Will: William Davis

WILLIAM DAVIS Will

Prince William County Will Book H, pg. 250

7 Jan 1797; proved 5 Feb 1798

In the name of God amen I WILLIAM DAVIS of Prince William County & state of Virginia late of Charles in Maryland (having my proper reason and memory) do constitute this my last will and testament, disallowing all other wills & testaments by me heretofore made & First.

I recommend my soul to God who have it, and my body to be decently buried at the discretion of my Executors hereafter named.

I give unto my son JOSEPH five shillings and no more of my estate he having had a full share.

Item I give unto my son ISAAC five shillings and no more of my estate he having had a full share.

Item I give unto my grand son ROGER one heifer two years old.

Item I give unto my grand daughter ELIZABETH one heifer two years old.

Item my will and desire is that my son WILLIAM be sent to school three years at the expense of my estate.

Item my will is that the rest of my estate should be kept together until my son WILLIAM arrives to the age of twenty one years and then to be equally divided among my five youngest children namely ELIZABETH, ALLIN, SARAH, NANCY, and WILLIAM, and I do appoint my friend DAVID WILSON SCOTT & my son ALLIN my Executors of this my last will and testament.  Signed sealed and pronounced this 7^th day of January Anno Domini one thousand and ninety seven.

WILLIAM [his mark] DAVIS   {seal}

JN. KINCHELOE

JOHN FARGUSON

JN. KINCHELOE JR.

JANE FERGUSON

At a court held for Prince William County the 5^th Day of February 1798

The last will and testament of WILLIAM DAVIS deceased was presented to the court and being proved by the oaths of JOHN KINCHELOE, JOHN FERGUSON and JAMES FERGUSON ordered to be recorded. 

N.B. ALLEN DAVIS qualified as an Excr. The 6^th Day of February 1798.

Teste

JOHN WILLIAMS

Cl Cur

BACK FROM VACATION

I’m back after a week away, but how I wish it could have been 2 weeks. That said, I can’t help remembering a quip from Woody Allen: “A holiday in Bermuda is over in 2 weeks. A divorce is something you always have.”

Alexandria Gazette

When looking for newspaper articles about your ancestors, don't forget to check publications in neighboring cities.  The Alexandria Gazette, for instance, often published news and society snippits from Prince William county.  Searchable copies of the Alexandria Gazette from 1834-1974 can be found online at Chronicling America.

For example:

Alexandria Gazette - January 6, 1900 - PARALYZED.  Mrs. Thomas N. Conrad, wife of Professor Conrad, was paralyzed yesterday at her home at Neabsco Mills, Prince William County.  She was formally Miss Emma Ball, of King George county, and has a large circle of friends and relatives throughout the State.  The attack was severe, and the lady’s life is despaired of.

Alexandria Gazette – April 16, 1900 - FIRE IN PRINCE WILLIAM – The dwelling of Col. Thomas H. Leachman, of Folly Hall, Prince William county, was destroyed by fire early yesterday morning and very little of the contents of the dwelling were saved.  The houlse was an old Virginia mansion, well known in that section.  Miss Leachman, the daughter of Col. Leachman, is in Alexandria, a guest of Mrs. James E. Alexander, having come from home to attend the conference in Washington.  Col. Leachman is the father of the sheriff of Prince William county.  Mr. S. H. Lunt, of this city, has tendered Col. Leachman’s family a dwelling on his farm near Wellington, in Prince William county.

Yesterday's achievement: Family Ct grants de facto adoption to lesbian couple: http://ht.ly/43JfW

Bigamist gets nullity

In these days of relatively easy divorce, it is hard to think of anyone committing bigamy. However, a  bigamist recently obtained a nullity order from the Family Court. In the case, Mathus and Pews, the husband remarried in 1986, 3 years after meeting wife number two. The marriage certificate said that he was divorced. That was untrue. The husband married  wife number one in 1975, separated from her in 1979 but only finally divorced her in 1995, 9 years after remarrying.

Justice Dawe, granting the nullity, found that the second marriage was void.

Family Court: 9 month baby allowed to travel to China

A mother was allowed to take her 9 month old baby to China by the Family Court recently, despite opposition by the father, who feared that the baby would not be returned.

The mother told the court that the baby was travelling to China to be with the maternal grandparents during Chinese New Year.

The Family Court in Gin and Hing followed earlier principles in  Line and Line (1997) about whether to allow children to travel overseas:

(a) The existence or otherwise of continuing ties between the departing parent and Australia (such as the ownership of real estate, the existence of business interests, or the residence of close family or friends here);

The court found that the mother was an Australian citizen,  her travel papers did not recognise her as a citizen of China, that she had lived in Australia for the last 7 years,  that there was yet to be a property settlement and the mother had offered to put up her share of a $800,000 and $1 million as a bond to ensure her and the baby's return. This was the key factor for the child to be returned.

(b) The existence and strength of possible motives not to return (including the level of conflict between the parents, particularly over child related issues);

The father said that the mother's parents had come to Australia as business migrants, but had sold their home here and moved back to China, that they were very wealthy and intended for the child not to return. There was no evidence that they would try and prevent the child from returning. 

(c) The existence and strength of possible motives to remain in the other nominated country (such as the ownership of real estate, the existence of business interests, or the residence of close family and/or personal friends there);

Justice Cronin found that the risk of non-return was low.

(d) Whether the country of travel is a signatory to the Hague convention.

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is the prime means to retrieve children from overseas. It is usually a lot easier to get a child back from a country that has signed up to the Hague convention than one that has not. China has not signed the Hague convention.

Over $350,000 for lawyers, but on the verge of bankruptcy?

In a recent Family Court case, the husband said that he had no money to pay towards the wife's legal fees, that a "bankruptcy position looms", and did not control several companies, but for some reason those companies had paid over $350,000 to his lawyers towards his legal fees.

The wife, in the case of Iphostrou and Iphostrou, owed almost $200,000 to her lawyers, and asked for $500,000 from the husband for her future costs, to help with her anticipated total legal bill of almost $900,000. The wife did not end up getting her $500,000 but got the next best thing: guaranteed payments and restrictions on the husband's spending on his own costs.

Justice Cronin, in considering the wife's position, noted:

One significant dispute between the parties related to whether the various corporate entities owed the husband money. The wife pointed to a document obtained from the computers of the entities showing that he was owed millions of dollars. The same document but formally completed and lodged for corporation purposes, not only showed that he did not have such an asset but that he owed the corporate entities money. No explanation was given as to why that might be so and no doubt it will be the subject of intense scrutiny and ultimate cross-examination.

Ultimately his Honour said that there needed to be a "level playing field" and ordered that every time money was paid to the husband's solicitors , the same amount had to be paid to the wife's solicitors, in a dramatic version of what is known as a dollar for dollar order.