MDSTMARY-L Archives
Archiver > MDSTMARY > 2004-04 > 1081565494
From:
Subject: Re: [MDSTMARY-L] Luke Mattingly of John of Cezar and wife Eleanor or Elizabet...
Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2004 22:51:34 EDT
Judith, etal
In all of our research over the last 20 years in Maryland, the term Orphan
has been used to designate heirs who had not come of age - usually 21 for men
and 18 for women. The problem was probably with the abstractor for Skinner.
The abstract that Paul Mattingly posted only referred to Joseph and Luke as
orphans. However, James who was under guardianship of his brother John would
likely have been under age. There is no way that John would have been a minor,
with about everyone carrying a birthdate circa 1712-1715 which would make him
age 30 at the time of the estate administration. Many of you may have been
carrying James as a son of John and Grace, however, I believe this is the first
time I have really noticed his name. I still see no reason at all to carry Mark
as a son of John & Grace. What's your thought on Mark? and James?
Charley
writes:
> Charley, I did not add the word "Orphans" to the abstract. It was in the
> body of the abstract as written. Judith
>
> MARYLAND PROBATE RECORDS, PREROGATIVE COURT ABSTRACTS, 1744-1750, p. 25, FTM
> CD 206
> John Mattenly 21.366 A SM L225.19.8 L255.0.10 Jun 21 1745
> Sureties: John Mattenly, George Haden
> Received from: John Poore.
> Payments to: Ann Haden, Matthew Harbert, Mr. Philip Key, John Chesher,
> Edward Mattenly, James Thompson.
> Distribution to: accountant (1/3). Residue to (orphans): John Mattenly,
> Ignatius Mattenly, Richard Mattenly, Luke Mattenley, Joseph Mattenley,
> Elizabeth Mattenley, Susanna Mattenley.
> Administratrix: Grace Johnson, wife of Peter Johnson
This thread: