Anne Champion de Crespigny (1739 – 1797)

02 Sunday Feb 2020

Posted by Anne Young in 52 ancestors, CdeC 18th century, probate, will

My sixth great aunt Anne Champion de Crespigny (1739 – 1797) was the sixth of seven children of Philip Champion de Crespigny (1704-1765) and his wife Anne née Fonnereau (1704-1782). She was born on 10 October 1739 and was baptised on 30 October 1739 at the Church of St Benet Paul’s Wharf, London.

Anne’s father Philip had a successful career as a lawyer. At one point he held the position of Marshal of the Court of Admiralty, its senior sheriff. Philip’s father Thomas Champion Crespigny (1666 – 1712), a Huguenot refugee, served in the English army. He died at the age of forty-eight, when Philip was only seven years old. Philip was indentured at the age of fourteen to Charles Garrett, procurator of the ecclesiastical Arches Court of Canterbury. In 1731 Philip married Anne Fonnereau, the daughter of a wealthy Huguenot merchant.

Philip and Anne had seven children, two of whom died young:
Jane Champion Crespigny 1733–died young
Claude Champion de Crespigny 1734–1818 the 1st baronet Champion de Crespigny
Susan Champion Crespigny 1735–1766
Anne Champion Crespigny 1736–1738
Philip Champion Crespigny 1738–1803 my 5th great grandfather
Anne Champion Crespigny 1739–1797
Jane Champion Crespigny 1742–1829

About 1765, Anne de Crespigny’s portrait was drawn in pastel by Catherine Read (1723 – 1778).

CdeC Anne H0046-L155543688

Anne de Crespigny married twice. Her first marriage, in April 1765, only two months after her father’s death, was to Bonouvrier Glover (1739 – 1780). Her second marriage, in 1783, was to James Gladell, later James Gladell Vernon (1746 – 1819). Anne had no children by either marriage..

Anne left a will dated 7 January 1797 probated in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury on 5 July 1797. At the time this was drawn up her
residence was Hereford Street in the Parish of Saint George Hanover
Square in the Liberty of Westminster and County of Middlesex. Her will
refers to her marriage settlement, her husband James Gladell, her
brother-in-law, the husband of Susan, Sir Richard Sutton, and to George
Stainforth. I am not sure how George Stainforth is related or connected. She also mentioned and left money to:

her nephews Thomas Champion Crespigny (1763 – 1799) and Philip Champion Crespigny (1765 – 1851), sons of her brother Philip Champion de Crespigny (1738 – 1803) and his first wife Sarah
Her brother Claude Champion Crespigny, her sister in law Mary and her nephew William (1765 – 1829)
Her godson William Other Champion Crespigny, this would have been the son of William, grandson of Claude, born 1789 and died 1816
Her sister Jane Reveley, her brother in law Henry Reveley (1737 – 1798), her niece Henrietta Reveley (1777 – 1862), her nephews Hugh Reveley (1772 – 1851) and Algernon Reveley (1786 – 1870), and her niece Elizabeth Anne Roper (1773 – 1816)
Her niece Anne (1768 – 1844) the wife of Hugh Barlow and daughter of Philip Champion de Crespigny (1738 – 1803) and his first wife Sarah
Her four nieces Clara (Clarissa 1776 – 1836), Maria (1776 – 1858), Fanny (1779 – 1865) and Elizabeth Champion Crespigny (Eliza 1784 – 1831); daughters of Philip and his 3rd and 4th wives Clarissa and Dorothy
Right Honourable Alice Countess of Shipbrook, the widow of her husband’s uncle Francis Vernon (1716 – 1783)
Richard Glover (1750 – 1822), her brother-in-law from her first marriage

Following the probate records include a letter from Anne to her niece Henrietta, presumably kept because it describes how she wished to have some of her belongings dispersed. I have transcribed this below, keeping the original spelling.

March the 20th

My Dear Henrietta

As I am going to have an opporation performed that renders my recovery doubtful I write you these lines to say that my wardrobe and all that is in my drawers independant of my Trinket Box (which Mr Vernon is intitled to by right. As well as by my desire I leave to you conditionally that you will resave for your own use and benefit all that – is worth your acceptanttance desiring you will give everything else to my maid Mitrell (?) Who having lived but a few months with me is not intitled to great perquisites at the same time would give her what ever is not worth your acceptance an Ivory ffan which John Shore brought me from India & desire may be sent to my ffriend Lady Shelley as a small token of my Remembrance

Most affectionately A. G. Vernon

She died on 2 June 1797. This was recorded by The European Magazine, and
the London Review.

A natural conclusion

02 Tuesday Oct 2018

Posted by Anne Young in Chauncy, court case, probate, will

≈ 1 Comment

In a memoir of his sister Theresa Poole formerly Walker nee Chauncy (1807 – 1876), Philip Lamothe Snell Chauncy (1816 – 1880), who was my third great grandfather, wrote:

[Her grandfather] William Snell Chauncy was the proprietor of the Winkfield Estate in Berkshire, where he resided for many years ; he was also possessed of slave estates in Antigua and St. Kitts, in the West Indies, of house property in Sackville Street, Dublin, and of considerable funded property.

Her father was his only son, born in London, on the 14th August, 1781, and died at Leamington on 1st August, 1845.

In giving this information, however, Philip Chauncy neglects to mention that his and Therese’s father was illegitimate, the natural son of William Snell-Chauncy (1756-1829).

Here was the explanation for something that had puzzled me: why had published pedigrees of my Chauncey forebears failed to include Philip Chauncy’s father William (1781-1845)?

On 14 August 1781 William Brown, the son of Eunice Brown and William Snell-Chauncy, was born in London.

Eunice (1753 – 1836) was the daughter of Captain Robert Brown (1713 – 1769) and his wife Margaret Brown nee Cosnahan (1718 – 1769). The Brown family was from the Isle of Man. Eunice was the seventh of nine children. William Brown was brought up on the Isle of Man by his mother’s family, with financial support from his father.

On 6 June 1783 William Snell-Chauncy married Sarah Toulmin (1757 – 1834). William and Sarah had two daughters, Sarah (1786 – 1841) and Catharine (1788 – 1858). William Snell-Chauncy and his wife Sarah separated in 1789. The Deed of Separation, issued in 1789, stipulated that William should not have the management of his two daughters.

Philip Chauncy’s father, William, married Rose Therese Lamothe on 5 May 1804 at Malew on the Isle of Man. Marriage records give his name as William Snell Chauncy; it appears William had adopted his father’s name. William’s children were all known by the surname Chauncy.

Philip wrote that his sister Theresa was “sent on a visit to my grandfather at Wingfield, where she rendered us good service by watching and partially defeating the intrigues of another branch of the family who were using every exertion to obtain an undue share of property from my grandfather in his old age. I think Theresa must have been at Wingfield for several years”. This would have been in the late 1820s.

William Snell-Chauncy died in 1829. In his will he named his son as William Brown, later referring to his “natural son William Brown”. The children of William Brown were also provided for, as was Eunice Brown, William’s mother. Only after providing for the Browns does William’s will turn to his daughters Sarah and Catharine. He made no provision for his wife Sarah, stating he had provided for her in his lifetime.

In 1831 William Snell-Chauncy’s daughter Mrs Catherine Snell Burke challenged the legal validity of the will and its codicil on the grounds of insanity of the testator. One of the executors was a man called Robert Westwood; the case was named ‘Westwood against Burke and Others’. The challenge was put forward in June 1831 and the case came to court in November and December 1831. The bulk of William Snell-Chauncy’s estate of £25,000 had been left to his natural son.

Martha and Theresa Brown [sic], Philip Chauncy’s sisters, were noted as having lived with the deceased, their grandfather. The court heard evidence alleging that William Snell-Chauncy’s behaviour had been childish, that he was a habitual drunkard, and that he had conducted himself in an insane and irrational manner. It was also alleged that the signature on the will was not in his hand-writing. The counter allegations were that the deceased, though eccentric, was not of unsound mind; he had conducted his own affairs, had received and paid money, played at cards, spoke French; that he was charitable and benevolent; and that he entertained great regard for his natural son and his family.

On 19 December 1831 The Times reported the proceedings of the Prerogative Court for December 17. The King’s Advocate on behalf of the executors observed that the party opposing the will was really Captain Burke on behalf of his wife and her unmarried sister and that Captain Burke’s difficulty with the will was not that the testator was incapable of making a will but only a will more in favour of the legitimate children. The King’s Advocate noted that previous wills made by William Snell-Chauncy in 1799, 1816 and 1820 had all provided for his natural son. Given that the 1789 deed of separation from his wife had stipulated he should not have the management of his two daughters, it followed that there was less intimacy with his legitimate family. But he had had constant interaction with his natural son and his family.

Dr Lushington on behalf of Captain Burke stated that in the course of evidence there were “charges brought against the Misses Brown [Theresa and Martha Chauncy] [which] were not a substantial part of the case, but solely with the view of discrediting the testimony of a witness.”

Portrait of Sir John Nicholl (1759-1838), Welsh politician and judge. Artist William Owen Collections of St John’s College, University of Oxford Retrieved from https://artuk.org/discover/artworks/sir-john-nicholl-223355

The Times of 5 January 1832 reported the decision of Sir John Nicholl, judge of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. More than 50 witnesses had been examined and there were depositions from more than 100 witnesses. There was a larger body of evidence on the case than in any case of the records of the Court. Nicholl found that no act of insanity had been proved and that the whole conduct and history of the testator naturally led to the conclusion of the probability of the dispositions in the will. The judge

“referred particularly to the charges alleged against the Misses Brown, in an interrogatory address to a witness named Gould, and which he had positively denied. Where, he asked, was the necessity of attacking the character of these two young women? It was an act of justice to them that the Court should declare thus publicly, that the character of these young women had been attacked without any just cause, and that the single witness by whom the charge had been attempted to be supported, was unworthy of any sort of credit whatever.”

Mr and Mrs Burke were condemned to all costs as it was deemed unfair that the estate should bear any of the costs.

From the judge’s summing up it appears that Martha had most certainly earned the comment from her brother that “…she rendered us good service by watching and partially defeating the intrigues of another branch of the family who were using every exertion to obtain an undue share of property from my grandfather in his old age”.

Sources

Philip Lamothe Snell Chauncy (1816 – 1880) wrote a memoir of his sister Mrs Poole, Theresa Poole formerly Walker nee Chauncy (1807 – 1876). It was first published in 1873 as Memoir of the late Mrs G.H. Poole by her brother. It was republished in 1976 together with a memoir of Philip’s second wife as Memoirs of Mrs. Poole and Mrs. Chauncy.
Tucker, Stephen, 1835-1887. Pedigree of the Family of Chauncy. Special private reprint, with additions. London: Mitchell and Hughes, 1884. Viewed online at https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=wu.89062913470 [see printed page 10]
Will of William Snell Chauncy Esquire probated 26 March 1832 PCC Class: PROB 11; Piece: 1795
“Prerogative Court, Tuesday, Nov. 15.” Times [London, England] 16 Nov. 1831: 4. The Times Digital Archive. Web. 30 Sept. 2018.
“Prerogative Court, Saturday, Dec. 17.” Times [London, England] 19 Dec. 1831: 7. The Times Digital Archive. Web. 30 Sept. 2018.
“Prerogative Court, Wednesday, Jan. 4.” Times [London, England] 5 Jan. 1832: 4. The Times Digital Archive. Web. 30 Sept. 2018.

Burke’s family records can be wrong

14 Tuesday Aug 2018

Posted by Anne Young in Crew, genealogical records, Mainwaring, Pye, will

≈ 5 Comments

Double portait of Edward Mainwaring and Jemima Pye by Michael Dahl. The portrait hangs in the front hall of Whitmore Hall. Image from the book by Christine Mainwaring: From 1066 to Waltzing Matilda page 71

Many family historians rely on published pedigrees such as John Burke‘s 1833 Genealogical and Heraldic history of the commoners of Great Britain and Ireland. Unfortunately sometimes Burke got it wrong.

My Mainwaring forebears are included in Burke’s 1833 family records, a genealogy of the junior houses of British nobility, which records family origins, surnames, events, and locations of about 300 British families; some are accompanied by coats of arms. The records have been digitised and indexed by Ancestry.com. The incorrect relationships are included in at least 28 public family trees on ancestry.com, presumably based on Burke’s error.

The entry for my seventh great grandparents reads:

Edward Mainwaring, of Whitmore Hall, bapt. 25 Aug. 1681, m. 1st Jemima Pye, second dau. of Edmund Pye, of Farringdon, Berks (see Burke’s Landed Gentry), by Anne , his wife, dau. of Lord Crewe, of Stene, and by her, who was buried 22 August 1721, had issue, …

When I started to look at the text of the marriage settlement for Edward and Jemima I became a little confused. Burke’s has combined mother and daughter into one person: Jemima was the daughter of Anne Rider formerly Pye nee Wright (c 1660-1731) and granddaughter of Anne Wright nee Crew (1637-1707); Jemima was thus the great granddaughter of Lord Crewe of Stene, 1st Baron Crewe.

The settlement was dated 15 March 1708 and was between four groups of people:

Edward Mainwaring of Whitmore, only son and heir of Edward Mainwaring deceased by Bridgett his wife, of the first part;
The Right Honourable and Right Reverend Nathaniel Lord Crewe, Baron of Stene, and Bishop of Durham, Henry Pye of Faringdon Co. Berks Esquire and John Conyers of Walthamstowe Co. Essex Esquire, Executors of the will of Dame Anne Wright of Dagenham, of the second part,
Anne Rider late wife of Edmund Pye Esquire of Faringdon and Jemima Pye, the daughter of the said Anne Rider and Edmund Pye of the third part, and
the Honourable Edward Cartaret of the Middle Temple and Carew Hervey, alias Mildmay, of the fourth part.

Dame Anne Wright of Dagenham was the daughter of Lord Crewe of Stene. She was the sister of the Right Honourable and Right Reverend Nathaniel Lord Crewe, Baron of Stene, and Bishop of Durham. She died in 1707 and her will was proved on 24 March 1708. [The National Archives; Kew, England; Prerogative Court of Canterbury and Related Probate Jurisdictions: Will Registers; Class: PROB 11; Piece: 508]

Anne Crew, born about 1637, married Henry Wright on 23 March 1658. Wright was a physician, son of Laurence (Lawrence) Wright, also a physician, at one time physician to Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell. Laurence Wright died in 1658. Shortly afterwards, on 10 April 1658, Cromwell made Laurence’s son Henry a baronet. This honour was disallowed – it didn’t seem Wright – when the monarchy was restored in May 1660, but on 11 June 1660 Henry Wright was AGAIN created a baronet by King Charles II. Henry and Anne Wright had two children, Anne and Henry (1662-1681). Henry junior died unmarried and on his death the baronetcy became extinct.

Anne Wright, the daughter, married Edmund Pye on 4 March 1678/9 at St Giles in the Fields. Pye was a medical doctor, the son and heir of Sir Robert Pye of Faringdon, Berkshire. Edmund Pye was born in 1656 and died about 1703 of smallpox at Knotting, Oxfordshire. His wife Anne remarried, to William Rider or Ryder. She died in 1731. [Edmund Pye’s will probated 3 January 1704 PCC Will Registers; Class: PROB 11; Piece: 480. Anne Rider’s will probated 2 March 1731 PCC Will Registers; Class: PROB 11; Piece: 650]

Crewe Wright Pye tree

Edward Cartaret was Jemima Pye’s second cousin. He was youngest of four children. His mother died at the time of his birth. Edward’s father, Philip Cartaret, was killed in the Battle of Soleby when he was six months old, along with his maternal grandfather, Edward Montagu, Earl of Sandwich. Edward Cartaret, together with Carew Harvey, were provided for in the marriage settlement of Edward Mainwaring and Jemima Pye in the case of failure of male issue of the marriage.

The Burning of the ‘Royal James’ at the Battle of Solebay, 28 May 1672. Painting by Willem van de Velde the Younger. Edward Montagu and Philip Cartaret were on board the ‘Royal James’ which was attacked by fire ships. Image retrieved through Wikipedia.

While I understand the family connection of Edward Cartaret, I am not sure how Carew Harvey alias Mildmay is related. He was a neighbour of Anne Rider formerly Pye nee Wright in Essex and was appointed Sheriff of Essex in 1712. Perhaps her estate of Dagnams was encumbered in some way to him.

I have not been able to find out much about William Rider. When Anne Rider formerly Pye nee Wright made her will in 1722 she described herself as the wife of William Rider and left him an annuity of one hundred pounds per year during his lifetime. She bequeathed one thousand pounds to her grand daughter Jemima Mainwaring as promised her son in law Edward Mainwaring. There were other bequests but her residuary legatee was her much esteemed friend and relation Edward Carteret, that is her first cousin once removed.

William Rider / Ryder and his wife Anne were involved in several court cases.

1707 Pye v Ryder: (UK NA C 5/263/27)

Plaintiffs: Jemima Pye, Mary Pye, John Pye, Penelope Pye and Isabella Pye.

Defendants: William Ryder, Anne Ryder his wife, [unknown] Pye and others.

Subject: personal estate of the deceased Edmund Pye of St Margaret, Westminster, Middlesex, Bedfordshire.

1707 Argus v Ryder: (UK NA C 5/222/11)

Plaintiffs: Emery Argus and another.

Defendants: William Ryder, Anne Ryder his wife, [unknown] Pye and others.

Subject: property in Westminster and Grafton, Middlesex and Oxfordshire.

1714 Rider v Rider: (UK NA C 11/1248/20)

Plaintiffs: Anne Rider (wife of William Rider, esq of Knotting, Bedfordshire, and formerly widow and sole executrix of Edmund Pye, esq deceased late of Knotting, Robert Packer, esq) and Henry Pye, esq of Faringdon, Berkshire (eldest son and heir of said Edmund Pye and Anne Pye).

Defendants: William Rider, esq, Edward Carteret, Carew Hervey alias Carew Mildmay, Thomas Watford senior and Thomas Watford junior

1714 Rider v Watford: (UK NA C 11/745/15)

Plaintiffs: William Rider, esq of Knotting, Bedfordshire and Ann Rider his wife (late widow and executrix of Edmund Pye, esq deceased, late of Farrington, Berkshire).

Defendants: Edward Carteret, esq, Thomas Watford senior, Thomas Watford junior and Carew Harvey alias Carew Mildmay.

1716 Rider v Rider: (UK NA C 11/1248/23)

Plaintiffs: Ann Rider (wife of William Ryder, a defendant, by Robert Parker, esq) and Edmund Pye, esq.

Defendants: William Rider, esq and others.

William Rider was also involved in several other court cases.

Although John Burke’s genealogy made a small error in confusing the generations, overall it is a very useful source and a terrific starting point for tracing the family trees of the families he documented. The genealogies would have been painstakingly compiled and of course without the databases and digitised records we rely on today. As with anybody’s research, Burke’s genealogies need to be verified against available documents which for this period include marriage settlements and wills. Perhaps also court cases.

Sources:

John Burke (1833). A genealogical and heraldic history of the commoners of Great Britain and Ireland. p. 352.
The marriage settlement is transcribed at pages 151-154 of The Mainwarings of Whitmore and Biddulph in the County of Stafford. An account of the family, and its connections by marriage and descent; with special reference to the Manor of Whitmore. J.G. Cavenagh-Mainwaring, about 1935. Gordon Mainwaring had deciphered the relationships and noted the dis repancy in Burke’s pedigree.
Mark Noble (1787). Memoirs of the Protectoral-house of Cromwell: Deduced from an Early Period, and Continued Down to the Present Time. Printed Pearson and Rollason, sold by R. Baldwin [etc.] London. pp. 106–107.

Will of Thomas Champion de Crespigny made 1704 probated 1712

15 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Anne Young in 52 ancestors, Champion de Crespigny, probate, will

≈ 2 Comments

Will of Thomas Champion de Crespigny 1704

Probate of estate of Thomas Champion de Crespigny

Forename Thomas Surname Champion Alternate Surname Champion Alias Champion De Crespigny Date of Probate July 1712 Date of Will 24th June 1704 Reference PROB11/527 Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC) Wills, 1384-1858 [database online]. TheGenealogist.co.uk

Translated out of French
In the Name of God Amen
I give all my goods present and to come to my dear wife
Magdalen Champion whom I make Executrix of this my~
Will done at London this twenty fourth of June 1704..Tho:
Champion Witnesses I: Taunay W: Waxham P: Broton

Thomas Champion de Crespigny was my 7th great grandfather.
Thomas was born about 1664 in France. His family were Huguenot. He came to England in about 1676 and joined the army. He married Magdalen Granger (1664-1730), a fellow Huguenot, on 12 February 1695 at St Mary Magdalen, Old Fish Street, London. They had six children of whom two died young.

Thomas died in1712 leaving Magdalen with four children

William aged 14 (1698-1721)
Jeanne or Jane aged 12 (1700-1776)
Philip aged 7 (1704-1765)
Claude aged 6 (1706-1782)

In a document dated 20 September 1712, Sir Charles Hotham certified that Thomas Champion de Crespigny had served as Captain in his regiment, and added that:

he left a poor widdow [sic] and four Children in a very distressed Condition, so that she stands in great need of Her Majesty’s [Queen Anne‘s] most Gracious Bounty, and of the Pension commonly allowed to the Officers widdows.

The family still holds a copy of this document and the original apparently was held by the War Office.

Magdalen received a pension of £26 a year, being the regular rate for the widow of a captain.

On 15 June 1713, nine months after Thomas’ death, the government granted Magdalen stock in the South Sea Company valued at £333.18.9; the amount was due for Thomas’ clothing and other expenses during the period to 24 June 1712.

References

Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC) Wills, 1384-1858 Forename Thomas Surname Champion Alternate Surname Champion Alias Champion De Crespigny Date of Probate July 1712 Date of Will 24th June 1704 Reference PROB11/527 retrieved from TheGenealogist.co.uk
Calendar of Treasury Books, Volume 29, 1714-1715, pages cxiii-cxlii: Declared Accounts: Army: Pensions to Officers’ Widows [Audit Office: Bundle 233, Roll 810 A.O. 1/233/810] 25 October 1714 to 24 December 1715, citing Crespigny and six others of Sir Charles Hotham’s Regiment.A later accounting, in Bundle 233, Roll 811, relating to 22 April 1723, identifies £26 per annum paid to Mary Crespigny, widow of a captain in Sir Charles Hotham’s Regiment; Mary is miswritten for Magdalen.
Calendar of Treasury Books, Volume XXVII Part 2, page 249. The authority for payment is issued by Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford and Lord Treasurer, to John Howe the Paymaster General of Guards and Garrisons.
Champions from Normandy: An essay on the early history of the Champion de Crespigny family 1350-1800 AD by Rafe de Crespigny pages 124-5

The will of Mary Feillet née Champion

09 Monday Oct 2017

Posted by Anne Young in Champion de Crespigny, probate, will

≈ 2 Comments

Marie Champion was the third child of Claude Champion de Crespigny (1620-1695) and his wife Marie de Vierville (1628-1708).

Marie was born in about 1655 in France and came with the rest of her family to England after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes.

On 13 May 1698 she married Jacques Feillet at the French Protestant Hungerford Chapel, Hungerford Market at Charing Cross on the Strand, London. Jacques or James died in about 1728, his will dated 1726 left everything to his wife Marie.

Mary Feillet made her will on 17 April 1736. She died not long after and the will was proved at London on 7 June 1736. She named her brother, sisters, nephews, and cousins in the will.

Mary Feillet will 1st page

Prerogative Court of Canterbury PROB 11/677 Mary Feillet Place of Abode St James, Middlesex Date of Probate 7th June 1736 Date of Will 17th April 1736

Translated out of ffrench

In the Name of God Amen
I the underwritten Mary ffeillet widow of the Parish of
Saint James in the County of Middlesex being by the Grace of
God of sound Body and mind have made my Will as followeth –
ffirst I recommend my Soul to God through the Meritts of Jesus
Christ my Saviour and dispose of my Worldly Goods in manner
following I give to my Brother Peter Champion Crespigny the
???? during his life of the Estate which shall remain to me
after my decease And after my death I give the property thereof
to my two nephews Philip and Claude Champion de Crespigny to
be divided between them Share and Share alike Excepting One
hundred pounds Sterling which I give by way of ??? to my
Nephew Philip The rest shall be equally divided between them with
the following Conditions when my said Nephews shall enter
into Possession of my Estate after the death of my Brother they

shall pay three months after the Legacys hereafter Specified I give to
my Sister Margaret Debordes the Sum of ffifty pounds Sterling Item I
give to my sister Jane Lamberti the life Sum of ffifty pounds Sterling
Item I give to my Niece Allix the life Sum of ffifty pounds sterling
Item I give the sum of twenty ffive pound sterling to ffrances Goslin
Item I give the sum of twenty ffive pounds Sterling to my Cousins de
Pierrepont to be equally divided among them Item I give ffive pounds
Sterling to Thomas Goyer and a life sum of ffive pounds Sterling
to Mary Goyer his Daughter Item I also give a life sum of ffive
pounds sterling to the Daughter of Thomas Gofroy Item I give ten
pounds Sterling to Mrs Pierre Item I give ffive pounds Sterling
to the Poor of the Church of La Patente Item I give my late first
husband ??? Goslin’s Picture set with Diamonds to my Nephew
Philip upon Condition that it shall be preserved in his family so
without taking the Diamonds of And if he dyes without Children
I desire it may go to his Brother Claude upon the same Condition
Item I give to my said Nephew Philip my Diamond ring and
my Pearl Necklace To my Niece Susanna de Crespigny his
Daughter and I Declare and Constitute my said Nephews Executors
of this my Will revealing all those with I may have heretofore made
and my ???? is that the payment of the Legacys here above
shall be putt off till after the death of my said Brother Done in
London this 17 April 1736. Approved of the Obliteration of the
Two words ???? – Mary Feillet – Signed sealed and ???
in the presence of the Witnesses ??? – Emmanuel la Tour
Saml Granopre

faithfully translated out of ffrench London the
first day of June 1736. Which I attest Pet. St Eloy
Notary Publ.

This Will was proved a London before the Worshipful
John Andrew Doctor of Laws Surrogate of the Right
Worshipfull John ??? Doctor of Laws Master Keeper
Commissary of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury lawfully ???
constituted the Seventh day of June in the year of our Lord one
thousand Seven hundred and thirty six by the Oaths of Philip
Champion de Crespigny and Claude Champion de Crespigny the
Executors in the said Will named to whom Administration was
granted of all and singular the Goods Chattells and Credits of the
said deceased being first Sworn duly to Administer.

Anne's Family History

~ An online research journal

Category Archives: will