This is something that comes up every now and then. I did not compile this information myself but saved it when it was posted by someone else. I wish I had saved the name of the person so I could give them credit! Bev According to George Webb, The Office and Authority of a Justice of Peace (Williamsburg, 1736)a person was considered "of age" under different circumstances. On page 188 he wrote: "At Common Law, every Person under the Age of One and Twenty Years is an Infact; but this holds only in Civil Causes, for in Criminal Matters the Law regards the Age of Discretion, which is 14 Years. Co. Lit.1.3. f.405 "And in Cases Civil there are several Exceptions, as, The Age for a Man to marry, is 14, and for a Woman 12. Hob.225. "An Infant of 17, shall take Administation, or prove a Will, in his own Right; for then the Power of Administrator, or Executor, during Minority, ceaseth. Vaughn, 93. "And whatever Act he doth, which was his Duty to do, as giving Release upon receiving all Money due, Paiment of just Debts, &c. shall bind him. Co. 5. Rep.27. "Above 18, may bequeath Slaves, by Will in Writing. 1 Geo. 2. cap. 11. "And in divers other Cases, whereby by Special Law, or Custom, an Infant shall be bound, as tho' he were of full Age. "Surety of the Peace is grantable to or against an Infant, tho' under 14 Years of Age. Dalt. 269. "An Infant of 14 Years may commit Forcible Entry, or Detainer, for which he may be fined; and he shall find Sureties for his Good-behaviour; But he shall suffer no Imprisonment, nor Corporal Pains, for Breach of any Penal Law, wherein an Infant is not expressly named; yet, he shall forfeit the Penalty of a Penal Law, and so may lose his Goods. Doct. & Stud. p. 147, 148. "An Infant above 18, may be a Disseisor with Force, and may be imprisoned for the same. 22 Edw. 4, cap. 9. "In all Cases of Treason, or Felony, Infancy is no Plea, but the Offender, tho' under 14, shall be liable to the Punishments by Law inflicted for such Offence, if it appear that he had Knowledge of Good and Evil. Dalt. 350." There are other circumstances when a person is considered "of age", for example, orphan boys were appearenticed until age 21 and girls to age 18. If I remember correctly, anyone 14 or older could witness legal documents. (Saved from another list.) Appointment of a legal guardian was not nessicarily related to who raised a child or where he or she lived. A legal guardian was either named or chosen for an entirely differnt reason: to protect the child's right to his or her inheritance. Typically, when a father or mother died, the children continued to live with the surviving parent, or perhaps with grandparents or other relatives, and no legal action was deemed necessary. Guardians for the children were thus not named or chosen until some "triggering" event. For example, suppose the widow decided to remarry. Under typical laws, she was entitled to her "dower right" (usually one-third), and the children were entitled to the remainder of their father's estate. In view of the impending marriage, it was usually deemed necessary for the under-age children to have guardians to see to it that their property rights were protected. The other common "triggering" event was the death of a grandparent. Suppose the children's mother had previously died and the children were living with the father. Later, the mother's father died intestate. In this case, her children would be entitled to their mother's share of the grandfather's estate, thus make it necessary that the children have a legal guardian. (In a case such as this, it might well be that the father of the children was named their guardian.) The appointment of a guardian by the court or the choosing of one by someone at least 14 years old contains some hidden messages for genealogists: First, as noted, it says that those who chose guardians were at least age 14. Secondly, it tells you to look for some event that made the appointment of choice of the guardian necessary - usually the remarriage of the mother or the death of a grandparent. What it does not tell you is when the parent (or parents) may have died. Nor does it tell you anything about who actually was rearing the children. IOW, the guardians were for strictly legal purposes, not for the purpose of saying who should be responsible for raising the child. It is true, however, that totally orphaned (both parents dead) were often raised by an uncle or other close relative, who was also their guardian. Said uncle would, of course, exact the costs of keeping and schooling the children from their inheritances!