Garngaboch, East Monklands

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:01 pm

I think that bit starts:

The testa[men]t dative and Inv[entor]y of the goods and gear [th]at pertained [and] belonged to Umqhile
John Paull of Garngavoch within the parrochie of East Munkland the tym
of his deceis who deceassed In the moneth of January 1722 years Faithfully made and given up be Junet Mary Jean__? Elisone Paulls daughters lau[fu]ls ____
of kin to the defunct And William Paull in Musswood of Garngavoch ___
uncle as upgiver for them Executor Dative descerned to the said deceased John
Paul their father by decreet of the Commissar of Hamilton [and] Campsie
his Dep[onen]t? (it is an abbreviated word, just not sure what!)upon the tuenty first day of January 1724 years as ane decreet
Dative pronounced their anent in itself fully bears.

...will come back to this. The bits in the gutter are hard to make out, as you cannot see the letters clearly.

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:57 pm

Band of Caubionrie *udlays *or Tyrone????

Bond of Cautionrie Findlay For Spren__? (it is a surname - they guy's first name is Robert in the document, and he is a wryter in Glasgow. i.e. a legal person )

Not sure about that last word. Could it be a surname "Sproule"? Though the centre letter looks like a secretary hand "e"...I'm sure it is an "e", I just can't think for now of a surname that fits.....

Post by **AnneM** » Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:24 pm

It definitely says executor dative and looks to me as though it says executor dative qua next of kin.

Anne

Lorna Allison · Post by **Lorna Allison** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 10:53 am

Great work

I have the picture of children being in the care of Gt. Uncle William who is living closeby. The second page includes items such as 2 brass beds in the Spouses bed chamber; "one gun, one sword, two candlesticks and a pint stoup" - (that would be in the snug then?!). Gives one a real feeling of the times.

I am most grateful for all your assistance. When the wall finally tumbles I shall let you know.

Regards

Lorna

Archiver · Post by **Archiver** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 2:16 pm

LesleyB wrote:I think that bit starts:

The testa[men]t dative and Inv[entor]y of the goods and gear [th]at pertained [and] belonged to Umqhile
John Paull of Garngavoch within the parrochie of East Munkland the tym
of his deceis who deceassed In the moneth of January 1722 years Faithfully made and given up be Junet Mary Jean__? Elisone Paulls daughters lau[fu]ls ____
of kin to the defunct And William Paull in Musswood of Garngavoch ___
uncle as upgiver for them Executor Dative descerned to the said deceased John
Paul their father by decreet of the Commissar of Hamilton [and] Campsie
his Dep[onen]t? (it is an abbreviated word, just not sure what!)upon the tuenty first day of January 1724 years as ane decreet
Dative pronounced their anent in itself fully bears.

...will come back to this. The bits in the gutter are hard to make out, as you cannot see the letters clearly.

I agree, though think that it's meant to be Jonet and that the word after Jean is [and] so that it reads 'Jonet Mary Jean [and] Elisone Paulls daughters lau[fu]ls [and] nearest of kin...', 'nearest' being the word in the fold.

I think that it says 'William Paull in Mosswood of Garngavoch their uncle' with 'their' being the word in the fold.

Not sure what that last abbreviation is, or if it is an abbreviation - could it be 'deput' maybe? His cross for the 't' could be a mark above the 'u' for both that word and the next, 'upon'.

Lorna Allison · Post by **Lorna Allison** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 6:56 pm

Me again

Since nowhere in the Testament is a "Thomas" mentioned do you think this means that definitely the son, who appears in the list of John Paull's children to his wife Mary Scot, had died?

He is down as being born in 1715 and I had assumed that he was the same Thomas who had 7 children to wife Mary Storry also in "Airdrie or New Monkland" because of the names viz. William, Janet, Elison, John, Sara, Jean and Mary. If John did not have a live son Thomas when he died, then it could mean that these children are in fact William Paul's grandchildren - the two brothers having stuck virtually to the same family names.

I suppose that this is yet another imponderable

but I would still welcome anyone's thoughts.

Regards

Lorna

Lorna Allison · Post by **Lorna Allison** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 8:00 pm

Answering my own question!

I have pulled William Paull's own family and - no surprise there - Jean, John, Janet and Thomas. Admittedly no Elisone, but then William's Thomas may have been brought up with Elisone and it was probably a family name anyway.

Sorry to bother you folks - but still would rather like to know if you think that from the Testament you think John Paull's son Thomas had died.

Regards

Lorna

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 8:56 pm

Hi Lorna
As far as I remember, an eldest son did not have a share in the "moveable property" if he had inherited land or a house for instance, so it is possible for a son to be living but NOT mentioned in a testament. This is a testmanent dative in any case, drawn up after the death, not a "will" or testament testamentar written whilst the person in question was still living. TD's were drawn up when a person died intestate (not having made a will) so that an executor could be appointed (William Paull in this case) and the estate sorted out: this is why it contains an inventory, so that the total worth of the property (excluding land) could be totalled, debts paid off, and monies due to the deceased rounded up and the total worth divided up in an appopriate fashion.
Was Thomas the only son, as far as you know, or one of several? Where did he fit in...eldest?

Best wishes
Lesley

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:04 pm

Hi Archiver

Not sure what that last abbreviation is, or if it is an abbreviation - could it be 'deput' maybe?

What you have suggested probably makes more sense, as do the words you have suggested for those in the gutter. As usual here on TalkingScot, a few heads working together are better than one!!

Best wishes
Lesley

Lorna Allison · Post by **Lorna Allison** » Tue Sep 02, 2008 9:29 pm

Hi Lesley

I have 6 children born to John of the Testament between 1711 and 1721:

Janet b. 1711
Jean b. 1713
Thomas b. 1715
Mary b. 1717
Jean b. 1719
Elison b. 1721

No sign of any other sons. The testament appears to include farming equipment, grain and things with "chimneys" (can't make that out!) so the farm was going to be pretty well depleted if everything was sold. Of course Thomas would only have been 9 in 1724, you would think he needed a decision made about what happened to him too?

Regards

Lorna