My G-G-G-G Grandparents were John Banner and Mary Livingston. They lived near Turkey Spring in Berkeley County (Now Jefferson Co.). John Banner died in 1783. On his Will one of the witnesses was Adam Livingston. I am wondering if anyone out there knows if Mary Livingston Banner and Adam Livingston were sister and brother. I would also like to find out who were the children of Adam Livingston. The story of Adam Livingston: The legend of the Wizard Clipper involved Adam Livingston, who moved to Smithfield(Now Middleway) from Lancaster Co. PA. probably the early 1770's. About 1795 a stranger came to the Livingstons house to seek lodging. The Livingstons took him in. In the middle of the night the stranger got very sick and asked for a priest. The Livingstons being of the Protestant faith wouldn't hear of a priest coming into their home. The stranger died in the middle of the night. The next day the towns people helped Adam bury the man. They never did know his name. A short time after strange things started happening around the Livingston Home. The sound of scissors clipping and then finding that clothing was all cut up. The animals died in strange ways. One day Mrs. Livingston and a neighbor were visiting in the yard , the ducks started squaking, they looked over and ducks heads had been cut off. After this, word traveled fast about the strange haunted house. Strangers would come from miles around to see if they could hear the scissors clipping. Adam was at his wits end. One night Adam had a dream, he had climbed a hill and at the top was a man in a robe. Adam told his friend Joseph Minghini about his dream. Joseph suggested he go to the Episcopal Clergy in Winchester and talk to them about it. Adam made the trip to Winchester but it didn't help him. Then Joseph suggested he talk with Richard McSherry about his dream . Richard McSherry said that the man in the dream sounded like Father Dennis Cahill, who would come into Shepherdstown the following Sunday for Mass. Richard and Adam went to talk with Father Cahill. Father Cahill agreed to come to the house, he sprinkled holy water around and said a Mass. After that the evil spirits were gone. Adam donated land for a chapel to be built on the property where the stranger was buried. According to one book Adam left for Cambria Co. PA. somewhere between 1800-1805. I have found references to this story in the following books. J. Barry- Strange Story T.K. Cartmell- Shenandoah Pioneers and their Decendents R.L. Bates- Middleway A Study of Social History Please don't forget my original questions. Who were the children of Adam Livingston and were Mary Livingston Banner and Adam Livingston sister and brother. Thanks for any Help!! Judy Woehrle [email protected]

Hal, I see that you have already had a couple of helpful replies to your queries as to what names were actually listed on the tax rolls. This is how Alcock, in Fauquier Families, 1759-1799, p. x, summarizes it: "In summary white males listed by name as subject to county tithes and state personal property taxes were: 1759-1780 All 16 and over 1781-1786 Only heads of households 1787 All 16 and over; those under 21 so noted 1788-1799 All 16 and over; minors not distinguished. "Throughout the period lists also include names of: Females only if heads of households with taxable dependents or property. Free black males over 16" There were a few exceptions. Constables, mariners and seafarers were exempt by statute. So were military personnel (in 1880). The exemption for the old and infirm was not automatic. They had to go to county court and request to be exempted, and exemption was at the court's discretion. And in the original law of Oct 1748, there was a provision that provided exemption for "such only as the county courts for charitable reasons . . . think fit to excuse." Jim Granger -----Original Message----- >Thanks Jim, but now that we know who was taxable, could you comment on whose >names appeared or did not appear by name on the tax list?

Hi, Jayne . . . This is not what you asked for, but wondered if it would be useful. Source - THRU 3rd GENERATION: Shanholtzer History & Allied Family Roots of Hampshire Co, WV & Frederick Co, VA, by Wilmer L. Kerns, Ph.D., McClain Prntg Co, Parsons, WV 26287, 1980. Source - Generation 4: FTM 1 Isaac RITCHIE SR b: Abt. 1735 [RutschlyRitschiRutschiRitcheyRicheyRichyRichie] PA d: Abt. October 1824 . +Maria CatherineCathrina WOLFE b: Bet. 1722 - 1745 [Wolf] [Miller?] d: Bet. 1766 - 1833 m: June 12, 1786 ........ 2 Jacob RITCHEY b: 1762 d: 1850 Brocks Gap, VA ............ +Maria TURNER b: 1764 Rockingham Co, VA d: 1859 Rockingham Co, VA m: 1787 Father: James TURNER I Mother: Zetty Unknown ................... 3 RITCHEY, Mr. Isaac b: 1797 Fulks Run d: WFT Est. 1825-1888 ....................... +BAKER, Ms. Catherine b: 1796 AKA-Katie Fulks Run m: February 28, 1819 d: WFT Est. 1825-1890 Father: BAKER, Mr. John Mother: TURNER, Ms. Elizabeth .............................. 4 RITCHIE SR, Mr. Levi b: 1805 d: WFT Est. 1889-1908 .................................. +CAPLINGER, Ms. Susannah b: November 17, 1826 AKA-Susan m: March 27, 1848 d: September 29, 1888 Criders, Rockingham Co, VA Father: CAPLINGER, Mr. Lewis Mother: FITZWATER, Ms. Catherine ........ 2 RITCHIE, Mr. Henry b: October 19, 1785 [RutschlyRitschiRutschiRitcheyRicheyRichyRichie] d: Bet. 1850 - 1860 ............ +BIBLE, Ms. Elizabeth b: January 15, 1784 m: March 06, 1817 d: December 06, 1875 Father: BIBLE, Mr. Adam Mother: SHOEMAKER, Ms. Magdalene ................... 3 RITCHIE, Mr. Isaac b: August 22, 1826 [RutschlyRitschiRutschiRitcheyRicheyRichyRichie] d: October 20, 1908 ....................... +SHOWALTER, Ms. Elizabeth b: April 23, 1828 ~Mennonite desc m: June 19, 1849 d: October 10, 1888 Father: SHOWALTER, Mr. Anthony B. Mother: LONG, Ms. Susannah .............................. 4 RITCHIE, Ms. Sophia Ann b: November 14, 1869 [RutschlyRitschiRutschiRitcheyRicheyRichyRichie] d: July 17, 1953 .................................. +KERNS, Mr. Robert Roderick b: December 23, 1872 AKA-Bob d: September 29, 1961 Father: KERNS, Mr. Aaron Mother: SHANHOLTZ, Ms. Tamson Happy Hunting and Helping. Flo. -- Winchester, VA, USA ~ ICQ uin 18874402 Mailing List Moderator ~ The Genealogy Help Network See the Web Site at ~ http://ghn.genealogy.org Subscribe~ http://www.onelist.com/subscribe.cgi/GenHelpNetwork

I am looking for the parents and siblings of John Harper, who married Hannah Gilham on January 30, 1822 in Fredeick County, VA, minister George Reed. I am looking for the parents and siblings of George H. Harper, who married Ann Probasco on March 17, 1831 in Fredeick County, VA, minister Lewis Eighelburger. These two Harpers may be related.

To All: I am looking for any descendents or researchers, of the family of a William RICHEY/ RITCHY/RITCHIE who had several NNLG Surveys in Old Frederick Co. prior to 1760, which he sold to several people. He sold one of these to Daniel KENNEDY prior to 1758. By 1760, William RICHEY/RITCHY/RITCHIE had left for "Carolina" and John KENNEDY is selling the land that his father bought from William RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE. 1759: We find Record of a William RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE on the tax record in Rowen Co., NC 1771: Both a William and John Richey - along w/a John KENNEDY on the Rowan Co. Petition to the King, requesting a new Co. 1778: WA Co., NC (now Greene Co., TN) William RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE has land grants as does John KENNEDY (now Greene Co., TN). There is also a John RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE in WA Co. NC. In all these areas we find KENNEDYS w/William Ritchey. Was the William RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE who lived in Frederick Co. VA the same William RICHEY/RITCHEY/RITCHIE that is found in Rowan Co., NC and WA Co., NC (now Greene Co., TN)?. Is there some kind of "family connection" between William R. and John KENNEDY????? Thank You, Jayne [email protected] They went West and "Lived"

Sara said: Date: Saturday, February 20, 1999 4:45 PM Subject: Legal Age >....Does anyone know of a good book that explains the >legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the Rev >War. "The Source" edited by Eakle and Cerni, published by Ancestry Publishing Co. 1984, contains a chart of "Ages of Legal Action" on page 186. From this chart, *in general,* the legal action of "being taxed" or "in possession of" required a male to be at least age 16, females appear in the original records as "heirs of...." However, there were exceptions and laws varied amongst the states. Another precaution, *United States* laws dated from 1776 as the earliest year, including the state of Virginia. *English Law* or *Common Law* would need to be researched for the pre-Rev War period making for a complicated process. The printed laws of several American colonies are published in 18 volumes by Michael Glazier, Inc., available in many law libraries. A 1997 revision of "The Source," edited by Szucs and Luebking is available at the following link: http://www.ancestry.com/home/source/srcindex.htm This on-line source contains *many* answers and pointers for genealogists. Neil McDonald

Can anyone tell me where "Jersey Mountain" is in VA/WV, please. I am told it is not far from Winchester. It is supposedly in the Backcreek area. I am interested in this location as it is where my ancestors first came from NJ in 1735 before settling in Capon Bridge, WV in the early 1740's with Lord Fairfax Grants. Thank you. Doug Park Fayetteville, NC

Will of John Banner written in 1782 died in 1783. I leave my land and plantation to my wife until my son John Banner shall arrive to age, he now being of the age of one year past. So far everyone that has responded thinks the son was 1 year going on 2 years old. Thanks for the help, Judy Woehrle [email protected]

Hal, >Thanks Jim, but now that we know who was taxable, could you comment on whose >names appeared or did not appear by name on the tax list? i.e., >Did an unmarried male living with parents ever get listed by name on the tax >list? In the 1787 list, the tax collectors were required to put the name of the person taxed AND the name of the person who paid the taxes. Thus the name of a 16-20 year old tithable whose taxes were being paid by a parent would be listed seperately. In other years, they were not required to do so and there is no consistency in whether they did or not. >Did a married male living with parents ever get listed by name on the tax list? Yes. >Did females (besides widows) ever get listed by name on the list? Only if the husband was absent and had been so for some time...at least that is what I have been told by others. >How about Grandpa and Grandma living with others? Grandma was exempt...and so too probably was Grandpa. Grandma would only appear if she was a widow and head of household with 16-20 year old tithables. >Any other non Heads of Household listed by name??...In lists where the tax collector does list others in the household, the mostly candidates would be hired hands for whom the employer is taking the responsibility of paying their taxes. That is what I have picked up over the years. Hope it helps. Renee L. Dauven

To All: I also have a will that wording is ambiguous as to the ages of the heirs. I would appreciate any ideas & thoughts from any of you about this, since You are not emotionally <ggg> involved. Dated: 4 Apr 1751 - Daniel Kannady near Back Creek in Frederick Co. States he is very sick and weak in Body. (I will dispense with the "usual preamble") I give Devise and Dispose of the same in the Following manner and Form. First & Foremost I order that all my Funeral Expenses be paid and Debts. I give and bequeath unto Mary my Dearly Beloved Wife the thirds of the Land during her Lifetime and then to be to my son youngest who if Lives, I intened and allow his name to be Called Daniel. Item I give unto William Kennady my son the sum of Five Shillings. Item I give unto Mary Kannady my Daughter the sum of Five Shillings. Item I give my son Thomas Kannady the third of the Land and should my youngest son die Thomas Kannady it to Half of the Plantation if he stays out his time with his mother while he be of age. Item I give to my John the third of the Land to be his Proper Right. Whatsomerver Horses, Cows, Sheep or Elsa not in memory is to be sold and monies to pay my Debts that is to say to put up at sale at the proper time of year such as will come in Value to the same and the remainder are equally to be Divided to my Daughters. I likewise Constitute and appoint my Dearly and Beloved wife Mary and Samuel Cornal whom I likewise constitute make and ordain my sole Executors of this my last will and Testament. (Et. Et.) Presented in Court 8 May 1758. Inventory returned 30 Mar 1759. The testator is Presbyterian, either Scots or Scotch/Irish. In 751: How old would you think the heirs mentioned in the will are.???? Thanks to you all for you consideration and help. Jayne [email protected] They went West and "Lived"

Thanks Jim, but now that we know who was taxable, could you comment on whose names appeared or did not appear by name on the tax list? i.e., Did an unmarried male living with parents ever get listed by name on the tax list? Did a married male living with parents ever get listed by name on the tax list? Did females (besides widows) ever get listed by name on the list? How about Grandpa and Grandma living with others? Any other non Heads of Household listed by name??... Thanks, Hal McCawley James H Granger wrote: > These are all good questions. And the answer for them, as with questions > about present-day taxes, is "it depends"--on the time, place and > circumstances. Our 18th century law-makers were not as meddlesome as those > of today when it came to changing tax laws, but they stirred the pot enough > to make it hard on genealogists. > > In 1748 the General Assembly passed a law, effective 1751, establishing that > all male persons 16 and over, as well as all negro, mulatto, and Indian > women slaves of those ages and the wives of all free negroes, mulattos, or > Indians were "tithable." This poll tax was collected by the county for the > county's use. > > Then, in 1762, the General Assembly was having difficulty financing the > French and Indian War, so taxes were added for the colony. Bad for the tax > payers, buy good for us, because a copy of the tithable rolls had to be sent > to Williamsburg, thus increasing the chances that we can find them. The > laws as to who was taxed did not change, however, until after the > Revolution. > > In 1779, the tithable list was changed to cover all white males 21 and over, > all white servants regardless of age or gender, except apprentices under 21, > and all slaves, male or female. The old or infirm could be exempt, as could > military personnel in 1780. > > In 1781, the law was changed to cover all free males over 21 and all slaves. > > In 1782--all males citizens and all slaves. > > in 1783, "tithable" was changed to "taxable." The law-makers also > complicated things for genealogists by permitting those counties that chose > to include on the rolls white males between the ages of 16 and 21. > > There was a major revision of the tax-collection infrastructure in 1786. > Paid tax commissioners replaced county justices as "the tax man," and their > record-keeping requirements were increased, but the definition of who was > taxable did not change. > > In 1788, the poll tax on adult white males was repealed, and the tax on > slaves was limited to those over 12 years old. > > These laws changing who was taxable also brought changes as to the tax rate > and classes of property subject to tax--such as livestock, carriages, > billiard tables and the licenses of doctors, merchants and tavern keepers. > > John P. Alcock's _Fauquier Families 1759-1799_ (Athens, GA: Iberian > Publishing Co., 1994) has a marvelous 23 page introduction that explains > Virginia tax history; marriage bonds; minute, deed and will records; and a > lot of other things that confuse genealogists--the introduction was worth > the price of the book to me. If you are researching Fauquier County, this > book is a gold mine. Even if you are not especially interested in Fauquier > County, you might consider it, although it is pricey. You can find out more > about it out at > http://www.iberian.com/Fauquier.phtml . It can be purchased other places > as well, I imagine. (I have no pecuniary interest in the book or in > Iberian--just a customer satisfied with this purchase.) > > Jim Granger > > ==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== > Visit the Frederick County,VA USGenWeb Home Page! > http://www.rootsweb.com/~vafreder/frederic.htm > Visit the Frederick County USGenWeb Archives! > http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/va/frederic.htm

These are all good questions. And the answer for them, as with questions about present-day taxes, is "it depends"--on the time, place and circumstances. Our 18th century law-makers were not as meddlesome as those of today when it came to changing tax laws, but they stirred the pot enough to make it hard on genealogists. In 1748 the General Assembly passed a law, effective 1751, establishing that all male persons 16 and over, as well as all negro, mulatto, and Indian women slaves of those ages and the wives of all free negroes, mulattos, or Indians were "tithable." This poll tax was collected by the county for the county's use. Then, in 1762, the General Assembly was having difficulty financing the French and Indian War, so taxes were added for the colony. Bad for the tax payers, buy good for us, because a copy of the tithable rolls had to be sent to Williamsburg, thus increasing the chances that we can find them. The laws as to who was taxed did not change, however, until after the Revolution. In 1779, the tithable list was changed to cover all white males 21 and over, all white servants regardless of age or gender, except apprentices under 21, and all slaves, male or female. The old or infirm could be exempt, as could military personnel in 1780. In 1781, the law was changed to cover all free males over 21 and all slaves. In 1782--all males citizens and all slaves. in 1783, "tithable" was changed to "taxable." The law-makers also complicated things for genealogists by permitting those counties that chose to include on the rolls white males between the ages of 16 and 21. There was a major revision of the tax-collection infrastructure in 1786. Paid tax commissioners replaced county justices as "the tax man," and their record-keeping requirements were increased, but the definition of who was taxable did not change. In 1788, the poll tax on adult white males was repealed, and the tax on slaves was limited to those over 12 years old. These laws changing who was taxable also brought changes as to the tax rate and classes of property subject to tax--such as livestock, carriages, billiard tables and the licenses of doctors, merchants and tavern keepers. John P. Alcock's _Fauquier Families 1759-1799_ (Athens, GA: Iberian Publishing Co., 1994) has a marvelous 23 page introduction that explains Virginia tax history; marriage bonds; minute, deed and will records; and a lot of other things that confuse genealogists--the introduction was worth the price of the book to me. If you are researching Fauquier County, this book is a gold mine. Even if you are not especially interested in Fauquier County, you might consider it, although it is pricey. You can find out more about it out at http://www.iberian.com/Fauquier.phtml . It can be purchased other places as well, I imagine. (I have no pecuniary interest in the book or in Iberian--just a customer satisfied with this purchase.) Jim Granger

Hello . . . It would be a lot easier for readers to "spot" a connection about the Harper family if you were to include little items like: full names, spouses, when, where, why Most of the folks on these Mailing Lists work full time, with very little spare time to waste on a vague query. People are also more responsive when they feel comfortable responding to a person, rather than an E-Mail address. I am sure you would feel the same way, if you thought about it. I am sorry if this sounded harsh. I do not mean to offend you. We all had to learn -- shucks some of us are still learning. Flo. <[email protected]> [email protected] wrote: > > I am searching to the Harper family of early Frederick County, VA. > > ==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ====

Here is my problem with legal age. I have a copy of the Will of John Banner, who died in 1783 in Berkeley County. The exact wording in it is very confusing, it says," I leave my land and plantation to my wife until my son John Banner shall arrive to age, he now being of the age of one year past". What age was the son? Is it possible, as another decendent claims, that this son was in NC in 1784 collecting a Military pay voucher? I appreciate any comments!!!!! Thanks Judy Woehrle [email protected]

You'd better look it up in a good source, since it may have varied from decade to decade, but I believe the most common age at which a male was added to the list of titheables was age 16. [email protected] wrote: > Subject: > > OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA-D Digest Volume 99 : Issue 70 > > Today's Topics: > #1 Re: Re:CUSTER ["Tom Ashton" <[email protected]>] > #2 Re: why abbreviate? ["Karol McKenzie" <[email protected]] > #3 Re: why abbreviate? ["Renee Dauven" <[email protected]] > #4 Legal Age [[email protected]] > #5 Re: Legal Age [[email protected]] > > Administrivia: > Administrivia: > Please consider supporting RootsWeb: > http://www.rootsweb.com/rootsweb/how-to-subscribe.html > > To unsubscribe from OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA-D, send a message to > [email protected] > that contains in the body of the message the command > unsubscribe > and no other text. No subject line is necessary, but if your software > requires one, just use unsubscribe in the subject, too. > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Re:CUSTER > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 07:41:04 -0500 > From: "Tom Ashton" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > Did you ever get info on this request...I have a cousin that married a > Richard Custer from Berkeley county...do not have any info on his line but > if you did not get a reply for help let me know a few more names and I will > attempt calling her and see if she is connected by marriage to your line. > Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Polly Custer <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, January 11, 1999 10:27 AM > Subject: Re:CUSTER > > >I am searching for information on the CUSTER surname in Berkeley County > >WV.... > >I have reached a stumbling block with REUBEN CUSTER who resided in B. Co. > >in the early 1800's and left behind a large family whose descendants are > >still residing in B. Co. > > > >Would appreciate hearing from anyone who may have CUSTER in their research. > > > >Thanks > >PJC > > > > > > > >==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== > >Visit the Frederick County,VA USGenWeb Home Page! > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~vafreder/frederic.htm > > > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: why abbreviate? > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 09:28:48 -0800 > From: "Karol McKenzie" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > My experience: > > Jno. = Jonathan > Jas. = James > -----Original Message----- > From: Harold Miller <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 8:17 PM > Subject: why abbreviate? > > >>>Hi again. > >>> > >> > >>At 12:48 PM 2/19/99 -0800, James H Granger wrote: > >>>Sandy, > >>>You had better listen to Barbara. She is correct. Think about it--why > >>>would anyone "abbreviate" a four-letter word to three letters and a > period?? > >>>:=) > >>>Jim Granger > >>>- > > > > > >About the abbreviation of John or Jonathan as Jno......this was discussed a > >while back on another list. I did not understand either, till someone > >mentioned that in early days, writing was done with a quill, paper and ink > >were very costly. Also, try to write with a quill. So any way they could > >cut corners, save on writing, save on ink and paper - they used it. Thus > >many, many words were abbreviated. Also explains the way some of the > >letters were written. Wm was William, etc. Now as to there being a > >universal abbreviation.....it was more left up to the person doing the > >writing. Therefore, we now wonder if Jno was John or something else. And > >the answer, it depends. While maybe many used it for John, it could also > be > >Jonathon. Jas - you would think Jason, but I found where it was Jasper. > So > >don't think there is only one correct answer. > > > >And talking about paper being costly.....they would write in the margins. > >Also, they would sometimes take a written letter, turn it around and write > >in between the previous written lines. Saved paper. Also makes it really > >interesting to now try to read some of these letters. > > > >Mary [email protected] > > > > > >==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== > >Visit the Frederick County,VA USGenWeb Home Page! > >http://www.rootsweb.com/~vafreder/frederic.htm > > > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: why abbreviate? > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 07:29:16 -0800 > From: "Renee Dauven" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > "Jas" was "James". Unless there is other supporting evidence to the > contrary, when it is encountered in a document, you can assume that is what > is meant. > One of the things that may help you determine what is meant would be to > look at the creator of the document. If what you are looking at is a legal > document created by the clerk of the county court, go with the standard > interpretation of "Jno" for John and "Jas" for James. If what you are > looking at is an entry in a family Bible or an old letter, particularly from > the later part of the 19th century, and the writer would appear to have had > a limited education, than you may want to be less strict in your > interpretation and more open to the possibility that there as been a > misunderstanding of the standard abbreviation or that the writer is assuming > that the reader will know to whom he is referring by using an idiosycrantic > abbreviation.. > By the 1820's the quill was replaced by the steel pen. > > Renee L. Dauven > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Legal Age > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:37:58 EST > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > I realize "infant" means underage but what was age of majority. At what age > was a man would be added to the list of tithables? Is it different than the > age of majority? Did one have to own property to be added by name to the list > of tithables? Did underage children have to reach majority before receiving > their inheritance. Does anyone know of a good book that explains the > legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the Rev > War. > > Thanks, > > Sara Patton > > ______________________________ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Subject: Re: Legal Age > Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 17:20:48 -0600 (CST) > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > Great question...I'd like to know the answer too! > > Brenda Jo > > On 02/20/99 17:37:58 you wrote: > > > >I realize "infant" means underage but what was age of majority. At what > age > >was a man would be added to the list of tithables? Is it different than > the > >age of majority? Did one have to own property to be added by name to the > list > >of tithables? Did underage children have to reach majority before > receiving > >their inheritance. Does anyone know of a good book that explains the > >legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the > Rev > >War. > > > >Thanks, > > > >Sara Patton > > > > > >==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== > >The RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative is supported by its users: > >RootsWeb would cease to exist if not for the support of folks like you. > >By becoming a Member, Sponsor, or Donor, you help RootsWeb provide Web > >and FTP space on thousands of genealogical topics, mailing > >lists for thousands of groups of genealogists with shared interests, and > >search engines to make huge amounts of genealogical data freely > >available to Internet genealogists.Become A Rootsweb Sponser Today! > >http://www.rootsweb.com/ > > > > > >

I got the following from the VA-ROOTS list a couple of years back. I hope it helps y'all. In THE MAGAZINE OF VIRGINIA GENEALOGY Vol. 25 (August 1987), in an article entitled "Misconceptions Concerning "Legal" Ages" Edgar MacDonald wrote, in part: < < . . .While 21 was agreed on as being "of age " in the usual sense, under English Common Law a father's will, having the force of law, frequently determined when a child became of age. Virginia court records abound in instances where fathers named their children "of age" as early as 15 and 16. . . a minor could perfectly well buy land if he had ihe means or credit. At 14 a male could marry, sign contracts, choose his guardian, bequeath personal property, apprentice himself. He could even sell land as a minor but was usually required to confirm the sale upon arriving at the age of 21; however, where unchallenged, few of these confirmations found their way into the records. The general assumption by many genealogists that 21 was the universal age for civic activities is simply erroneous. . . For most of his activities concerning his personal affairs, the colonial male in Virginia, and elsewhere, was imminently qualified to affix his name to public documents at the responsible age of 14. . .>>

Bouviers Law Dictionary 1856 Edition would be a good place to look for your answers. www.alaska.net/~winter/bouvier1856.html For what my opinion is worth, I believe that I read somewhere that the first U.S. Census in 1790, listed only the 2 age groups of; 16 & up including head & 16 and under, was because males 16 & up still living at home were taxable. Hope this helps you find your answers. Shirley ......in Idaho ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ [email protected] wrote: > > I realize "infant" means underage but what was age of majority. At what age > was a man would be added to the list of tithables? Is it different than the > age of majority? Did one have to own property to be added by name to the list > of tithables? Did underage children have to reach majority before receiving > their inheritance. Does anyone know of a good book that explains the > legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the Rev > War. > > Thanks, > > Sara Patton > > ==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== > The RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative is supported by its users: > RootsWeb would cease to exist if not for the support of folks like you. > By becoming a Member, Sponsor, or Donor, you help RootsWeb provide Web > and FTP space on thousands of genealogical topics, mailing > lists for thousands of groups of genealogists with shared interests, and > search engines to make huge amounts of genealogical data freely > available to Internet genealogists.Become A Rootsweb Sponser Today! > http://www.rootsweb.com/

Great question...I'd like to know the answer too! Brenda Jo On 02/20/99 17:37:58 you wrote: > >I realize "infant" means underage but what was age of majority. At what age >was a man would be added to the list of tithables? Is it different than the >age of majority? Did one have to own property to be added by name to the list >of tithables? Did underage children have to reach majority before receiving >their inheritance. Does anyone know of a good book that explains the >legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the Rev >War. > >Thanks, > >Sara Patton > > >==== OLD-FREDERICK-CO-VA Mailing List ==== >The RootsWeb Genealogical Data Cooperative is supported by its users: >RootsWeb would cease to exist if not for the support of folks like you. >By becoming a Member, Sponsor, or Donor, you help RootsWeb provide Web >and FTP space on thousands of genealogical topics, mailing >lists for thousands of groups of genealogists with shared interests, and >search engines to make huge amounts of genealogical data freely >available to Internet genealogists.Become A Rootsweb Sponser Today! >http://www.rootsweb.com/ > > >

I am searching to the Harper family of early Frederick County, VA.

I realize "infant" means underage but what was age of majority. At what age was a man would be added to the list of tithables? Is it different than the age of majority? Did one have to own property to be added by name to the list of tithables? Did underage children have to reach majority before receiving their inheritance. Does anyone know of a good book that explains the legalities of the 18th century and whether or not they changed after the Rev War. Thanks, Sara Patton