Great summary. I am aware of one quirk in Tennessee law that I'm not sure whether it was Tennessee-specific or not. At one point, certainly in the 1860s, a wife who had at least two children with her husband was entitled to a child's portion of the estate as well as the dower. One of the cases I've studied the closest was in 1860 in Hancock County -- and at least 12 more years as the case dragged on for a long time. At that time, Edward Walker Jr. died intestate and apparently unexpectedly. His oldest son from his first marriage was executor apparently; much of the paperwork was lost in one of the Hancock County fires, but there's still a substantial case file covering some of the nonsense in that particular case, but I'll avoid going off topic on that. In any case, his second wife, by whom he had four children, was entitled to a child's portion of the real estate and dower. In the case of Edward's widow, Sarah (Crumley), that meant that she was entitled to 1/14th of the value of land and 1/14 of the cost of the slave the family owned; slaves were considered real property. Edward left 13 living children, which results in 1/14th for each including Sarah. The Civil War got in the way as well as some apparent fraud by someone who bought the land, and the case was messy. Eventually, though, Sarah sold her dower rights about a year after the property itself was sold, and comparing the two prices, her interest seems to have been 25%, although other factors may have been involved. Dower in Tennessee, I assume, was much like other states: she would lose the right if she died or moved off the property. Strangely, she did move off the property at least 2 years before she sold her rights, but apparently no one pushed the issue. Another strange but understandable result from roughly the same time period: When Edward Jr.'s brother Joseph died in an accident in 1851 in Claiborne County, he apparently was the executor of the estates of both of his parents. When Joseph's wife became the executor of Joseph's estate, she inherited the role of executor of his parents' estates. One final thing that could give some hints about where to look for records: in Claiborne County and a lot of other places presumably, it was not at all uncommon for a widow to have to sue her own children for dower rights, and the records generated can be useful. Such a lawsuit is not necessarily a sign of any sort of family dispute; many of the suits just seem to be a formality that was required essentially to register her rights. On 4/16/07, Steve Smith <stevesmith41@bellsouth.net> wrote: > > Sharon has raised an interesting question. Some of the rights of women in > this time period are misunderstood and to some degrees they were probably > misunderstood in the early nineteenth century by the common person. An > unmarried woman who was of legal age could buy and sell property just as a > man; however upon entering into marriage her rights were much more > limited. > The land she possessed may become the property of her husband unless there > were prenuptial agreements made to protect this from happening. I have > never found a very good source to show all the laws of this time period > and > some I've just figured out as I went along and now the internet has > brought > many to light for researchers. > > Most of the laws of this period were laws that were common in English law > and therefore became law in the colonies and later the states. A single > woman was referred to in law as Femme Sole, with many of the same rights > as > the man. A married woman was referred to as Femme Covert, with her > husband > in charge of acting in her behalf in legal matters. Many of these laws > did > not begin to change until after 1840 and mostly after the Civil War. Some > states were slow to change even after new laws passed and most women were > probably kept ignorant of her rights. Before this time when a man sold > property his wife was entitled to an interest known as a dower. It was > usually a one third interest. If the man sold the property his wife was > usually required to sign with him on the deed to transfer her right of > dower. This was particularly important when transferring the land where > the > home was built, for if this was sold and the man died the woman could be > left without anything. Eventually some courts did enforce the laws by > separately questioning the woman to be certain she was selling her > interest > of property without the persuasion of the husband. I still see many > situations where the man sold property he had bought out of speculation > and > when he sold the land the woman's name is not on the deed. This seemed to > be an accepted practice, even though it may not have been legal. > > A woman's rights changed when she divorced the husband or he died. If the > man died intestate, the woman had the right to be the executor of his > estate. She had to go to court and either accept this responsibility or > "relinquish" this right to another person; or the courts would appoint > someone for her to carry out this responsibility. I see this was common > even as far back as statehood in Tennessee. An example I just looked at > was > when Martha Yoakum and her son went into court in Grainger County in 1800 > and she accepted her "rights" as the administrator of her deceased > husband, > George Yoakum. Her oldest son, Isaac, was named as co-executor along with > her. Many researchers for years thought that this was Isaac Yoakum and > his > wife, Martha. However Isaac's wife would have had no 'rights' in the > administration of the estate of her husband's father. Later it was proven > that the wife of Isaac was named Mary and not Martha. Upon the death of > the > husband that died intestate the woman was entitled to one third of the > property and one years support taken from his possessions. This was to > protect the woman against debts the man had entered into that would have > been settled by selling all the woman may have had to sustain her and her > family. > > I just did a search for dower rights in Tennessee and I did not > immediately > see a link that dealt with Tennessee in specific; however, most states had > common laws that were similar. Here is one site I enjoyed: > http://www.press.uillinois.edu/epub/books/stowell/ch5.html > I'm sure that by doing some more searching other sites could be found to > better illustrate the laws pertaining to women and how they were enforced > at > this time. > > Steve Smith > > -----Original Message----- > From: tnclaibo-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:tnclaibo-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of Sharon Bryant > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:49 AM > To: tnclaibo@rootsweb.com > Subject: [TNCLAIBO] Question about deeds > > I have been reviewing some old deeds which were copied and sent to me by > CD. > > I noticed that there were no relinquishments of Dower rights for any of > these deeds. > > Was this normal for pre-1850 Claiborne Co., TN deeds? > > Thanks, > > Sharon > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TNCLAIBO-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > TNCLAIBO-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Phillip A. Walker phillip.walker@gmail.com