the rule that if a woman married, she must retire arose after 1919, when so many men returned to civilian life to find that they had been replaced by females. It applied in other occupations too - mostly the 'better' ones, like Civil service and clerical work in general. A factory worker could carry on till she went into labour -she was cheaper than a man. I knew a woman who had to retire on marriage to her headmaster - having committed two crimes, of being a married woman and fraternising above her station. -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

Thanks, "(Excepting tythe of corne and Hay)" sounds right, but I am not sure that the first letter is an E. In the following examples from the same document we have. 1) Elvaston http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/images/Temp/Survey_Sample2.jpg 2) Shelford http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/images/Temp/Survey_Sample3.jpg 3) Stanhope http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/images/Temp/Survey_Sample4.jpg 4) and an enlargement of my original query... (Excepting tythe of Corne and Hay) http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/images/Temp/Survey_Sample1.jpg The first letter seems closer to the "S" in Shelford and Stanhope than the "R" in Elvaston. Regards Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: "c d" <[email protected]> To: "Kevin Richardson" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 11:01 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 > > > (Excepting ... Hay) > > The words are enclosed within brackets) > >> >> 1) The last paragraph mentions tythes, and I cannot quite make out the >> word preceeding "tythe of corne" >> >

In message <[email protected]>, [email protected] writes > >In a message dated 7/16/2006 7:11:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, >[email protected] writes: > >If a supposed cadet of an armigerous family uses radically different >arms, either he is not really related, or there has been such an >almighty bustup that he wishes to make a point of it, and is allowed to >do so by the Heralds.. > > >I was referring to a time before this time period. I agree that at a later >time the Heralds determined all the arms, but there was a time when they did >not. Are you referring to a date before 1487? -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

<<CD thought the last word might be els not ale, in which case it could meane els[e] ie: "when the same is eaten with cattell and not els[e]" (as in otherwise)>> That makes sense to me. <<Also, a general question about tithes, I understand that they are a form of taxation, but would they be payable by all the residents of Elvaston, even those owning their own land such as my "John Richardson of Thulston". How would they be collected/administered?>> Tithes were complicated. By the time they were done away with in the late 19th and early 20th centuries the law governing them had become very complex, and difficult to summarise briefly. The 1911 Encycopedia Britannica article at http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Tithes describes the situation towards the end reasonably well (though not briefly!), and there may be other good explanations of the pre-Tithe Commutation Acts law on the web somewhere. Tithes were normally paid by all the residents of a parish (whether they were C of E or not - the Quakers in particular deeply resented having to pay them), and it was normally the actual occupier of the land who paid them, not the freehold owner or landlord - ie they were paid by the person who actually grew/raised/collected/caught the produce from which the tithe was taken. The method of collection varied, but the basic system was for the tithe to be set aside in the field as the crop was being harvested - every tenth sheaf of corn, etc. Clearly that couldn't apply to every form of produce though, and even where it was feasible some other system might be developed locally. It became common for parishoners to agree a fixed amount of cash due from each piece of land with the parson. In the medieval and early modern period it was common for the parson to lease his tithes to some local entrepreneur, giving him a fixed income without the bother of collection - the entrepreneur would expect to make a profit by collecting more than the renthe was paying. It was also common, where the parish had a vicar not a rector, for the parson only to be entitled to the petty tithes, and for the great tithes of corn and hay to belong to a monastery or some other ecclesiastical body or dignitary. After the Dissolution many of these great tithes passed into private ownership. So many parishioners, for one reason or another, had to give up 10% gross of their income to lay men with no religious connection at all. I'm always amazed that the objections to the system weren't stronger and more widespread than they were. Matt

Herbage means grass or other greenery fed to livestock, so it wouldn't be barley. I think the sense is probably that the vicar gets a tithe of the hay from the Breaches unless the grass has been cropped by livestock instead of being mown for hay. So the last word might be some synonym for 'mown' - perhaps 'taken'? Matt -----Original Message----- From: Norman Lee [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 July 2006 09:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 Hello Kevin This would probably be barley which could be used to make malt which would then be used to make ale or it could be entirely cattle feed, rather expensive cattle feed. Perhaps the crop was poor, on the poorer sort of land? Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Richardson" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2006 12:25 AM Subject: [OEL] Survey of Elvaston Manor - 1623 >I am transcribing a Survey of the Manor of Elvaston which in parts is very >hard to read. There are some words that I cannot make out, and others that >do not seem to make sense. If anyone could help I would once again be very >gratefull. > > 1) The last paragraph mentions tythes, and I cannot quite make out the > word preceeding "tythe of corne" > > 2) "...and also the tythe herbage of one peece of ground called the > breaches lying on Oseraston field in the said Countie of Derby, when the > same is eaten with cattell and not ale." > > The part "eaten with cattell and not ale" does not sound right and I asume > that I have not transcribed it correctly. > > http://www.7hosts.myancestors.name/documents/property/Survey_page12_1.ht m > > Within the above web page link is another link to an image of part of the > document. > > Regards > > Kevin > > > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > [email protected] > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date: 14/07/2006 > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== SEARCHABLE archives for OLD-ENGLISH: http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl?list=OLD-ENGLISH