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. Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eve McLaughlin" <eve@varneys.demon.co.uk> To: <OLD-ENGLISH-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:38 PM Subject: Re: [OEL] scotish inventory/probate > In message <00af01c49c55$f14fab60$d65a893e@escom>, "J.C.Christopher > Glass" <chris@jccglass.fsnet.co.uk> writes > >Hi all > >ive just downloaded an Deposition/inventory ( from scotdocs online) > >for the death of William Glass died 1889 kinross > > > >The strange thing is this Deposition, by his daughter, > > of his assetts was not made till 1901 > >following his wife's death in 1901 > >why wasnt it a deposition of her mothers assetts in 1901 > possibly because father left his wife the use of them for life only - so > when she died, they were still his assets 'borrowed' for the last 12 > years. It is more of an English attitude than a Scottish one, but there > you go. > > -- > Eve McLaughlin > > Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians > Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society > > > ==== OLD-ENGLISH Mailing List ==== > Going away for a while? > Don't forget to UNSUBSCRIBE! > OLD-ENGLISH-L-request@rootsweb.com >