PDA

View Full Version : "nineteen pounds nineteen shillings"



ChattieKathy
01-09-2011, 7:28 PM
In reading the wills for my gggrandparents, I find the phrase "nineteen pounds nineteen shillings" being left to 2 of their 5 children...the same 2 children in both wills. I found reference to this quote to Charles Dickens and the secret to happiness in financial situations. Does anyone have an idea what the significance to specific children might be? Could they have been poorer than the others and were being encouraged? Or...perhaps they had debt issues??

Any thoughts?

ChattieKathy

Ladkyis
01-09-2011, 7:41 PM
Perhaps they were both well set up and didn't need any more money but rather than cut them out totally they were left a small sum so they couldn't challenge the will.

Perhaps that particular sum was below a taxation level for gifts and so they would not lose any of the money to the government of the day.

strawberrymivvy
01-09-2011, 7:45 PM
Having a quick scan online it appears to have at one time been a common amount to leave in a will, so I imagine David Copperfield had quite an impact and people were just hoping it would result in happiness to the person it was bequeathed to. Perhaps those 2 children were particularly unhappy/unfortunate?

Hollytree
01-09-2011, 7:59 PM
One pound and one shilling was a guinea, now whether 19 guineas was a significant amount in legal terms I don't know.............but still a good amount to be left as a legacy.

Anne:smile5:

Sue Mackay
01-09-2011, 8:30 PM
Legacy Duty was introduced in 1805 to help finance the war against Napoleon, and I believe the threshold was £20, so there were many legacies of 19 guineas. The threshold was increased to £100 in 1853.

More info at http://www.
uk-family-history.com/death-duty.html

Ladkyis
02-09-2011, 9:50 AM
Legacy Duty was introduced in 1805 to help finance the war against Napoleon, and I believe the threshold was £20, so there were many legacies of 19 guineas. The threshold was increased to £100 in 1853.

More info at http://www.
uk-family-history.com/death-duty.html

That was the word I was trying to remember, legacy duty (ok that's two words) I knew there would be a way the government was trying to get its paws on people's money.

Kerrywood
02-09-2011, 10:25 AM
Legacy Duty was introduced in 1805 to help finance the war against Napoleon

I wonder if there's been a misunderstanding here? The subject of Legacy/Succession Duty is very complicated.

From my notes (which may be defective) ...

Death Duties have been collected since 1694. Legacy Duty (under that title) was introduced by Act of Parliament in 1780, but no centralised registers survive until 1796, when a further Legacy Duty Act was passed. At this period duty was payable only on personal estate (i.e. not on freehold land and the buildings on it).

Another Legacy Duty Act of 1805 enabled tax to be collected on legacies arising from the sale of real estate (land and buildings).

In 1853 the Succession Duty Act was introduced, which required tax to be paid for the first time on land transfers between members of the same family.


and I believe the threshold was £20, so there were many legacies of 19 guineas.
My understanding (which may be defective) is that the £20 threshold relates to the value of the whole estate, not the value of individual legacies.

In any case, legacy duty was calculated on the estate as a whole. I believe it was not paid by beneficiaries individually but by the estate, and the appropriate percentage (which varied according to family relationship) was then deducted from individual legacies on distribution.

So I don't think individual bequests of 19 guineas are anything to do with tax thresholds. That said, I don't know why 19 guineas should be such a popular bequest.

Kerrywood
02-09-2011, 12:50 PM
So I don't think individual bequests of 19 guineas are anything to do with tax thresholds.

Wrong! I should have dug further before posting!

The class description for IR 26 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=3&CATID=8056&SearchInit=4&SearchType=6&CATREF=IR+26) explains the liability for duty. The relevant phrases (extracted) seem to be ...

============
Between 1796 and 1805 duty was payable only on personal estate, not on leases, freeholds or real estate. Duty was only payable on legacies and residues over £20, and only when the beneficiaries were not spouses, children, parents or grandparents of the deceased.

Between 1805 and 1815 everyone except the spouse and parents of the deceased paid the duty on legacies and residues worth over £20; real estate which the will directed to be sold to raise such legacies or residues was now included.

Between 1815 and 1853 duty was paid by everyone except the spouse on legacies and residues of over £20; and, once again, real estate was only subject to duty if it was to be sold to raise money legacies or residues.

By the Succession Duty Act of 1853, duty became payable on the personal and real estate of estates worth over £100, although bequests to spouses were still not liable to duty.
============

The £100 threshold introduced in 1853 does seem to apply to the value of the estate, not to individual legacies. For these I think the threshold must have remained at £20. That does of course explain the nineteen-guinea bequests in the wills under discussion, which I believe are dated 1876 and 1890.

So, as you were, and apologies to Sue and everyone. I'm obviously just a total waste of space today!

ChattieKathy
02-09-2011, 1:52 PM
So...does this apply to wills written in 1876 and 1884?

Kerrywood
02-09-2011, 2:10 PM
So...does this apply to wills written in 1876 and 1884?

Yes, according to my revised thinking -- unless anybody comes back with a different interpretation. :smile5:

ChattieKathy
03-09-2011, 3:07 AM
I guess it's just the sentimental side of me...but I'm wanting to believe that it has some sort of special meaning. I wish I could learn more about these people! The little I know about the youngest child (my ggrandmother) is that she was a bit of an un-affectionate lady who didn't seem to care much for children. Some interesting people!