Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - GFHWP

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
The Lighter Side / Re: 'In the Blood' free download from Amazon Kindle
« on: Saturday 26 January 13 19:23 GMT (UK)  »
Not seen these before but the premise is certainly interesting – heir hunter uncovering dastardly deeds in the past. The scope for stories in this vein is considerably large, especially considering how many real life ancestral tales revealed on rootschat are such eye openers.
On a more straight forward note may I recommend Damned Charity, a historical fiction  Kindle e-book set in the East Midlands during the Great Cheese Riot of 1766. 

2
The Common Room / Re: Transfer of Deeds to son?
« on: Saturday 26 January 13 19:13 GMT (UK)  »
Mazi is correct but it is not just the loyalists who would have it this way as the rules of succession would have allowed Carles II to become king on the death of Charles I.
He was not allowed to rule though until the republic, under Cromwell, came to an end.
For all intents and purposes then he reigned for 36 years which is why the document gives this period.

3
The Common Room / Re: Transfer of Deeds to son?
« on: Saturday 26 January 13 00:16 GMT (UK)  »

 Your legend states that Alexander held the continuation of a Lease dated 7/1/1684. As you do not know his age when baptised it is likely he was a minor at the time of the grant of the Lease in which case it would have been granted to someone else. Later on, (after 1805?) Alexander received the continuation.
Your main problem as I see it is that you do not know the property to which the Lease relates and without this it would be extremely difficult to track down.
An additional problem is that you only refer to the right to sell cattle.  Whilst this right might have run with the property ownership, it may also have been just that – a right to sell cattle, in which case it would have been a Licence not a Lease.

4
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Field numbers and measurements on maps
« on: Friday 09 November 12 20:11 GMT (UK)  »
You're welcome.

I used to have a job where interpretation of map data was a major consideration so if you are stuck on any point feel free to pm me.

Phil

5
The Common Room / Re: Land measures
« on: Friday 09 November 12 15:24 GMT (UK)  »
The original surveying chain - the Gunters chain, was 66ft long had 100 links so each one was equal to 7.92 inches.
Early surveyors used this bit of steel to measure the lenght and breadth of the UK, and produced maps so accurate even modern laser rangefinding and satellite mapping has alterered them only slightly.

Phil

6
The Common Room / Re: Land measures
« on: Friday 09 November 12 00:18 GMT (UK)  »
Quote from: GrahamSimons on Thursday 08 November 12 22:15 GMT (UK)
These measures were printed on the back cover of our exercise books in primary school in the 1950s......

Along with other stuff such as stones, lbs and oz, (weight) £ s d (money) and furlongs and chains, (distance)  A chain was  I recall 22yds long or 66feet. Something still used today as that is the length of a cricket pitch.

7
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Field numbers and measurements on maps
« on: Friday 09 November 12 00:08 GMT (UK)  »
Ken

It sounds as if you are looking at the 1:2500 Ordnance Survey maps and from the dates quoted these will be the County Series maps, identifiable by the reference name which will be the county/roman numeral/arabic numeral : eg.  Kent XV1 13.
These maps all show what are termed as parcel numbers. That is a number allocated to each defined parcel (enclosure) lying within a certain parish. Numbers were originally allocated on a consecutive basis across the parish but changes such as subdividing fields or removing fences stopped that and so they went on to an arbitary numbering system.
The allocation of the number was determined by the surveyor or cartographer at the OS and it referred to an area on the map bounded by a standing  physical feature, such as a wall or hedge although sometimes non physical features such as the imaginary line of the parish boundary or  change in ground surface, such as the edge of a track, could delimit the parcel.
For each parcel the area was shown below the parcel number. Eg 1.672 would represent an area of 1.672 acres.
Occasionally the parcel number would run to 4 digits although this was not too common and should not be confused with the 4 digit reference given on the Ordnance Survey National Grid map, which does, as you say, refer to the grid reference.
Parcel numbers on NG maps reflect the grid reference to the nearest 10m of the centre of the specific parcel and so although they look arbitary are in fact unique identifiers.
As  Kenton has said, the brace  is used to link separately defined areas of ground into one single parcel.  Where there is a gap in the brace it means that the feature crossed (such as a road) is not included in the numbered parcel.
Also not included in this system were built up areas as that would have cluttered up the map. There was a symbol placed on the map to indicate this – it looks like a lollipop.
If you are doing research into land holdings then understanding this system will be of help as in rural areas the land deeds often listed the property owned by reference to the parcel numbers on the particular OS maps.

Hope that all makes sense.

Phil

8
The Common Room / Re: Legal Term 'Beneficial Owner'
« on: Friday 05 October 12 13:59 BST (UK)  »
Under the Law of Property Act 1925, land holdings in England were classified into one of two legal  estates, Freehold or Leasehold.
These were further categorised depending on the security of the holding.
In the case of Freehold there were (and still are) two interests, Absolute Freehold and Possessory Freehold.
Possessory Freehold is a limited holding backed only by evidence of uninterrupted occupation over a period of years (12) and can be contested.
On the other hand, Absolute Freehold is an undefeasible title but to claim this it is necessary to back it up with an unbroken chain of ownership throughout a period of years. In 1931 the period was 25 years and so if you had the relevant deeds covering that period you could sell as the beneficial owner of the Absolute Freehold.
These deeds (prior to land Registration) tended to be held by the Solicitors acting for the beneficial owner and might have gone back, in some cases several hundreds of years. However it was only necessary to show the documentation for the legally required period. So, even if you have documents to show the chain of title through various owners down to yourself , say for the last 100 years, you did not have to produce them, stating instead that tile should commence only at a certain date and supplying that documentary evidence.
By 1931 Land Registration was compulsory for all property transactions in London and so if your property fell within the geographical area at that time then it would have to have been registered on the sale. The Land Registry would have examined the deeds and if satisfied, superseded them with a certificate. The certificate would have a unique number (the Title Number) and contain a plan of the property/location and a written schedule (called the Register), which gave details of the property, the beneficial owner, the class of title and also any legal considerations (such as a right of way) affecting it.
You can apply to the Land Registry for a search of their Index Map, quoting the property address. This will reveal the title number and using this you can obtain a copy of the certificate.
I hope this helps.

Phil

9
Family History Beginners Board / Re: House history
« on: Friday 22 June 12 22:09 BST (UK)  »
Whilst you might not have copies of the old deeds, the Land Registration Certificate will contain information relating to legal aspects of the property. These could possibly be in the form of extracts from or even copies of the deeds that gave rise to the sale from the builder to the first occupier.
Obtain a copy of the Land/Charge Certificate and see what it contains.

Phil

Pages: [1] 2 3 4