RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => London & Middlesex Lookup Requests => London and Middlesex => England => London & Middlesex Completed Lookup Requests => Topic started by: yelkcub on Sunday 02 November 08 21:04 GMT (UK)
-
I wonder whether any list member has knowledge of the PAGE family who owned huge estates in Middlesex around Harrow and Uxendon? I believe there may also have been a Page property in or near Rickmansworth.
The death of Henry Page in 1829 was the start of a great deal of litigation and became known as the 'Page millions' case, with several claimants to the fortune, all of whom failed to overturn the probate on Henry Page's will.
The story was that Henry (who lived in St Marylebone in Upper Norton Street) was swindled out of his fortune by rascally lawyers (are there such people?).
I would be interested in any information about this family and their connections.
Best wishes
Ian
Moderator comment: Topic title amended
-
:-[ ... that should of course read '18th and 19th centuries.
-
In 1829 in the Times, there is the mention of 42, Upper Norton-street, Portland Place - lease and household effects to be sold by direction of the executors of the estate of Henry Page, Esq, deceased.
NY Times seems to have a mention of a lawsuit in 1912 relating to this case! It does not appear to have dragged on - rather, it seems the probate was quickly settled by Henry's lawyer, and the case was only brought up later on, as the London Times entries show.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F00E5DE153CE633A25756C2A9629C946396D6CF
Found the related entry in the London Times:
The Times, Tuesday, Feb 27, 1912; pg. 4; Issue 39832; col C
The case was Charlotte Ann Tappenden v. Francis Young. (started Mar 7 1911)
Charlotte was claiming that Henry's next of kin, Richard and John Page, were deceased, and wanted letters of administration, sentence against 'a certain pretended will and codicils', and revocation of probate granted before the burial of said Henry Page, deceased, of said pretended will and codicils.
There was a Mrs Agnes Theodosia Hill, niece of the two presumed deceased (may have been Charlotte's sister). It was claimed that the two presumed deceased returned from the Indian Mutiny, remained home for about a year, but then went to South America, it was believed as soldiers in Brazil. They had corresponded with their sister, Mrs Helen Downs, mother of the applicant, for about three years, before all communication ceased. About 1864, Helen having learnt of her possible claim to the Page estate, she attempted to make contact with them, but to no avail.
The Times, Thursday, Apr 25, 1912; pg. 3; Issue 39882; col C
- further details.
Henry Page was said to have died between Jun 25, 1829, and Jul 1, 1829, and died intestate and a widower without child or parent, brother or sister, uncle or aunt, niece or nephew, leaving him surviving Ellen Downs, nee Page (wife of John Downs), and Ann Page, his cousins-german, co-heiresses at law and next of kin. Ann Page died in May 1898, intestate, and Ellen in August, 1898, intestate, leaving her lawful daughters Charlotte Ann Tappenden (plaintiff) and Agnes Theodosia Hill as only surviving kin.
Furthermore, that the defendant (Francis Young), was the sole surviving executor of Henry Young, who died on Dec 1, 1869, and who was an executor of an alleged will dated Nov 16 1825, of the deceased, and who on July 1, 1829 (before the burial took place on July 6) obtained a grant of probate of the alleged will and two alleged codicils, said will being unduly influenced by Henry Young, who was Henry Page's solicitor and had no ties to him by blood or marriage.
The estimate of the Page estate's value in 1912 was of the order of 20 to 30 million, although the exact details of where it all was were not known. In 1803, the eldest brother Richard Page had died, and at that time it had been about 40,000 acres at £20 an acre, including all of Kilburn and Wembley and roughly extended from the Marble Arch to Hendon. :o (Henry was the youngest of five brothers).
It was claimed that Henry Young had sworn at the time of Henry Page's death that the property was not worth more than £5000, in order to obtain probate.
Another of the brothers is named as William Page, mentioned on a deed in 1818 but it was claimed he actually died in 1814. There were _two_ William Pages baptised in Harrow in the same year (1755), and the William Page who was brother of Henry apparently died in Marylebone in 1814, but his will was not produced until 1824, when another William Page died. Both Henry Young and a clergyman named Cunningham, who also was present at Henry Page's death and benefited from Henry Page's will, were involved with this 1824 burial.
The case was dismissed by the Judge, primarily due to the fact that Henry Page having died over 80 years ago, and Henry Young over 40 years ago, it was not possible to adequately prove that undue influence had been exerted.
The Times, Friday, Dec 06, 1912; pg. 2; Issue 40075; col F
- Charlotte Ann Tappenden was in bankruptcy court; mentions that she was widowed 22 years ago, and had 3 sisters. She worked as a cook and was supported by her children and friends.
-
Many thanks, Jorose, for your full and informative reply – this was certainly a very odd case, with all the ingredients of Victorian melodrama. Let me say first of all that I harbour no delusions about acquiring these Page millions. My enquiry is part of an attempt to trace the forebears of an ancestor of mine.
My ancestor was Henry Page (born circa 1785, died Hillingdon 1851). In 1850 four of his sons migrated to Australia. One of them was James Page who became a successful businessman in Adelaide and died in Mitcham, South Australia in 1913. The community historian of Mitcham was kind enough to send me a bundle of papers relating to James Page, one of which was a press cutting (undated) about one of James Page’s daughters, Laura (Mrs HP Wilson) who intended, according to the reporter, to travel to London to pursue a family tradition that this branch of the Page family were related to the Henry Page who died in 1829. In addition to the tradition, there was ‘a bundle of papers’ which James had brought with him to Australia suggesting that her grandfather Henry Page had a claim on the Page estate. To quote the newspaper article: ‘… the discovery among the papers in the possession of the Adelaide Pages of a letter to their grandfather from the family solicitor in which is the statement, ‘If your father [i.e. Henry Page’s father] had said only two words, it would have settled everything’
Now family traditions are notoriously unreliable, but I would like to find a family tree of the Middlesex Page family to see whether my ancestor was in fact related. At the moment it seems like my best chance to surmount the brick wall hiding Henry Page’s origins.
Best wishes
Ian
-
Strangely enough, there's a second case relating to the probate of a Henry Page. This one was married - or maybe not! - to a Jane Godden.
Case is mentioned in:
The Times, Tuesday, Dec 17, 1861; pg. 8; Issue 24118; col C
A Thomas Page was the original testator, and his brothers were Richard, Charles Robert, and Henry. The money left in Thomas' will was to be split among the brothers, and then among any children of the brothers once all three were deceased.
Henry had children with Jane Godden, who were baptised as the children of Henry Page and Jane his wife (apparently the eldest, a daughter, was b. 1810). However, there was no proof of marriage, although Henry and Jane had lived together for forty years as man and wife. Various relatives were mentioned - Mrs Smith, surviving sister of Jane Godden, also an Aunt Phillis and Aunt Martha who were probably also sisters of Jane (mentioned in a statement by her daughter). Henry Page had been alive and 'about to make his will' in 1851. (ETA: Brother Richard is also listed as having died childless, so presumably the case was between the children of Henry and the children of Charles Robert).
One of the lawyers is listed as representing 'the children of Henry Page (in England)', which might suggest some were overseas?
Further ETA: Were the two words, perhaps, "I do"? ;D
-
This second case you have found interests me greatly. In fact, my ancestor Henry Page appears in the 1841 census (living 20 Bury St Westminster) with his wife Jane. In 1851 he lived in London Street, Hillingdon End, a widower. He made his will the same year, 6 July 1851 and died 10 July 1851. On 13 Aug 1851 admon granted to his son Charles George Page.
By 1851 four of his sons were in Australia. Henry Page named each of his daughters in his will: all were married. He does not name his sons, referring simply to ‘such of my sons that shall be living at the time of my decease’. One of his sons, my ancestor Henry William Page, had died aged 29 in 1844. All Henry Page’s children were bequeathed equal shares in his estate.
What interests me in the case you have found:
- The fact that Henry Page was ‘about to make his will’ in 1851
His wife’s name – Jane – though I have never succeeded in finding details of their marriage.
The fact that the first child of Henry and Jane, a daughter (also called Jane) was b. 31 May 1810, christened 17 June 1810, St Mary’s, St Marylebone.
The fact that it is implied that some of Henry Page’s sons were not in England
I did a quick search in the 1851 census of Henry Page (b. 1770 plus or minus 20 years, assuming that since his first child was born 1810 he is unlikely to have been born later than 1790). Only three HPs are shown living in the London area who do not have a living wife. One is a shoemaker, born Essex and living in Shoreditch; another is a ‘private pensioner’ born Exeter, living Greenwich; the third is my ancestor. There is only one wifeless HP living away from the London area, a servant in Wiltshire. I think the Henry Page in the case you found is likely to be my great great great grandfather
Needs checking, but this is an exciting lead!
-
I think if you could find the will of Thomas Page, mentioning his three brothers, that might clinch it. There might also be original Chancery records in the National Archives which give more details about the lawsuit.
I've sent the newspaper articles for the 1861 case by email.
-
Perhaps the case was contested on the death of the other brother Charles Robert.
Deaths Sep 1860
Page Charles Robert W. Ham 4a 14
Regards
Valda
-
Many thanks for that Valda. I think I may have found Charles Robert in the 1841 and 1851 census. He is described (if it's the right man - there is no 'Robert' in the census record) as a merchant, born in Oporto, Portugal. He has a son, Henry, possibly named after his brother, my ancestor - Henry is a rice merchant in 1851. Henry's son James, who went to South Australia in 1850 was also a merchant who, in his early twenties, spent a couple of years in Hamburg learning to make his way in commerce. He was apparently a multilinguist, one of whose languages was Portuguese. Could be promising ... if it's the same man as the one whose death record you found
With thanks and best wishes
Ian
-
Charles Page aged 72 (with two names and the fact Charles Robert appeared last in the list of brothers, you might expect him to be the youngest one) born Oporto was living in Oxford Terrace Kensington on the 1851 census. This is his Prerogative Court of Canterbury will.
Will of Charles Page of Oxford Terrace London
Date 19 January 1855
Catalogue reference PROB 11/2205
so he could not be the man who died in West Ham in 1860.
Regards
Valda
-
Where did Henry say he was born in 1851, btw? I found a long-winded obituary in the Times 1841 for a Richard Page, b. Brighton in 1773, worked in Holland and spoke French and Dutch, returned to London in 1793 and worked in the corn trade and in various other business ventures. It mentions no family, so he may be the brother Richard Page - if the Brighton connection makes sense, that is.
-
Thanks for your reply, Jorose
In the 1851 census, just months before his death, Henry reported his birthplace as Charlwood Surrey, though his name does not appear in the baptismal register.
I get the feeling that this family moved around a lot - especially if we are right and the brothers were merchants of one kind or another. Can you give me the date of the Times story so that I can order a copy and follow up on your lead? The Richard Page you have found certainly seems a more likely candidate than any I have so far looked at in the census of 1841 and 1851.
A person I have been researching, James Page (b 1825) who was probably the son of Henry, though Henry might have been his uncle, was a multilinguist and had worked in commerce in Hamburg before migrating to Australia in 1850. In Australia he was for a time the French and Swiss consul (or vice consul) and had a business as a shipping agent.
Valda -
many thanks for your reply too. I found a notice of Charles Page's death in the 1855 Gentleman's Magazine 'of Oxford Terrace, formerly of Oporto'
-
Richard Page's obituary:
The Times Wednesday, Feb 24, 1841; pg. 6; Issue 17602; col B
In fact, almost the exact same piece can be found on Google Books in 'The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction'.
-
Thanks for that, Jenna - I found the item in Google books, and this RP still seems a likely candidate for my ancestor's brother
Best wishes
Ian
-
There are various trees for Charles Robert Page who died in 1860 on Ancestry. He was in baptised Wilmington Sussex (listed as Kent on the 1851 census) in 1784. He seems to have been a sawyer in Bexley Kent on the 1851 and 1841 censuses. Nothing showing on the trees he had any known brothers with the names listed (but then Wilmington parish registers are not on the IGI). He is the only possible Charles Robert Page death on the civil registration.
Wilmington and Charlwood are about 35 miles apart.
Regards
Valda
-
Hi Valda
... and sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you. I'm afraid work got in the way of my research. I'm sure you have been told this many, many times, but you are a marvel.
This is a really interesting record, a better bet than the Charles I have been looking at. I managed to find a list of this Charles's children. My central piece of evidence at the moment is the Chancery case. If I can only find out the names of the people (children of my ancestor's brothers) who were the petitioners in the case (unnamed in the Times) questioning the legitimacy of my ancestor's children, then perhaps I will be able to confirm this Charles as my ancestor's brother.
With thanks and best wishes
Ian
-
Hi Ian
what were the names of Charles' children? Are they the same as the children of Charles Robert born Wilmington?
Regards
Valda
-
Charles Robert appears in more than one tree and accounts of his children vary slightly. This is the one I'm working with:
Henry 1812
Charles Robert 1813 (d. Tasmania 1894)
James 1816 (20 Mar)
Jane 1816
William 1818 (d. 1894)
John 1821
George 1829
Arthur 1831
Only the last two appear in the parental home in the first two censuses
As far as I can tell at least three of his sons were early settlers in Australia - James being in Tasmania as early as 1845 according to the record of his second child's birth.
One detail in this tree bothers me: Thomas Page (father of Charles Robert) is said to have been born 1755 and married 1767. I suppose this must mean that he was christened some years after his birth, which must be before 1755 unless we are to contemplate his marrying at 12.
-
Hi Ian
sorry I was thinking when you said you had a list of Charles Robert's children, it was a definite list of the children of the man mentioned in The Times extract and not from the trees I gave the link for, so no proof that this is the same man as in The Times article, especially since none of the trees gives this man any brothers called Henry, Richard and Thomas, just two siblings James and Hannah.
Regards
Valda
-
Hello Valda -
No, unless I find another, more detailed reference to the 1861 Chancery case, it will be a case of waiting until I can get to a law library, hoping that some book in their collection has details of the Page suit. It would be good to find some promising matches for Thomas , too, though it's all too possible that hedied before the 1841 census was taken. Finding Richard is less urgent, as the Times report states that he had no children.
I like this Charles for more reasons than one. I admit that having a male sibling with a name other than Richard, Thomas, Henry may pose a difficulty ... but perhaps this James did not survive into adulthood. One reason I like the look of this Charles is that some of his sons were early migrants to Australia - which is also the case in Henry's family. One of Henry's daughters turns up in that part of Kent in the late 1840s when she and her children, deserted by her husband, were admitted 'in distress' to the Dartford Union, some distance from all her previous known addresses.
The search goes on ... and I really appreciate your interest and expertise.
Ian
-
http://listsearches.rootsweb.com/th/read/AUS-Tasmania/2002-10/1035373829
http://gravesoftas.dynup.net/graves%20of%20tasmania/Murderers/Free%20Settlers/thomas_page.htm
Regards
Valda
-
Good morning Valda -
How amazing that no fewer than five sons from the same family should have migrated to Tasmania together in 1841. Surely in those days the parents' expectation must have been that they would never see their children again.
I'm going to post the look-up request we discussed in the forum you suggested. Fingers crossed - it is a rather cheeky request
Ian
-
Ian
for the benfit of others searching for Chancery cases this is the advice I gave you about searching for Chancery cases when you asked me about searching in Law libraries.
Besides the growing index to Chancery cases on The National Archives website, the only other index I know for Chancery is Bernau's index which is an C18th index.
Law libraries from my experience are not interested in indexing every single case that occurs in English civil (or criminal law). There sole purpose is as a reference for judges and lawyers to search for precedents - since English law is based on laws passed by parliament and precedents set by previous interpretations of that law in actual court cases, and/or judges interpretation of what is fair (equity/equitable), it is therefore important that such cases are kept for them to refer back to.
Records of cases which took place in Crown courts are kept at The National Archives (one of the reasons they have over 50 miles of shelved records - Chancery cases taking up a substantial mileage of the shelving). Law libraries would have no interest in the vast majority of these cases and modern law libraries (as held in universities for instance) would have little or no interest in increasingly historic cases in a court that ceased to exist in 1873, when most laws of the period and judgements on what is equitable and have long since been superceded by more modern laws passed in parliament and modern C20th judgements by judges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_Chancery
http://www.medievalgenealogy.org.uk/guide/cha.shtml
Difficult to know where you should put such a request (on a general board like England - there isn't a board specifically for The National Archives - it isn't the sort of place to do look ups as researching records there can be quite time consuming) because really you need to employ a professional researcher who knows their way around Chancery to research for you at The National Archives or wait until TNA has indexed all its Chancery cases - a mamoth task considering the court records stretch back to the late C14th.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/RdLeaflet.asp?sLeafletID=165
Regards
Valda
-
Hello Valda,
Thanks for this posting, which offers valuable advice to those looking to use Chancery and other court records to further their family research. I take your point that the majority of Chancery suits and their judgments have little relevance to modern legal practice. However, with respect, they are still of great value to those seeking to research the history of English law. The person I spoke to at the Law Society library told me that all Chancery suits were written up, the reports collected in digests of court proceedings. Whether any of these digests can be found in university law libraries, as a resource for legal historians, remains to be seen. I am pursuing this because, at the moment, I can’t see another way of moving forward with my attempt to solve the puzzle of this family.
Regarding the Courts of Chancery, I came across this quotation in a website: “Persons who have had Chancery suits describe them as rather unpleasant, being as difficult to get out of as a pair of wet leather breeches.” (Punch, 1842)
Best wishes
Ian
-
I ought to add that in my previous posting I was not referring to official court papers, but to commercially produced accounts.
There are a number of English digests, but the most useful and comprehensive is The Digest (called The English and Empire Digest until 1981), which covers cases from the Yearbooks to the present. Cases are arranged in classified order under broad subject headings and then chronologically within each topic. Each case is assigned a number that can be used to trace the later treatment of that case (thereby allowing The Digest to be used as a citator). Each volume has its own index and there is a two-volume general index of subjects and of words and phrases. In some instances an older case may not be in the current digest. You may find it by checking one of the older editions.
The English and Empire Digest: Being a complete digest of every English case from early times to present day, Vols. 1-48 London, 1919-1930
-
Ian
Have you checked the Law Society online catalogue?
http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/productsandservices/libraryservices.law
The Law Society answer enquiries and for a fee will produce information from their books if (because it is a members only service) you are enquiring for historical materials.
'We may be able to assist those requiring access to rare books and historical materials in our collections that you have not been able to find elsewhere. '
Or the Bodleain, British Library or Guildhall Library are the sort of libraries you are likely to find copies of such historic books.
e.g.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/E83562F1-D24B-4F16-8E71-1128E1A58353/0/LawcollectionsatGuildhallLibraryKRBMay08.pdf
However the easiest method for a university library would appear to access the online database.
Halsbury Laws Direct: legal information online
e.g.
http://www.darlington.gov.uk/Education/Library/Reference+Library/On-line+Databases.htm
From my memory of casebook volumes like this at university. I did most of my work in the law library section with law students though I personally wasn't studying law, the case write ups were short and succinct with the bare outlines of the case, the legal arguments and the outcome. They were not the sort of accounts that named names or needed to for the purpose they were written for.
Regards
Valda
-
Thanks Valda - I will investigate! The Law Society sounds like a good bet.
Ian
-
Charles Robert appears in more than one tree and accounts of his children vary slightly. This is the one I'm working with:
Henry 1812
Charles Robert 1813 (d. Tasmania 1894)
James 1816 (20 Mar)
Jane 1816
William 1818 (d. 1894)
John 1821
George 1829
Arthur 1831
Only the last two appear in the parental home in the first two censuses
As far as I can tell at least three of his sons were early settlers in Australia - James being in Tasmania as early as 1845 according to the record of his second child's birth.
One detail in this tree bothers me: Thomas Page (father of Charles Robert) is said to have been born 1755 and married 1767. I suppose this must mean that he was christened some years after his birth, which must be before 1755 unless we are to contemplate his marrying at 12.
hi im doing research on pages in Australia the names of Charles Robert's children match the ancestors of mine that first came out here. but dates aren't quite the same our ancestors came out in 1825 on the ship the Andromeda the brothers.
Henry n wife Sarah
Charles n Rebbecca
James n Matilda
William
john.
and their children.
Contact me through
Moderator comment: e-mail address removed to prevent spamming and other abuse. Please use the personal message system to exchange e-mail addresses. Thank you
Leigh Page
-
Hi Leight
Welcome to Rootschat
It might be worth as a beginning reading through the guidance for posting
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,403279.0.html
We don't allow personal emails on Rootscat. We use something called pms - personal messaging instead. You can click on the name of any poster on their post and send them a personal message. You can't use this sytem until you have made three posts, so it might be worth making two further posts giving more information so you can get going and carry on the conversation after that as you both wish.
Regards
Valda
co-London and Middlesex moderator
-
Hi
My mother was a Page - and the page millions have always fascinated me. I only came across your
query as I have just had an article published on Blessed Francis Page - executed as a Catholic Priest in 1602 and am just finishing off another on his cousin Anthony Page another Catholic priest executed in 1593.
So I googled Page millions and up you came.
I do have a large family tree but probably it only follows our line down to modern times but I will try and trace you on it and let you know.
I always understood that the last attempts to get the estates out of Chancery crippled the family financially and that's why no one tried again.
best wishes
Fiona
-
Hi Fiona
Pleasant surprise to find a response to my Page research. It's been quite some time since I undertook any family research. I hit the proverbial brick wall with my 3 x great grandfather, Henry Page––never able to find details of his birth / christening. I know he died in Hillingdon, Middx in 1851 and was buried in Hayes Churchyard. I know the names of his brothers, corroborated by details in the 1861 Chancery proceedings, in which Henry Page's descendants lost the right to inherit from an uncle, Thomas Page. I have birth/baptismal details for Henry's siblings, so presume Henry's parents were Thomas Page and Susanna Middleton, married 1767 in the parish church of St Margaret of Antioch, Darenth, Kent.
I too was quite excited by the Page Millions story, but in the end I could not find any link whatsoever between my ancestors and the funds in question. A descendant of one of Henry Page's sons, James (who migrated to South Australia in 1850) made something of a splash in the Australian press by setting out to prove 'our' entitlement. She based her claim on a couple of family legends of probably spurious authority, and the claim came to nothing.
You have made me decide, when time permits, to dig out my old research files ... my memory is a little hazy on details. If anything about my Page family members accords with details of your family tree, I'd be keen to learn!
Best wishes - Happy New Year and happy researching! IAN
-
Hi Ian
Quick reply!
I am short on Henrys - only one who married a Mary Lott and died without issue in 1829.
When you get further back than your Henry I could try again.
The Pages do seem centred on Mddx - Harrow and Wembley and Sudbury
best
Fiona
-
Hi
I found out about this case a while ago in an ancestry page I am Bev Downs Ellen Downs was my great great grandmother was she actually telling the truth was she related to henry Im the descendant of John Downs the brother of Agnes Theodosia Downs
-
Hi, I know this is an old thread, but what a fascinating read! I only heard about this case recently while researching my family tree. My 3rd Gt Uncle, Alfred Charles Lott apparently made numerous attempts to secure the estates between the 1870s and around 1910 funded by bond holders to the sum of £30,000. He claimed that Henry Page's Will was invalid because he only had a life interest, and that the estates should have been passed to the Crown and held for the benefit of any representatives of the family who might be discovered. In this event the would be entitled to statutory payment as the informer. He died in 1921, leaving the grand sum of £33, so it's safe to say he wasn't successful in his quest!
-
Hi
I thought the problem was that the Page estates are in Chancery. My family beggared themselves fighting the case - maybe with Alfred Charles Lott - in the late 19th cent. There was an advert in the mid 1920s in the News of the World asking for descendants of the Page family. Maybe we could get one of the TV Heir Hunting programmes to take an interest
-
I don't know about Heir Hunters, but the story of the Page Millions is crying out to be made into a well researched documentary film––it remains one of the great mysteries. A member of my Page family travelled to England to make a claim back in the 1920s, based on a family legend. She got nowhere. I found no hard evidence to link 'my' Page family with the millions ... sadly!
-
Apologies, Lidiane, I've only skimmed through this thread so far, will have a proper read later. I can't condone or condemn his actions, but Alfred was certainly tenacious (although I have no idea where he found the time - he also fathered 20 children.)
I was quoting an article from a New Zealand paper, the Marlborough Express, from 11th December 1911 which was posted on Ancestry. The same article states that Alfred Lott also claimed he was Gt Nephew of Henry Page, so I have no idea of its validity, and my knowledge of the case is sketchy at present.
I agree, it would make great tv! Where did your ancestor travel from, YelkcuB? Looking forward to finding out more, it's such an intriguing story.
Linda
-
That's sad- but I think I will try to get someone interested for my sons. There is a good enough story
to make it quite exciting and there is the strong connection with Harrow School and the Page who was guardian of the young King Edward VII. Not to mention the Catholic Martyrs!
Heir Hunters are companies who watch the lists of people who die intestate and then put their team to work looking for lost heirs. Usually it is a race to get to them before another company arrives with the same results. There was a TV programme - on weekly- documenting some of the searches and the speed with which they ploughed through birth, marriage and death records was impressive. I suppose they get a fee
for their work!
Good luck with your own family research
I am just off to Yorkshire to clear the nettles from family graves in a country churchyard!
-
Mr Young did rather well for himself, didn't he!
" ...The estate and corn-rents seem to have been leased to Page's executors after his death. From 1830 to 1872 or later they were leased to Henry Young of Essex Street and subsequently to his widow on 21-year leases, renewable every seven years for a fine of £5,700, although in 1831 the college, considering the fallen price of land and corn, assessed the fine at £2,690. (fn. 73) Young sub-leased the land which, in 1831, was divided among seven tenants who paid £1,169 in rent. (fn. 74) In 1845 there were still 7 under-tenants, and the net annual value of land and corn-rents was £2,555. (fn. 75) By 1866 there were only 5 tenants, most of the land being held by Thomas Goodchild, and the net annual value was £1,479 for the land and £674 for the fixed rent-charge. (fn. 76) Corn-rents, supposedly determined by the price of corn from year to year, were reviewed only in 1832, 1846 (at £846), 1902, and 1916, (fn. 77) but most were redeemed between 1893 and 1911. (fn. 78) Small amounts of the land were conveyed to the railways or local authorities in the 1860s, in 1881, and 1893, (fn. 79) but most of it was sold during the 1920s and 1930s for building. (fn. 80)"
Source: https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/middx/vol4/pp249-255
"The manor of Uxendon in Harrow parish was first recorded in 1373. In 1516 the manor was inherited by Mabel, the wife of Richard Bellamy. In 1603 their descendant, also Richard Bellamy, conveyed the estate to Joan Mudge and William Mascall. By 1608 the manor belonged to Joan Mudge's son-in-law, Richard Page. In 1629 a portion of the estate in Kenton was alienated to Robert and Thomas Walter, but the Uxendon part of the manor remained with the Page family. In 1817 it comprised 413 acres of enclosed land and 202 acres allotted in lieu of open-field land. In the 1820s Henry Page, who had inherited the manor from his brothers, was known to be of weak intellect and a drunkard. In 1825 Page confirmed a bargain and sale in favour of one Henry Young, a solicitor whose business partner had worked for the family-it is possible that the document was obtained fraudulently. On Page's death in 1829 Young moved into the manor, which he had sold for the benefit of his wife and children when he died in 1869."
Source: https://aim25.com/cgi-bin/vcdf/detail?coll_id=18852&inst_id=118&nv1=search&nv2=
-
I remember- Mr Young was the dodgy solicitor.
I wonder how we can check up on what I was told - that Wembley Stadium was last sold with "unsound title".
-
Really? The plot thickens.
It seems HY was well-connected. It's no wonder the 'little people' didn't get very far.