--------------7AE5751C3875
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Misconceptions Concerning "Legal" Ages by Edgar MacDonald
In carefully researched family histories one continually sees such
statements as "In witnessing the deed he must have been of age and
therefore born before _____" & "He bought land in_____ and therefore
must have been 21 as of that date." Two errors infect the first
statement. While 21 was agreed on as being "of age" in the usual sense,
under ENGLISH COMMON LAW a father's WILL, having the force of law,
frequently determined when a child became "of age" as early as 15 & 16.
Indeed, a father could give a child "his freedom" verbally. More
important, however, is the fact that under ENGLISH COMMON LAW a witness
did
not have to be 21 to qualify as such. An "infant," the legal term for
anyone
under 21, could testify at any age when understanding was presumed, and
under
COMMON LAW the age of 14 was accepted without question as the age of
discretion.
--------------7AE5751C3875
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-ID: <md5:D41D8CD98F00B204E9800998ECF8427E>
Misconceptions Concerning "Legal" Ages by Edgar MacDonald
In carefully researched family histories one continually sees such statements as "In witnessing the deed he must have been of age and therefore born before _____" & "He bought land in_____ and therefore must have been 21 as of that date." Two errors infect the first statement. While 21 was agreed on as being "of age" in the usual sense, under ENGLISH COMMON LAW a father's WILL, having the force of law, frequently determined when a child became "of age" as early as 15 & 16. Indeed, a father could give a child "his freedom" verbally. More important, however, is the fact that under ENGLISH COMMON LAW a witness did not have to be 21 to qualify as such. An "infant," the legal term for anyone under 21, could testify at any age when understanding was presumed, and under COMMON LAW the age of 14 was accepted without question as the age of discretion.
In the second instance, a minor could perfectly well buy land if he had the means or credit. At 14 a male could marry, sign contracts, choose his guardian, bequeath personal property, apprentice himself. He could even sell land as a minor but was usually required to confirm the sale upon arriving at the age of 21; however, where unchallenged, few of these confirmations found their way into the records. The general assumption by many genealogists that 21 was the universal age for civic activities is simply erroneous. While a male had to be that age to vote, he was taxed at 16, and frequently he was mustered into the militia at 16. For most of his activities concerning his personal affairs, the colonial male in Virginia, and elsewhere, was imminently qualified to affix his name to public documents at the responsible age of 14. (I just saw a similar statement in one of my other Genealogy magazines. Flo)</x-rich>
--------------7AE5751C3875--