Will terminology help please

[maudarby]

Hi
I have just finished transcribing my G G aunt Susan's will (died 1868). I have had this will for many years; I bought it to find out if she was my G G grandmother's sister, which she was. I have never read it properly until now and I am puzzled because Susan appears to have spent her working life as a servant/cook for a lead merchant. Apart from having stocks to the value of £220 and £130 in Moorfields Bank I think she may also have owned property.
Could anybody tell me if this phrase from the will confirms this.

"Estate & Effects whatever & wherever both real & personally, whether in possesion or reversion, remainder or expectancy"

Also " sign my cross to this my last will....." Does this mean that she couldn't read or write?

Any help much appreciated
Moggie

[Olde Crone Holden]

I would have thought, if she owned property, that it would be mentioned specifically in the will. I think the wording is standard because people might not own property the day they make their will, but could buy or inherit some the next day and then die the day after! Lawyerly caution.

Making her mark may not have meant she couldn't write, she may have been in extremis! How long between the date of the will and her death?

I have a death bed will, where the dying man tried to sign his name but was too weak to do anything but a scrawl. Alongside the scrawl it says "the mark of".

OC

[Glen in Tinsel Knickers]

Wills could be written well before a death an in most cases the full contents of the estate would not be known at the time the will was written.

The phrase "whether in possesion or reversion, remainder or expectancy" allows a will to be made without prior knowledge of the of the contents/value of the estate and allows for anything acquired ofter the will is written to be incorporated into the estate and subsequent bequests.

I would tend to agree that the marking of an "x" suggests she either was illiterate or at the very lest unable to sign at the time the document was created.

[maudarby]

Hi OC and Glen
Thanks for the info. I don't have her death certificate but the will was dated 9th November 1868 and proved on 22nd December 1868 so she possibly died soon after the will was written. It seems a lot of money for someone of her status to have acquired. I had the idea that perhaps her employer had died and left her a small bequest. I have just downloaded his will from TNA and had a quick trawl through it but can't see any mention of her name. This may be a coincidence but her employer's will was proved on 19th March 1855 and Susan acquired annuities/stocks for a 30 year term from 5th April 1855.

Another question relating to the will. Susan left everything to her sister Lydia with the request that after Lydia's death everything was to be divided equally between Lydia's two sons. One of the sons was my G grandfather who predeceased Lydia so would everything have gone to the second son or would my G grandfather's children have had a share in the estate?
Moggie

[claretaylor22]

That sounds to me just like the "catch all" that would be used today. (wills and probate are my daily trade!)

As for the "x" the obvious would be she couldn't write her name but it is also possible she had had a stroke or similar and could no longer write.

Do you have a copy of the Grant of Probate? That will tell you the value of the estate which you can then convert to modern values which I think is fascinating!

Clare

[claretaylor22]

That depends on the exact wording, if you want to post the exact phrase I'll put it in plain english for you.

Clare

[maudarby]

Hi Clare
I don't have a Grant of Probate, all it says at the bottom of the will is Proved at London etc etc by the oath of the executrix. I have just refered back to the entry in the probate index and it says Effects under £600 and I have also just noticed that she died on 1st December 1868. I was trying to find out how much the £220 in stocks & £130 in money would be worth today but the site that I found came up with 2 vastly different amounts, one to do with the retail index and I think the other was related to wages.
Many thanks for your help
Moggie

[claretaylor22]

In 2007, £130 0s 0d from 1868 was worth:
£8,366.88 using the retail price index
£12,044.22 using the GDP deflator
£74,595.42 using the average earnings
£90,311.67 using the per capita GDP
£179,431.54 using the share of GDP

Measuring Worth - Relative Value of UK Pounds is the site I've used if you look if gives you an idea of which is the most helpful comparison for your purpose.

As for if it would have gone to your G grandfather if it says and then to x and y in equal shares absolutely then I would say your G GF wouldn't have anything as his entitlement died with him if it says "and to his issue per stirpes" then his children would have inherited.

HTH

Clare

[Olde Crone Holden]

I always do it in the price of terraced houses in Manchester, lol!

In the 1860s, newly constructed worker's cottages in Manchester (two up two down terraces) could be bought for £60 a piece. So she was worth seven terraced two-ups two-downs.

I recently re-read the Will of my great great aunt who died in 1960. She left me £350 and died a surprisingly well-off woman, for someone who had never married, and who had been a cook for most of her working life. As it happened, she herself had been left £350 in 1880, in the will of her grandfather who was born in 1793.

None of these people were wealthy during their lifetimes, but they were hard workers and very very careful with their money.

It was also customary for a good domestic servant who had worked for the same family for many years, to be given an annuity or a sum of money on retirement, in lieu of a pension. A live-in servant would only have personal expenses to find and might be able to amass considerable savings over a lifetime of work.

OC

[claretaylor22]

I think where people got theer money from is such a mystery, when my gt grandmother died in 1941 she left 7 houses in B'ham in trust, there were a further 2 which she passed to family prior to her death. And we just keep on wondering how! The family were declared bankrupt in 1931 and we have no idea how she managed it!

[maudarby]

Hi Clare
Thank you very much for the facts and figures. I think that the interest from even the lowest amount would have kept Lydia in reasonable comfort during her declining years given that in 1828 her father was given an extra shilling on top of his weekly parish relief to buy her a bonnet. There is no mention in Susan's will about heirs, assigns or "issue per stirpes " so the second son may well have received the residue of Susan's estate which may account for the fact that in 1911 my grandfather was a lamplighter living with a wife and 6 children in 3 rooms in Hanover Buildings in Southwark. I have just sent off to the Probate office to see whether Lydia left a will although I presume from the wording of her sister's will she would have had no say in whether her first son's children received anything.
Moggie

[claretaylor22]

Lydia would have been entitled to the interest for her life and would not have been able to touch the capital. On her death the capital would have passed to the surviving guy. She would have had no way of giving any of it to you Gt Grandfather's family as it wasn't hers forever.

She may not have left a will if she didn't have anything other than her life interest. My gt gt aunt had a life interest in properties from my gt gt grandmother but no Grant of any kind was needed in her estate as she didn't have anything else.

Clare

[maudarby]

Hi
Just to correct an earlier mistake I made. I had another look at the 1911 image and my grandfather, grandmother and 6 children were living in 2 rooms and not 3.
I have been trying to trace the 2nd son but with a name like James Clark it's not easy, there are hundreds of possibles. If he also died before his mother Lydia what would have happened to the remaining stocks etc?
Thanks Moggie