Fw: Complete Peerage Addition: Wills of Sir John Cornwall, L

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Leo van de Pas

Fw: Complete Peerage Addition: Wills of Sir John Cornwall, L

Legg inn av Leo van de Pas » 24 aug 2007 22:09:59

Something I find interesting. When he made his second will, did that not
void the first one? Was the second in contradiction with the first one?
Leo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Richardson" <royalancestry@msn.com>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval,soc.history.medieval,alt.history.british
To: <gen-medieval@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2007 5:35 AM
Subject: Complete Peerage Addition: Wills of Sir John Cornwall, Lord Fanhope


Dear Newsgroup ~

Complete Peerage, 5 (1926): 253254 (sub Fanhope) includes a good
account of the life history of Sir John Cornwall, Lord Fanhope, who
died in 1443. According to Complete Peerage, Lord Fanhope left a will
dated 10 December 1443, directing burial in the Friars Preachers,
Ludgate.

According to the source cited below, however, Lord Fanhope actually
left two wills, one dated dated 1 April 1437 and the other dated 10
Dec. 1443, both of which were probated. Under the terms of the first
will, a life rent of 40 marks payable out of certain London properties
was devoted to prayers for his soul.

Source: Beaven, Reports of Cases in Chancery, 2 (1841): 588-604.

This same addition needs to be made to Complete Peerage, 5 (1926): 200
(sub Exeter).

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah


-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GEN-MEDIEVAL-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Gjest

Re: Fw: Complete Peerage Addition: Wills of Sir John Cornwal

Legg inn av Gjest » 24 aug 2007 22:36:32

On 24 Aug., 22:09, "Leo van de Pas" <leovd...@netspeed.com.au> wrote:
Something I find interesting. When he made his second will, did that not
void the first one? Was the second in contradiction with the first one?
Leo

Dear Leo

In respect of the rent-charge, it seems that the second will did not
expressly contradict the earlier bequest.

Although it is usual for later wills to nullify earlier wills, this is
normally done in explicit terms (eg "I hereby revoke and annul all
other wills heretofore by me made" etc). If the later will does not
annul the earlier, or contradict or impede a specific bequest under
the earlier will, then both may be valid.

In Lord Fanhope's case, his executors were concerned that there might
not be enough money to enable the payment of the rent-charge as
bequeathed under the earlier will, so they put forward some additional
funds to ensure its operation. It is possible that this arrangement
also ensured that nobody alleged contradictions between the wills.

As I understand it, in cases such as this, the second will acts in the
same way as a codicil to the earlier.

MA-R

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»