In message <002101c49d53$decade20$5eccfc3e@oemcomputer>, "norman.lee1" <norman.lee1@virgin.net> writes >Was there not only a custom, almost always adhered to, that a wife would be >allowed her clothing and enough goods to keep her in the manner to which she >had become acustomed. The same went for the dependent children. Even though >it may not have been confirmed in law, the custome was sufficiently strong >for it to have been considered a family disgrace for a widow not to be >provided for. a wife was entitled to a third of the estate for life. And if the husband didn't want her to take it literally (a third of the sheep, a third of the cows, the forequarters of the ox etc) then he had to provide an alternative money/goods package which didn't have her reaching for the nearest lawyer. Often, pre 1882 and even later, a widow was left the life rent of all the household goods, but only if she didn't marry again. Only when she died did the property get divided between the children. But she could not sell or give anything away in her lifetime -- Eve McLaughlin Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society

And a third was required to be divided between the children, with the other third going to the 'dead', a strange sounding phrase meaning that the testator could do with this third whatever he liked. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eve McLaughlin" <eve@varneys.demon.co.uk> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 1:01 AM Subject: Re: [OEL] scotish inventory/probate > In message <002101c49d53$decade20$5eccfc3e@oemcomputer>, "norman.lee1" > <norman.lee1@virgin.net> writes > >Was there not only a custom, almost always adhered to, that a wife would be > >allowed her clothing and enough goods to keep her in the manner to which she > >had become acustomed. The same went for the dependent children. Even though > >it may not have been confirmed in law, the custome was sufficiently strong > >for it to have been considered a family disgrace for a widow not to be > >provided for. > a wife was entitled to a third of the estate for life. And if the > husband didn't want her to take it literally (a third of the sheep, a > third of the cows, the forequarters of the ox etc) then he had to > provide an alternative money/goods package which didn't have her > reaching for the nearest lawyer. > Often, pre 1882 and even later, a widow was left the life rent of all > the household goods, but only if she didn't marry again. Only when she > died did the property get divided between the children. > But she could not sell or give anything away in her lifetime > -- > Eve McLaughlin > > Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians > Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > OLD-ENGLISH Web Page > http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > >