It seems that David‘s five youngest children were not satisfied with
the way that the estate was being administered. They turned to the Court of
Chancery, which dealt with civil cases. Its procedure involved the
gathering of written pleadings and evidence. The following claim was filed :
1851
No 68 In Chancery, Vice Chancellor Kindersley
Between :
Martha Ivall, James
Bainbrigge Ivall, Emma Ivall, Kate Bainbrigge Ivall and Albert Ivall all of
them infants, under the age of twenty one years by Henry Hannam Cort, their
next friend, Plaintiffs
and
Martha Ivall widow, William
James, George Jones and David James Ivall, Defendants
The Claim of Martha Ivall,
James Bainbrigge Ivall, Emma Ivall, Kate Bainbrigge Ivall and Albert Ivall all
of them infants under the age of twenty one years by Henry Hannam Cort of York
Street, Portman Square in the County of Middlesex, Surgeon, their next friend
the above named Plaintiffs the said several infants Plaintiffs by the said
Henry Hannam Cort state, That they are five of the residuary legatees under the
Will dated the thirteenth day of November one thousand eight hundred and forty
three of David Ivall late of Tottenham Court Road in the Parish of Saint
Pancras and County of Middlesex and of No 14 Bloomfield Road, Maida Hill in the
said County of Middlesex, Coach Maker deceased who died on the eighth day of
June one thousand eight hundred and fifty and that the above named Defendants
Martha Ivall widow, William James and George Jones are the executors of the
said David Ivall deceased and that the said Martha Ivall widow, William James
and George Jones have not accounted for or invested the shares of the residuary
personal Estate of the said testator to which the said Martha Ivall, James
Bainbrigge Ivall, Emma Ivall, Kate Bainbrigge Ivall and Albert Ivall are
respectively entitled the said several infant Plaintiffs therefore by the said Henry
Hannam Cort claim to have the personal estate of the said David Ivall
administered in this Court and to have their Costs of this Suit and for that
purpose that all proper directions may be given and accounts taken.
26th November
1851
(Henry H Cort appears in the 1861 census, aged 55, a General Practitioner,
living at 23 Acacia Rd, Marylebone).
The court accepted the plaintiffs’ request to administer David Ivall’s
estate and this led to a series of court reports, petitions, decrees and orders
(I have found 19 in total) over the next 6 years. They are in the National
Archives at Kew.
In many Chancery suits the presiding judge would ask a Chancery Master
(a court official) to investigate the evidence (including sworn statements from
the parties) and report back to the court. Master Senior prepared a report
dated 11 February 1853, which summarised the position. There were debts
totalling £7,598 due from creditors to the estate. David James Ivall and Martha
James Brisco Ivall had reached 21 and had not yet been paid the £1,000 due to
each of them.
Martha Ivall (the wife of David Ivall) died intestate on 13 June 1853
aged 57. Letters of administration for her estate were granted to David James
Ivall, her son. He and Anne Caroline Kingston were appointed as the guardians
of James, Emma, Kate and Albert Ivall who were under the age of 21. The sum of
£100 pa each for the maintenance and education of James, Emma and Kate was
approved with £80 pa for Albert.
On 7 July 1854, the court gave permission for Emma, Kate and Albert to
visit their brother David “for a period
of one month at his residence in Dieppe in the Empire of France, their sister
the Plaintiff Martha James Brisco Ivall by her solicitor undertaking to
accompany and take charge of them and their Guardian Anne Caroline Kingston,
the wife of William Wykeham Kingston, by her Solicitor undertaking that the
said Infants shall return within one calendar month from this time.”
The Court approved the apprenticeship of Albert Ivall to James Rock of
Hastings, Coach Builder, for 5 years from 26 January 1855 (Albert’s sixteenth
birthday). James Rock was paid £250 and Albert’s wages were set
at 6s per week in the first year, 7s in the second, 8s in the third, 10s in the
fourth and 12s in the fifth. The amount that his guardians were allocated to
spend on Albert’s maintenance and education was increased to £130
pa.
David’s six children each received about £5,000 when they reached the
age of 21. This was a substantial sum then. Their biographies show that some of
them such as David James Ivall, continued to be wealthy throughout their lives whereas
James and Albert Ivall were later declared bankrupt.
1 comment:
Wow, can't imagine how much time/effort must have been involved in finding out all the information here. It's interesting reading about what happened in their lives, makes them all feel much more 'real' as relatives than just lines on a family tree would. I wonder what the compound interest of £35,000 over 170 years would have been in David Ivall had invested it instead though!
----
Michael
Post a Comment