2013-09-05 • Intestate, Inventory, Distribution
Khathu: Hello vkn
vkn: Howdy to you Khathu http://tinyurl.com/l27wzdr Interesting talk re Plutocrats
Khathu: very interesting topic
Seventies: hello Khathu and vkn
vkn: Good tips on slave period research Khathu Good Howdy Seventies.
Seventies: Always good stuff from Khathu
Khathu: Hello Seventies
vkn: I am learning to use dragon dictate to ease writing/typing
Khathu: Hopefully people will pay attention to the tips I have a questions regarding probate records
daviss: hello khathu, Seventies and vkn!
Khathu: Hello daviss
vkn: Howdy Daviss did you get mail
Seventies: hi daviss
Khathu: Are there any experts in this area here
daviss: I have not been in email yet vkn, I will check. I am running a tad late this morning
vkn: okies my mail clint is acting tricky today
Seventies: In my experience, the people who help me the most at the courthouse are the people looking for land deeds...
Khathu: Would the probate process continue even though the heirs including minor children relocated to another state? And if so, would the case be transferred to the new county and states
daviss: rough sleep last night so I still have not gotten it together yet
Khathu: of residences?
Seventies: hi alt
vkn: Good howdy alt
Khathu: Hello alt
alt: Hello folks... daviss, Khathu, Seventies & vkn
daviss: Not sure about way back when khathu but in these days it is handled in the same court
vkn: Give us a try Khathu re Probate record sets
Seventies: Good question. In my case, the probate land division took place in MS though the heirs left the state. Took a much longer time to resolve though.
Khathu: Here is my situation - Jameson Moody died intestate in Chesterfield County, VA in 1842. His wife Mary died intestate as well the following year. At the time of their death there was four minor children. Their eldest son James H. Moody served as the administrator. In 1857, the James H. Moody and his siblings including the minor children relocated to Fairfield, Freestone County, Texas
alt: Khathu, the case of my 2nd great-grandfather .. Lat wiill & Testament "probated" and resolved in California .. heirs were in Ohio at the time of his death....
vkn: Intestate indicates letters of Administration to me Khathu
alt: the executor of the estate was located in California, but the property assets were in Ohio.
Khathu: I am trying to find a final settlement of the estate and it just dawned on me that although the probate processing started in Chesterfield Co., VA, the children were still minor when the family arrived in Texas. I guess I will pick up my search in Freestone County for the final settlement since I was not able to locate one in Chesterfield Co., VA
Seventies: The property in question were the enslaved and not land, right?
Khathu: The last document I have from Chesterfiled County, VA is dated 1853.
daviss: If in fact it were started in one place there would have to be an entry in the courthouse files stating that Khathu
Khathu: enslaved property, land, livestock, furniture, books, etc.
vkn: Khathu seems there would need to be a dismissal in the initiating county/state
alt: here is another example.. 3rd great-grandfather died "intestate" this is an estate settlement paper.... the plaintiff was the ancestor who lived in California, all others were in Ohio. http://tinyurl.com/kg6hyyr
Seventies: Do you think Mary and James Jr. would've sold the property to move out to Texas?
daviss: stating the case would be transferred and terminated khathu
vkn: ....and such accounting may be in "loose papers"
Khathu: It started in Chesterfield Co, VA for sure.
vkn: Agreed Daviss
alt: my example is dated 1864 Khathu
Khathu: Seventies Jameson and Mary never lived in Texas, their children relocated to Texas about 10 year after their parents death
Seventies: ah okay
Khathu: Thanks alt
vkn: In my Alabama probate experience, administrator must reside in Alabama
alt: yw Khathu, I would think that each case would have it's own "peculiars", but the laws of inheritance would be universal in the U.S. of A.
vkn: Agreed Alt
daviss: In one of my many jobs lol I was a Deputy Clerk for over 6 years at the Clerk Of Superior Court here in AZ
Khathu: Most of the enslaved property traveled to Texas with the Moodys
alt: and what was your experience with 'probate' cases daviss?
vkn: Excellent experience Daviss and great background in your current life
daviss: all cases were filed through our office alt and nosey me read cases that came through. The most famous was the James Kidd case
alt: so Khathu, the Will wasn't probated/finalized even 10 years after the death of the person?
Seventies: lol I used to do the same thing at the MP (military police station). Crime is EVERYWHERE.
Khathu: There was no will Both parents died without a will.
vkn: Khathu I would think Court would need to approve property re location to Texas
Seventies: What were the inheritance laws in VA at the time of the deaths of james sr. and Mary?
alt: so the 'intestate" case wasn't probated for 10 years?
Seventies: or just the basic laws.
Khathu: James son not James Sr.
Seventies: oh sorry.
daviss: if no will khathu someone still had to be appointed to handle everything through the courts
Khathu: It was their eldest son James H. Moody
Seventies: ok thanks for the clarification.
vkn: ...and as you know Alt some intestate are never finalized
Khathu: I have the paper trail from 1842-1853 but not final settlement or any documentation showing that the intestate was finalized
daviss: so the paper trail in Texas starts in 1853 khathu
alt: Was James H. Moody iliving n the State where his father died at the time the case was filed as "intestate"?
vkn: Howdy Selma
Selma: Good afternoon alt, daviss, khathu, seventies and vkn
Seventies: hi Selma
daviss: Hello Selma!
alt: wouldn't it seem that the the estate property would be finalized, if ever, in the State where it was 'probated"? Hello Selma
daviss: I would think so alt
Khathu: Hello Selma
Selma: (daviss..wow deputy clierk)
daviss: lol Selma
vkn: Deputy Daviss lol
alt: and if part of that estate was "chattel slaves" they would become the property of the heirs wherever (State) they would be located. heirs & slaves.
Khathu: @daviss The paper trail ends in VA 1853 i.e. that the last document I am able to locate pertaining to the probate processing preceeding.
Seventies: Maybe that document holds clues.
daviss: ok that was what I was wondering khathu
Khathu: @alt I understand that but I am trying to figure out who got what
Selma: Was anyone contesting the distribution of the property Khathu
alt: I'm just thinking out loud by typing my thoughts
vkn: Reverse directories Khathu [Grantor Grantee] books
Khathu: there was no contesting of the property of Jameson's property However there was a chancery case involving the property of the mother's Mary Moody's enslaved property she inherited from her father
Selma: It is so much better when they fight (not for our folks) but just in terms of a paper trail
Khathu: Her father stated that after her death the enslaved property was to be divided amongst her children/heirs
alt: and I would think there would be special considerations if the estate (property) included "landed property" vs "moveable property" ie.. slaves.
Khathu: The Chesterfield County Historical Society wasn't sure about this situation either I'll just examine the probate records in Freestone County, Texas Thanks everyone for your input and suggestions
alt: you're welcome for "everything" Khathu LOL LOL LOL including my confusing thoughts LOL LOL
Selma: Are the probate records on microfilm Khathu
Khathu: Yes for both Chesterfield County, VA and Freestone County, TX I have already been to the courthouse in Chesterfield County as well as LVA
vkn: Yes Selma when Alonzo Slater died [intestate] children objected to 2nd wife seeking a years support. Heirs had to apply for letters to administer estate of intestate siblings and first wife in order for case to move forward which it did to the satisfaction of protesting heirs.
Selma: Glad it worked out vkn
Khathu: Here is another probate questions
Selma: Cause it can get very, very messy as we all know
alt: In the case I cited Khathu, the widow & the oldest son were the 'chief' benefactors of the husband/father's estate (no will) and the son "paid" his siblings for what would have been their share of their father's estate... of course this was all 'landed property' ,,,, no slaves or removable property was involved.
Khathu: In his will dated 1857, Benjamin Darsey mentioned 29 enslaved individuals but in the inventory only 9 were appraised. The 9 were to be sold per the will. by the way, the inventory was recorded in 1863
Selma: The other 20 distributed to heirs?
alt: could the other 20 slaves been 'divided' up between his heirs and not need to be appraised because they weren't going up for sale?
Khathu: That is the assumption I made Selma and alt So wouldn't there still need to be some documentation of this distribution?
Seventies: Wouldn't that be in the will, who got the remaining 20 enslaved people if they weren't 'given' to the heirs before the execution of the will and the death of Mr. Darcy?
alt: another case from my experience Khathu .. notice slaves to be sold and those going to heirs http://tinyurl.com/l3abf2q
vkn: Y'all be good. Got appointment to keep.
daviss: In the will and Inv I have for 1853 for my Whites the divided slaves were not appraised Khathu
Khathu: Well the will was written 1857 but Benjamin did not die until Fall of 1862 and the inventory was taken in 1863.
Seventies: Be good vkn
Khathu: Okay, so my assumption is probably correct
alt: my case was dated 1838 Khathu
Seventies: What state was this in? Texas?
Khathu: Smith County, Texas
Selma: Is this in Chesterfield County too Khathu
alt: mine was in KY Seventies
Selma: Ok..never mind Could the Civil War having something to do with it khathu..
Seventies: I was thinking the same Selma
Khathu: Maybe but I doubt the CW would have affected the inventory. His son John R. Darsey who inherited my gggg grandmother and her three sons conducted the inventory
Selma: So to the bitter end they were adding up the inventory
Khathu: but they only added up the slaves that were not yet distributed or sold John R. Darsey was "married" to the enslaved woman Ann in which he fathered 3 children
Selma: Ok another wrinkle
Seventies: see the quotes daviss... lol
Khathu: married in ("). He was never married and only had children with Ann
alt: oh, oh another set of problems... slaves could not 'legally' inherit property, even their enslaved children , right?
Selma: But he did leave them property after the War didn't he Khathu
Khathu: John died in 1887 and left his property to his "beloved son although colored are flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone and my sole heir" this was taken from the actual will
alt: okay, what is the relationship between what was happening in 1863 an 1887? are these 2 different situations
Seventies: okay y'all I gotta go. Have got to go... have a good day.
Khathu: Well it appears that John acquired Ann and their three sons (Henry, Richard and Texas) shortly after his father drafted his will in 1857. Benjamin Darsey died in 1863 and his son John R. Darsey died in 1887. I mentioned John because he was the executor of Benjamin's estate and conducted the inventory and appraisement despite the fact that he was entitled to some of the real and personal property
alt: and the wife (?) and her sons were the property of Benjamin, but she was the wife of John and the children were his?
Khathu: Yes They were definitely in John's possession by 1860
alt: so the son inherited his wife and children from the father's will of 1863
Khathu: the will was dated 1857 the inventory was conducted in 1863 but he had already had possession by 1860
alt: okay 1857-1863 they were the property of the father?
Khathu: legally yes
daviss: so he actually took possession in 63 after the Inv
Khathu: But they were not included in the inventory conducted in 1863
Khathu: that's why i am saying he took possession prior to his father's death.
daviss: was there an amendment
Selma: How old were the children when Benjamin died?
Khathu: All of Benjamin's heirs who resided in Texas took possession of their enslaved property as specified in the will before his death. There was 29 slaves listed in the will but only 9 listed in the inventory of the estate
alt: okay, so he had "granted' possession of the Wife & children to the son during slavery and they were include in his (Benjamin's) property inventory.
daviss: ok so in the will John was given Ann and children
alt: were=were not
Khathu: At the time only one son was born when the will was written
Selma: Ok so this was an ongoing "relationship" in which everyone was aware
Khathu: @alt - they were not includeed in the inventory.
alt: right, were not
daviss: question khathu..was Ann and the children given to John in the will
Khathu: @Selma - so much so that John is enumerated with his sons in the 1880 but he was listed as a boarder
alt: because they had been 'gifted' to the son and were not a part of his (Benjamin's) inventory
Khathu: At the time the will was written he was given Ann and her only son Henry who was born in 1855.
alt: right Khathu
daviss: and increase
Khathu: Richard and Texas were born after the will was written in 1858 It did not say increase in the will
daviss: was future increase stipulated
alt: so they would have been part of the "gift" as "increase"
Khathu: Sixth I give and bequeath to my beloved son J R Dorsey one Negro boy by the name of Cops about twenty years old of dark complexion and one Negro girl by the name of Ann about sixteen years old of dark complexion and her children Henry a boy about two years old That is the exact language from Benjamin's will (1857)
daviss: her children not child
Khathu: she only had one child
alt: right.. and now ..... after slavery and in his will John recognizes his children and their mother, Ann.
daviss: understood but wondering why the term children meaning more than one
Khathu: we can imply he meant her increases or she could have been pregnant at the time
Selma: Maybe she was pregnant
Khathu: with Richard and Texas
daviss: exactly Selma
Khathu: Ann is deceased by 1870 Thanks for all the questions. It is making walk through my analysis of the situation.
Selma: I thought that was what you were doing.. LOL
alt: okay, as I see it, any children born to Ann after the will was written 1857 (?) had to be the property of someone and he was including them with the term "increase' whenever they would be born
Khathu: the will doesn't include the term increase
daviss: there was no usage of increase
Khathu: with none of the women of child bearing age
alt: oh, okay .....would that be an "implied" condition with the age of Ann?
Khathu: one could assume that It could have just been a given
alt: the children of the enslved woman would have to belong to someone the=any
daviss: I would think because son was co habitting with her that the term increase would have been included
Khathu: I don't think there was a need to spell it out. The will does not include the term increase at all
daviss: yes but it would have been considering the time khathu 1853
Khathu: A lot of will I see do not include the term increase
alt: not the term, but the condition of the woman (enslaved)
Khathu: I think it was a given if someone owned a female they also would own all of the children she had moving forward
alt: the "owner" of the children, would be the "owner" of the enslaved woman, right .. and in this case it would be John by the stipulation of "gift"/bequeath in the Will
Khathu: Here is another example: Third I give and bequeath to my beloved grandchildren John B. F. HH William HH James W. and Martha J M Dorsey children of my deceased son Rufus M Dorsey my Negro girl by the name of Lue about fourteen years old of dark complexion and six hundred and fifty Dollars which my said decd son Rufus M recd from me for the sale of my negro boy Tom in his lifetime and one hundred Dollars in cash to be paid out of my Estate to them by me Executors the above bequest to be equal divided between them share and share alike the word increase was not utilized in this will
alt: so he's 'touching' all of the bases with his children/grandchildren and the disposition of his (Benjamin) slaves
Khathu: absolutely...after writing this will two of his sons death. So in 1859 he added a codicil and re-distributed the property slated for those two sons to his surviving heirs i meant died
Selma: Always make me cringe or want to Holler when I read some of these wills..I have used some very bad words in the library
Khathu: I can image Selma
alt: naughty-naughty Selma LOL
daviss: I wonder what would have happened to the next child of Ann if she were pregnant and john would have died prior to birth would that child be inventoried
Khathu: they probably would have went back to Benjamin since the next birth were twins
alt: a codicl (?) perhaps ownership would revert back to Benjamin, or they would be 'disposed' to another of his children
Khathu: no they probably would have been listed in the codicil since they were born in 1858 and the codicil was written in 1859
daviss: exactly alt
Khathu: and Ann and the children would have been willed to another heir or heirs
alt: you don't need another example from me, but I have one where a child died and her "inheritance' went to to a grandchild (Codicil)
Khathu: Yes, this Darsey case is a good example of that
Selma: Folks have to run..Khathu..good brain exercise Have a great day
Khathu: thanks Selma
daviss: ok selma
Khathu: have a great day everyone
daviss: lol alt that was quick
alt: you got the lights & chairs .... my back hurts LOL
daviss: ok lol Go ASU
alt: when they go ,,, they go .... lickety-split!!!!
daviss: youngsters for ya
daviss: later partner
alt: Da browns & da bucks!!!!!