Genealogy Chat

Phoenix Most of it WAS in Latin! And the other one, dated 1713 was ALL in Latin. Fortunately, it was a printed form and the 'filled-in' bits were in spider English. I almost cried when I opened the envelope, however, I find that if you leave these things on the coffee table they gradually start to make sense and you finish up wondering why you thought you couldnt read them! Bad news about the Inventories - guess that's a dead end, although I shall try to follow it up - you never know! The Bonds were for 80 quid each bondsman which seems like a fair bit to me, although I know they loaded them in order to encourage you to get on with the Admin. Olde Crone

Thankyou everyone! I didnt REALLY think relict could refer to his daughter, but I was clutching desperately at straws there. Merry - good idea about the remarriage, I didnt think of that.(I mean elderly Joseph to the young Anne) She must have been considerably younger than Joseph as she presented Mr Barber with a daughter some, erm, seven months after the wedding in April. So, Joseph's floozy of a young wife hung onto what she had by law, after Joseph's death in 1729 and was forced by her 'condition' to either hang onto it a bit longer and face the local shame (and the family's fury) or to do the decent thing and marry Mr Barber, thus losing her hold on the Pot Factory (or whatever it was). Yes, its starting to make sense now, thankyou. I will see what I can turn up in the Consistory Court records - I am still not ABSOLUTELY sure that this is my man. Olde Crone

Thank you, Merry, yes of course it is. Will correct it!

NB at least your admon was in English. Ten years earlier and it would have been scratchy handwriting AND Latin.

3. I've never heard of relict meaning anything other than widow! 4. I imagine that the inventory became tinder long ago. They survive well for early periods all over the place, but there is very little for the 1700s. I've studied the tudor period for wills, but not later periods, so I'm guessing here, but I assume that a law was changed or repealed so the retention of inventories was no longer deemed important.

I'm sure he made very nice dishes, though............... Merry

2. Bastards have no legal status at the period, so I think you must assume that there was a legal marriage. At this period they did not have to be written in a book. Oaths sworn before witnesses would be quite adequate. (Though those witnesses had to be reliable!)

Hi Old Crone According to YFT: Relit = The widow of the deceased there is no alternative given so it sound like it could be that relit was always the widow. Since Admon (Administration) means the letters of administration granted by court when no will is found, it is possable that it took 10 years to get them. Finding wills 5 years after a death is not unusual, so why shouldnt 10 years be plausable - it could have been a large estate that had to be searched for the will. My Grandfather died at christmas 2004 and his will has olny just been put in for probate. Another relative died Feb 2003 and it has only just been proved as a benaficary died and then the benaficary 's benaficary died making it complex to sort out.

1. Perfectly feasible that an admon is granted so long after death. I have one in the family some twenty years after the death: I imagine that the family were clearing out mother's effects and discovered something that had belonged to their sister and they could not get their hands on the loot without a bit of paper. It sounds as if the widow had continued say with a tenancy AS THE WIDOW but when her status changed it was argued that her new husband had no right to it, unless they could demonstrate that she was her late husband's legal heir.

Surely Anne can't be his daughter, because when she married Edward Barber she was a grieving widow and not a grieving spinster. My dictionary says relict is widow (as well as a few geological refs such as plant growth which is dried up and left behind, which seems about right! LOL) Ummmm.......Ahem.....my own rellies who married twice always has the second marriage in London so as to aviod the scrutiny of the local vicar because of the consanguinity rules! Could Joseph Lawton have been a bit too close to his second wife for comfort?? Merry

I received two Admons this week which I had hoped would answer many questions - but they havent, they have just raised a hundred more! One in particular is giving me grief. It is for Joseph Lawton, dishturner of Gawsworth deceased (but no date of death given and his death is not recorded in the local PR) There is however, a death for Joseph Lawton in 1729. The Admon is granted on 17th May 1739. (Ten years after his death - is this possible/likely?) to Anne Barber otherwise Lawton, now the wife of the said Edward Barber of Siddington relict of Joseph Lawton and Administratrix. (Edward Barber is one of the Bonsmen on the Admon. Grieving widow Anne Lawton married Edward on the 30th April 1739) Q - I cannot find a marrtiage betweern Joseph Lawton and Anne, between the death of his first wife in 1727 and Ann's remarriage. How likely is it that the Consistory Court would grant Admin to a 'common-law wife', bearing in mind that Joseph Lawton had many adult sons and daughters alive at 1739? Q. Does 'relict' ALWAYS mean 'widow of' - could it possibly mean his daughter? Q. Anne is required to report to the Consistory Court on 17th November 1740 (old style, I presume) with an Inventory - how likely is it that records of this proceeding still exist and more importantly, what are my chances of getting hold of them? Does anyone have any experience of Chester Consistory Courts? Olde Crone

See below in a min