Author Topic: Why the third son?  (Read 975 times)

Offline glen11

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Why the third son?
« on: Monday 28 August 17 10:48 BST (UK) »
Hello,that sounds cryptic,but a few weeks ago i posted a query about a Joseph Roberts and was told he left a will.Joseph died 1811,English Bicknor and left everything to his wife,when she died,his son James got everything.But James was the third son,plus there was an older sister as well.The first son never married,but i thought he would have inherited everything.All living grandchildren at the time got a guinea,Only James got anything(well everything)the other children werent even mentioned.Can anyone tell me why?I cant find out if James was married,the others were,it doesnt seem fair really.Thank you Glenys
Edwards.Godwin.Gilding

Offline Drosybont

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #1 on: Monday 28 August 17 11:27 BST (UK) »
It could be a sign of falling out in the family, but another possibility is that the others had already been helped financially, at marriage or when setting themselves up in an occupation.  If the parents lived into old age, maybe the son who got 'everything' was the one who stayed at home and supported them.

Drosybont
Hotham, Guilliatt, Brown, Winter, Buck, Webster, Mortimore
Richards, Meredith, Gower, Davies, Todd, Westmacott, Hill
Mid C19 Cardiff and Haverfordwest, the Marychurch family.

Offline Skoosh

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,736
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #2 on: Monday 28 August 17 13:08 BST (UK) »
Maybe the others had had their share of the family fortune in the past.

Skoosh.

Offline glen11

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #3 on: Monday 28 August 17 15:00 BST (UK) »
The eldest son never married,he died a few weeks before his mother.The daughter was widowed,married again and was pregnant,but the will only left a guinea to the two children from the first marriage.Apparently ,Joseph made the will and died a few days later.Verymysterious.Thank you.
Edwards.Godwin.Gilding


Offline Pejic

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 715
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #4 on: Tuesday 05 September 17 20:28 BST (UK) »
I'm sure that there was some inheritance pattern around Gloucester where the youngest son inherited - I have searched my archives without success for any reference though. I have a vague idea it was called 'Town English' or some such.
Richard Wernham (Berkshire 18th century),
William Hissey (1805 to 1813, Hampstead Norris),
Kapirin (Siberia 19th Century),
Kitching 1850,
Mary Howse born 1806 ish,
Chris Truelove marr. John Pocock 2-7-1696, Kintbury, Berks

Offline glen11

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday 05 September 17 20:34 BST (UK) »
Thank you.The trail has gone cold now.It looks like the son that inherited had a son,but i dont know if he inherited.They lived in English Bicknor.I will try to find out about your theory.The eldest son never married,dont know why.
Edwards.Godwin.Gilding

Offline Pejic

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 715
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #6 on: Tuesday 05 September 17 20:50 BST (UK) »
I have just recalled that it was called Borough English, about which Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say:
"Borough-English, the English form of ultimogeniture, the system of undivided inheritance by which real property passed intact to the youngest son or, failing sons, to the youngest daughter. Ultimogeniture was the customary rule of inheritance among unfree peasants, especially in southeast England. Its antiquity is uncertain, but it is first mentioned in the 12th century. “Borough-English” became the accepted legal term for the custom after a famous case in 1327 drew attention to the fact that in the French borough of Nottingham, which had grown up beside the English borough, land passed to the eldest son, whereas in the English borough it passed to the youngest son. As a system of undivided inheritance, borough-English applied mostly to unfree peasants and, like primogeniture, acted to preserve the manorial unit; among free peasants, land tended to pass by equal division among sons and daughters. The custom continued in many rural manors until abolished by the Administration of Estates Act of 1925."
Richard Wernham (Berkshire 18th century),
William Hissey (1805 to 1813, Hampstead Norris),
Kapirin (Siberia 19th Century),
Kitching 1850,
Mary Howse born 1806 ish,
Chris Truelove marr. John Pocock 2-7-1696, Kintbury, Berks

Offline glen11

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Why the third son?
« Reply #7 on: Tuesday 05 September 17 21:06 BST (UK) »
I must digest all that.I cant find anything about Joseph Roberts who died 1811,a few days after he made the will,but he must have had money,because he left the third son everything,after his wife died,and the grandchildren got a guinea each.And James wasnt the youngest.
Edwards.Godwin.Gilding