Author Topic: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire  (Read 5525 times)

Offline okkool

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Canadian by attitude
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #9 on: Saturday 24 June 17 03:38 BST (UK) »
In the next part I am trying to figure out the word in red. Note: the parish records indicate the true name is Sowdley Eyton.

and bequeath unto my Sonne Francis Butter the third part of John Garmsons Tenement in three parts to be divided And alsoe the third part in three parts to be divided of the
heathey pluck in the holding of mds Sewley Eyton And Alsoe the third part in three parts to be divided of the two Leasows in the holding of James Poole Lying beyond the

thanks Brian
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors. Edmund Burke 1729-1797

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,431
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #10 on: Saturday 24 June 17 05:57 BST (UK) »
It's:  m(re)s Lewsey Eyton = m(ist)re(s)s Lucy Eyton

From this alone I can't agree with what you say about the true name.  If you wish, please post the PR so I can see for myself.

ADDED:

Compare the first letter of the forename to the Ls in (what is arguably) Leasows and also Lying on the same line.

ADDED 2:

For clarity I have made a small change to my transcription above.

The thing between the m and s in the contracted form of mistress is the same superscript wiggle or loop which supplies the re in the contracted form of presence, as can be seen in most wills of this period.

Offline okkool

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Canadian by attitude
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #11 on: Saturday 24 June 17 16:40 BST (UK) »
Well Hd86 the word "mistress" does put a different spin on my conclusions.

Sowdley Eyton born 1669 had a sister Lusina born 1671. Their parents were Philip (died 1672) and Lucy Eyton.
Lucy dies in 1698 intestate but the intestate documents indicate she had surviving children Sowdley, Margaret, and Anne (Lusina predeased?).

I therefore conclude that my will refers to Lucy the mother.

Thanks for that pivotal word. Brian
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors. Edmund Burke 1729-1797

Offline okkool

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Canadian by attitude
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #12 on: Saturday 01 July 17 21:16 BST (UK) »
Needed a little help with words in red

hereditaments thereunto belonging or o Bright appertaining And if he the said William Butter shall happen by his said wife to have but one
daughter the sayd father shall give daughter or wife from the --- ------ the summe of two hundred pounds but if he shall have two
or three daughters the whole Estate shall pay amongst them noe more than three hundred pounds in the whole provided always and upon

Thanks Brian
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors. Edmund Burke 1729-1797


Offline clayton bradley

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,060
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.natio
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #13 on: Saturday 01 July 17 21:27 BST (UK) »
or of right appertaining
Broadley (Lancs all dates and Halifax bef 1654)

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,912
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #14 on: Saturday 01 July 17 21:42 BST (UK) »
daughter the sayd father shall give unto her or raise from the estate for(?) her(?) the sum(m) of ...

Offline okkool

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Canadian by attitude
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #15 on: Saturday 01 July 17 22:44 BST (UK) »
Thanks Clayton, that was was a pretty badly formed f from the writer.

That does make more sense Bookbox. Thank you for that.

Brian
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors. Edmund Burke 1729-1797

Offline okkool

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 293
  • Canadian by attitude
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #16 on: Tuesday 19 September 17 05:21 BST (UK) »
Hello
another word I am having trouble with.

for ever And further I give and bequeath unto my sonn Joseph Butter one Tenement Lying and being in Sambrooke now in the
occupation of William Simmons dureing the tearm of three years which I have yet in being from George Sambrooke And further I give and
 
thx Brian
People will not look forward to posterity, who never look backward to their ancestors. Edmund Burke 1729-1797

Offline horselydown86

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,431
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Francis Butter 1694 will Shropshire
« Reply #17 on: Tuesday 19 September 17 06:48 BST (UK) »
Hi Brian,

You are correct with:  ...wch I have yet in being from George...

He has a lease on the tenement from George.

At the time of writing three years of the lease remain unexpired.  These years he gives to son Joseph.

So:  yet in being = real/actual = unexpired (in relation to a lease)