Big changes have come to — all content is now read-only, and member subscriptions and the Shop have been discontinued.
Learn more

Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: Surnames: Pegg Family Genealogy Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Benjamin and Catherine Pegg
Posted by: Linda Showalter (ID *****3838) Date: May 17, 2002 at 13:19:10
  of 622

Perhaps the following information will be of help to Pegg researchers. The source is CASES DECIDED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO AT THE SPECIAL SESSIONS IN COLUMBUS, DECEMBER 1831, 1832, by Charles Hammond, Volume V, Cincinnati, 1872, pages 66 - 73.

December Term, 1831.

Smith Allen and James Young v. Jacob Little.

Under the statue of Ohio, a married woman can make a will devising real estate held in her own right.

This cause came before this court, by adjournment from the county of Licking.

It was an action of trespass, quare clausum fregit, and was submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts. The facts were these: Benjamin Pegg and Catherine Hull were lawfully joined in marriage, in the year 1780, and lived together in Pennsylvania, until they had eight children. In the year 1800, they separated by articles of agreement, and continued to live separate and apart until the death of the said Catherine. Soon after the separation, the said Catherine removed to the State of Ohio, and purchased the lot upon which the trespass is alleged to have been committed. In the year 1814 she made her will, devising the same lot to one Mary Ann Pegg, and soon after died. The will of Catherine Pegg was made without the assent of her husband, and he is still living.

In the year 1830, Mary Ann Pegg devised the same land to a stranger, under whom the plaintiff claims, and died. The agreement concludes as follows: "And it is agreed, that if the said Catherine, while a feme covert, as aforesaid, could make a valid will of said lot, then the plaintiffs are entitled to recover; if she could not, then judgment to be enetered for the defendant." The only question made was, whether under the laws of Ohio, in force in 1814, a feme covert could make a valid will or devise of land, and the decision of that question was adjourned here. . . .

We go upon the ground that, by the statues of February 10, 1810, a married woman had an unquestionable right to make a will. . . .

Notify Administrator about this message?

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network