From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sun Mar 26 15:28:48 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2QMSmjb026084; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:28:48 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2QMSkZ2009999 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:28:46 -0700 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k2QJvVFI009724 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:57:31 -0500 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k2QJvV9o009723 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:57:31 -0500 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k2QJnHFI009656 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:49:18 -0500 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k2QMKKTL021913 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:20:20 -0700 X-Envelope-From: dean.scribner@juno.com Sun Mar 26 15:20:20 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k2QMKKjb021904 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:20:20 -0700 Received: from m09.lax.untd.com (m09.lax.untd.com [64.136.30.72]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id k2QMKJki005576 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:20:20 -0700 Received: from m09.lax.untd.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by m09.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABCCQE5MA6EVUUA for (sender ); Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:19:23 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dean.scribner@juno.com) by m09.lax.untd.com (jqueuemail) id LLEZAPFX; Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:19:10 PST To: ROOTS-M@rootsweb.com Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 14:15:00 -0800 Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] Unusual guardianship papers Message-ID: <20060326.141655.724.3.dean.scribner@juno.com> X-Mailer: Juno 5.0.33 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0,8-33 From: Dean Scribner X-ContentStamp: 12:6:4066244624 X-MAIL-INFO: 3fed404540c41915c43019553019743900702db111f93165 X-UNTD-OriginStamp: M+80QjSznsSmyHjF3ygxsczyK96hk59xK99LUwClj30xZi+dHPlqTSGUIsNl55Tv X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 127.0.0.1|localhost|m09.lax.untd.com|dean.scribner@juno.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com It appears to me that there were two different guardians for two different purposes, one for the preservation of property until the children were of legal age, and the other for the one who might never be considered of legal age because of his disability. A careful reading of the guardianship papers could disclose some language that would explain the difference. One more thought: The guardian must be willing and able to accept the guardianship before being appointed, and the parties may have agreed on this solution, which was acceptable to the court. On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 15:45:24 EST JBletch@aol.com writes: > I have run across an unusual set of guardianship > papers and wonder if there is anyone who has > read anything similar. Any point of view appreciated. > > A man died (intestate) in MS in 1827, leaving six > minor children as heirs of his considerable estate. > The oldest child, a son, was 12 or 13 at the time. > This oldest child was handicapped in some way, being > listed in the guardianship papers (also in census records > as an adult) as a lunatic and idiotic. All guardianship > papers were filed in the orphan's court. > The five younger children were all included in one set > of papers with two court appointed guardians. The > older child had a separate set of papers. All the children > had their step father as one guardian. The second > guardian was different. > > My questions are why the separate filings? They were > both filed at about the same time. > Was the oldest child by a different wife? Did it have to do > with the fact he was handicapped? > > >