{"id":1082,"date":"2005-04-21T17:21:13","date_gmt":"2005-04-21T17:21:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/?p=1082"},"modified":"2014-01-06T18:18:45","modified_gmt":"2014-01-06T18:18:45","slug":"i-devise-and-bequeath","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/2005\/04\/21\/i-devise-and-bequeath\/","title":{"rendered":"“I Devise and Bequeath”: Property and Inheritance among the Scottish Highlanders in Scotch Settlement, Columbiana County, Ohio"},"content":{"rendered":"

By: Amanda Epperson<\/em><\/h3>\n

In the name of God Amen. I Alexander McIntosh of the County of Columbiana in\u00a0the State of Ohio a farmer, being sick and weak in body, but of sound mind\u00a0memory and understanding (blessed be to God for the same) do make and publish\u00a0this my last will and testament in manner and form following, to wit. Principally\u00a0and first of all I commend my immortal soul into the hands of God who gave it,\u00a0and my body to the earth to be buried in a decent and Christian like manner at the\u00a0discretion of my executors hereinafter named. And as to such worldly estate as it\u00a0hath pleased God to bless me with in this life I give and dispose of in following\u00a0manner to wit. . .<\/em>[1. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900\u00a0<\/em>(Salt Lake City: Filmed by the Genealogical Society of Utah, 1996), Microfilm, vol. 4, pp. 32-34.]<\/p>\n

With these, or similar, words, thousands of people have made decisions regarding the\u00a0distribution of their worldly goods and at the same time unknowingly created an\u00a0amazingly rich resource for historians. This particular will was written by Alexander\u00a0McIntosh who died in 1819, 11 years after he purchased land in Ohio. The exact year of\u00a0his emigration is unknown, but he settled in a community of Highlanders known as\u00a0Scotch Settlement, established in 1802 and located a few miles north of Wellsville in\u00a0Columbiana County. The majority of these emigrants were from Strathnairn and\u00a0Strathdearn, located just south of Inverness on the southeastern border of the Scottish\u00a0Highlands.<\/p>\n

McIntosh\u2019s will, along with the other 88 probate records included in the\u00a0Columbiana County Probate Court Records, relays much more information than one\u00a0might at first suppose.[2. Through a search of the Columbiana County Probate Records I identified 89 Scotch Settlement residents who died between 1812 and 1853 inclusive, 47 of whom left wills and 42 of whom died intestate.] The probate records include more than the wills: there are also\u00a0records of intestate cases, letters of administration, reports of guardianships, and estate\u00a0inventories and sales.[3. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>.] Nevertheless, the wills are among the most useful documents as\u00a0they are the most detailed and represent the wishes of the deceased. Lists of heirs in the wills are useful for reconstructing families and relationships. And of course, there is\u00a0reference to land owned and bequeathed. One can also use the lists of witnesses,\u00a0executors and administrators, estate appraisers, and bondsmen. These lists are helpful,\u00a0not only for determining who was living in the community at a certain time, but also for\u00a0gauging relationships between families and neighbors. This paper does not investigate\u00a0these relationships in depth, but it does appear that, among some families, bonds forged\u00a0in Scotland remained strong in the United States; but other families seemed more\u00a0willing to, or perhaps were obliged to, reach out to the non-Scots in the vicinity.<\/p>\n

The several estate inventories and sales not only include the items calculated in\u00a0the value of the estate, but often who purchased which items. One can estimate their\u00a0early success by the amount of bond posted when their estates went into probate.\u00a0Alexander McIntosh and John Cattanach both died in 1812, and are the first Settlement\u00a0estate records recorded by the Probate Court. McIntosh had an estate, exclusive of the\u00a0land, valued at $360.27 while the value of Cattanach\u2019s estate was $195.62, again\u00a0exclusive of the land, suggesting, that for reasons unknown at present, McIntosh was\u00a0\u201cmore successful\u201d than Cattanach.[4. Ibid., vol 2, pp. 19-23.]<\/p>\n

The inventories also give an idea of the material wealth and comforts acquired\u00a0by these Highlanders in the New World. As one would expect, many items relate to\u00a0farming; for example livestock, tools, and harvested crops. Also listed are household\u00a0furnishings: pewter plates, earthenware dishes, corner cupboards, pillows, bed ticks,\u00a0quilts, chairs, and cutlery. Several items suggest pursuits other than farming: a jacket\u00a0pattern, cloth, spinning wheels, spools, looms, and whiskey kegs. Several items were\u00a0probably unique to the Settlement: a scotch wagon, books in Gaelic, tartan plaids, and\u00a0scotch dirks. Books, as crucial to some frontier families as were plates and dishes, were\u00a0another important item in the estate records and were frequently kept in the family.[5. Howard H. Peckman, “Books and Reading on the Ohio Frontier,”\u00a0The\u00a0<\/em>Mississippi<\/em><\/em>Valley\u00a0<\/em>Historical Review\u00a0<\/em>44, no. 4 (1958): 663.] For example, when Alexander McIntosh died in 1819, he left his books to his son James,\u00a0and in 1826 Janet Noble (widow of Alexander) kept her husband\u2019s books as part of her\u00a0share of the estate. These books, mostly religious texts, were in English and Gaelic, and\u00a0generally valued at less than fifty cents a piece. But some books of exceptional quality\u00a0existed as in the 1820 estate inventory of Andrew Smith in which two untitled books in\u00a0English were valued at $2.25, and his Gaelic Bible was valued at $2.00. The previous\u00a0year Daniel McPherson\u2019s English Bible was valued at $1.50.[6. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol. 4, pp. 32-34, 163-65, 73, vol. 5, pp. 330-32.] One can glean the\u00a0accomplishment of some immigrants from their estate records as well.<\/p>\n

Though these lists of goods and people provide insight into the make up of the\u00a0community and the material success of its population, examinations of these wills also\u00a0reveal the emigrants\u2019 attitudes towards land and family. Although no wills are\u00a0identical, there are four common patterns to the dispersal of property \u2013 entail, nonpartible,\u00a0partible, and partible\/non-partible. Entail, the method by which land is\u00a0devised to all future generations and is held in trust by the current one, was common in\u00a0colonial America, most notably Virginia. However, a move to abolish entail was\u00a0successful by the end of the eighteenth century.[7. Holly Brewer, “Entailing Aristocracy in Colonial Virginia: “Ancient Feudal Restraints” and Revolutionary Reform,”\u00a0The William and Mary Quarterly\u00a0<\/em>54, no. 2 (1997): 307, 09.] Non-partible inheritance, usually seen\u00a0in the form of primogeniture, was common as well and (at least in a few areas) was used to settle intestate cases even though this practice was not permitted in Ohio.\u00a0However, this did not prevent someone from willing all his property to a sole heir, to\u00a0the exclusion of all others, if he so desired. Partible inheritance was when each heir\u00a0received an equal or almost equal share of the estate. In partible\/non-partible\u00a0inheritance, the farm was kept intact by bestowing it upon a single heir and other heirs\u00a0were compensated with cash or other property.[8. David P. Gagan, “The Indivisibility of Land: A Microanalysis of the System of Inheritance in Nineteenth-Century Ontario,”\u00a0Journal of Economic History\u00a0<\/em>36, no. 1, The Tasks of Economic History (1976): 129.] Those who died intestate had their\u00a0affairs settled as directed by Ohio law, which called for strict partible inheritance among\u00a0direct descendents after allowing for what was due the widow by right of dower.\u00a0Individuals who performed the same duties as an executor received \u201cletters of\u00a0administration\u201d. In most cases, recipients were a close male relative and the widow. If\u00a0a person died unmarried or childless, the state recognized all siblings or descendants of\u00a0siblings as heirs.<\/p>\n

The mandatory inclusion of siblings (or their heirs) who had remained in\u00a0Scotland could greatly delay the settling of the estate, underscoring the importance of\u00a0wills to this community, especially when land was involved. The full enormity of this\u00a0system was likely brought home to the community when Angus McIntosh died\u00a0intestate in 1831 at the age of 40. According to state law, his heirs were his four sisters\u00a0in the United States and one brother and his deceased sister\u2019s four children in Scotland.\u00a0It took three years of transatlantic communication to come to terms over the estate,\u00a0during which time his sisters and his mother, now approaching age 80, could not sell\u00a0his land or settle his debts. Consequently, they were almost wholly dependent upon\u00a0the charity of their neighbors.[9. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol. 7, p. 232, Private Collection, McIntosh Family Letters, Margaret McIntosh and family, Scotch Settlement to John McIntosh, Midmorile, 10 March 1834.]<\/p>\n

Scotch Settlement testators who left wills were on average 64\u00bd years old. The\u00a0average bond posted by the executors was just over $1600 and ranged from the $150 bond posted for the estate of Margaret Smith to $10,000 for the estate of William\u00a0McGillivary, each of whom died in 1848 (Table 1).[10. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>.] Most of those who wrote wills did\u00a0so shortly before death and presumably were men and women who knew that the end\u00a0was near and decided to tidy their affairs. It is also possible that these same people had\u00a0heirs who knew the trouble that would ensue if their parent died intestate. Those\u00a0included in Probate Court records who did not leave wills had an average age of 50 and\u00a0average bond posted of $900 (Table 2). If the age of death were known for more of these\u00a0individuals, the average would very likely be less. The younger age and smaller estates\u00a0suggest that these were people who were not expecting to die quite so soon, and\u00a0perhaps were victims of an accident or sudden illness.<\/p>\n

Those with land to bequeath used partible\/non-partible inheritance almost\u00a0exclusively.[11. This type of property division was also the most commonly used among farmers in Peel County, Ontario between 1840 and 1900. Gagan, “The Indivisibility of Land,” 129.] Those who did not used strict partible inheritance. The average number\u00a0of heirs to each farm was 2.1 and the average number of total heirs was 5.8. In nineteen\u00a0cases the owner devised land to a single heir and in fourteen cases they gave the land to\u00a0two or three heirs, effectively bequeathing them a joint tenancy.[12. A joint tenancy was a common form of land holding in Scotland. Generally speaking two families would share a lease to a single farm in order to share expenses.] These multiple land\u00a0heirs frequently included daughters. In all cases, heirs who did not receive land\u00a0received compensation with either cash or personal property. However, the\u00a0compensation was not always equal and in most cases daughters were paid less than\u00a0their brothers, and unmarried daughters received more than their married sisters.\u00a0Grandchildren were generally mentioned in wills only if their parent had died; the\u00a0exception being when a grandson and grandfather shared the same given name.<\/p>\n

Payments for compensation could require that the principal heir either sell or\u00a0mortgage the farm so that the obligations to the remaining heirs could be met.[13. Gagan, “The Indivisibility of Land,” 133-4.] Mitigating this problem somewhat was the fact that payments were rarely more than\u00a0$200, and in several cases payments were to be spread out over a number of years\u00a0without interest. Additionally, minor children were not to be paid until they reached\u00a0their majority, and, in a few instances, no payments were to be made to them until after\u00a0the death of the widow. These stipulations eased the burden on the principal heir and\u00a0made a mortgage or outright sale of the land less likely.<\/p>\n

Occasionally, children received only token bequests. Generally, these were sons\u00a0who had already established themselves, presumably with the assistance of their father.\u00a0For example, John McIntosh, who received only one dollar from his father (also John\u00a0McIntosh, who died in 1845), had purchased land from his parents in 1832.[14. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol. 13, pp. 332-33, Columbiana County Recorder,\u00a0Deed Records and Mortgages 1803-1881\u00a0<\/em>(Salt Lake City: Filmed by the Genealogical Society of Utah, 1973), Microfilm, vol. 17, p. 224.] Angus\u00a0Noble, who received a token bequest from his father (Alexander, who died in 1826), had\u00a0purchased land from his parents in 1825.[15. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol 9, pp. 431-33, Columbiana County Recorder,\u00a0Deed Records and Mortgages 1803-1881<\/em>, vol. 9, p. 341.] Married daughters were also among those\u00a0who received only token bequests, perhaps because they had received a dowry upon\u00a0marriage.<\/p>\n

Few individuals left their land to more than three people. In two cases, several of\u00a0the heirs were still minors when their father died. In these instances the mother was left\u00a0in charge of the property. It was to be sold upon her death and the proceeds divided\u00a0among the children. In a third case, John McPherson left his sons separate, but adjacent,\u00a0parcels of property and left a third property, located in Mercer County, to be sold with\u00a0the proceeds to be divided among his three daughters.<\/p>\n

As discussed previously, entail was not permitted in the United States.\u00a0However, this did not prevent some men in the Settlement from attempting to create\u00a0something similar to it. As a condition of inheritance the heirs of these men were not\u00a0permitted to sell the farm, and upon their death the property was to go to a specified\u00a0grandson or grandsons. In 1837, Daniel Smith left his land to his wife Margaret for her\u00a0natural life, upon her death the land went to their son Alexander for his natural life. It\u00a0was only after the death of Alexander in 1853 that anyone received this land in their\u00a0own right, namely Daniel\u2019s grandsons Angus and Philip.[16. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>,\u00a0vol. 11, pp. 341-43.] Hugh McBean, who died in\u00a01842, had essentially the same provisions in his will. The land went first to his wife,\u00a0then his son William, who was not permitted to sell the land as stipulations indicated\u00a0that it would eventually pass to his own heirs.[17. Ibid.]<\/p>\n

This collection of wills did not overlook women. Wills provided generously for
\nwidows in all cases over and above the right-of-dower, which was one-third of both the\u00a0real and personal estate of their deceased husbands. Twelve widows, five of whom had\u00a0minor children, received control of all or a portion of their husband\u2019s property for their\u00a0natural life, a control which lasted an average of 14 years. Wives routinely became\u00a0executors of their husbands\u2019 estate and guardian or co-guardian of any minor children.\u00a0Those who did not receive control of property were generally to be provided for at a\u00a0certain level determined by their sons. George Ogilvie who died in 1843, willed his\u00a0wife his dwelling house, the garden before the door, and a corner of the farm. He also\u00a0ordered his son William (who inherited the farm) to provide his mother in lieu of her\u00a0dower, if she agreed, with $25 per annum and the privilege of keeping one cow and six\u00a0sheep with his livestock.[18. Ibid., vol. 11, pp. 103-04.] While arrangements like this did make these women\u00a0moderately dependent upon their sons, the specifics of the will enabled them to take\u00a0legal action if the sons failed to meet their obligations. Men did leave property to their\u00a0daughters, both married and single, in their own right. In 1847, Alexander Campbell\u00a0left small bequests to each of his children, but left the bulk of his estate to his daughter\u00a0Jean who cared for him in his old age.[19. Ibid., vol. 15, pp. 70-71.]<\/p>\n

Those who died childless, without exception, left their property to blood\u00a0relatives. John and Elizabeth Calder, who died without issue in 1830 and 1842\u00a0respectively, are excellent examples.[20. Ibid., vol. 7, pp. 82-3, vol. 11, pp. 249-50.] John left his property to Elizabeth for her natural\u00a0life, and monetary bequests to his sister Ann, his sister Isabella and her children, and his\u00a0half-sisters Ellen and Isabella. Upon Elizabeth\u2019s death the land went to the children of\u00a0John\u2019s brother Alexander. Elizabeth Calder, on the other hand, left her property to her\u00a0sisters and their families who had remained in Scotland and to her niece and nephew,\u00a0Isabella and John McDonald.<\/p>\n

The recognition of nephews and nieces as primary heirs became especially\u00a0important as land in the Settlement became scarce in the 1840s and 1850s, as shown by\u00a0the McPherson family. Andrew McPherson, who immigrated in 1802, had four sons,\u00a0but only owned one farm. Andrew\u2019s brother Malcolm never married and had no\u00a0children. The solution reached by this family was to establish Andrew\u2019s elder sons,\u00a0Evan and Alexander, on farms of their own, which was possible in the mid to late 1820s\u00a0when land was still readily available. How much help these sons received is uncertain\u00a0but they received smaller cash bequests than their sisters did at their father\u2019s death.\u00a0Andrew left his farm to his son Malcolm, and Malcolm left his farm to his nephew\u00a0Andrew. This arrangement was probably of long-standing as the nephew Andrew,\u00a0who married in 1834, was living with his uncle by 1840.[21. Carol Willsey Bell,\u00a0Columbiana County, Ohio Marriages, 1800-1870: And Other Evidence of Marriages\u00a0<\/em>(Youngstown, OH: Bell Books, 1990), Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol. 13, pp. 226-27, vol. 15, pp. 307-08, United States Census Office,\u00a0Sixth Census of the United States, 1840 : Population Schedules, Columbiana County, Ohio\u00a0<\/em>(Washington, D.C.: National Archives), Microfilm.]<\/p>\n

These patterns, revealed by this small collection of wills, reveal the importance of\u00a0land and family to this community. The inclusion of all children in the wills and the\u00a0favoring of blood relatives emphasized the importance of the family, not only as seen in\u00a0Scotland, but also as seen in the networks that facilitate migration. In Scotland, it was\u00a0not unknown for women to take over the leases of their deceased husbands; and in Ohio, the granting of a farm to the widow for life is simply a continuance of this\u00a0practice. Provisions in the wills for widows and daughters suggest that these women\u00a0were held in esteem and valued by their husbands and fathers. This is not to say that\u00a0they were treated equally, but perhaps that their contributions to the success of the\u00a0family farm were thus recognized.<\/p>\n

One can view the acquisition of land in two ways. First, it could serve as a\u00a0commodity that one could be improve and sell in hopes of a high return. Second, land\u00a0could be a patrimony that could provide identity in the community and sustenance to\u00a0descendants.[22. Robert C. Ostergren, “Land and Family in Rural Immigrant Communities,”\u00a0Annals of the Association of American Geographers\u00a0<\/em>71, no. 3 (1981): 400.] It seems clear that most of the Highland immigrants in Scotch Settlement\u00a0subscribed to this latter, more traditional, view. American or Yankee farmers, who\u00a0tended to see land in the former sense, frequently sold their land to their heirs before\u00a0death and then retired on the proceeds.[23. Jon Gjerde,\u00a0The Minds of the West: Ethnocultural Evolution in the Rural\u00a0<\/em>Middle West<\/em>, 1830-1917\u00a0<\/em>(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1997), 167, 99.] This clearly did not happen in Scotch\u00a0Settlement as all men, even at advanced age, still owned their farms although they may\u00a0have retired from farming.[24. There is no evidence from the surviving deeds that any men in Scotch Settlement sold their farmsteads before their death, unless they moved away from Columbiana County.] The granting of land, in most cases, to one heir indicates\u00a0that the farm was sacrosanct and was meant to provide sustenance and identity to its\u00a0owners. Gagan, in his review of Canadian wills that used partible\/non-partible\u00a0inheritance, implies that land left to two heirs indicated the division of a farm.[25. Gagan, “The Indivisibility of Land,” 135-36.] Conversely, in a Highland context this may not have been the case. Joint tenancy was\u00a0common in the Highlands and tenants often favored it because they could then split the\u00a0rent. The use of a pseudo-entail also suggests the extreme importance of the land and\u00a0the desire of some Highlander men to pass on a patrimony to their descendents.<\/p>\n

Partible inheritance of real and personal estate was common in the Scottish\u00a0Lowlands.[26. Ned C. Landsman,\u00a0Scotland\u00a0<\/em>and Its First American Colony, 1683-1765<\/em>(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), 46-7.] Although the evidence is slight, it is possible that people in the Highlands\u00a0used it as well. Alexander Dallas, who immigrated in 1812, signed a note\u00a0acknowledging the \u00a3100 he had received from the estate of his father William Dallas.[27. Private Collection, Scotch Settlement Papers.] Alexander\u2019s eldest brother Duncan inherited the tack to the farm of Inchyettle in\u00a0Cawdor parish. It is likely that William Dallas compensated his other children in some\u00a0way as well. However, few average farmers in the Lowlands or the Highlands would\u00a0have been able to will property to their children as they did not own it, but rented it\u00a0from a superior.<\/p>\n

In the few known cases where sons were able to follow their fathers in a farm in\u00a0Strathnairn or Strathdearn, they were all the eldest sons, so they were the principal heir\u00a0at least for the land. However, in Scotch Settlement the family farm did not\u00a0automatically go to the eldest son. If the eldest son or sons were established before the\u00a0death of their father (presumably with the father\u2019s assistance), they were not granted\u00a0land in their father\u2019s will, instead it went to a younger brother or brothers. This fact\u00a0suggests that, generally, the Highlanders were not interested in establishing a stemhousehold\u00a0pattern, where most of the real property is bequeathed to a single heir. They\u00a0appear to have maintained a lineal household pattern that emphasized collateral\u00a0descent. One distinctive feature of clan organization in Scotland was that all branches\u00a0of the family were equally important, not just that of the eldest son. Significantly,\u00a0communities that emphasized lineal households over stem households were generally\u00a0more successful in resisting outside influences.[28. Gjerde, Minds of the West<\/em>, 205.]<\/p>\n

Families were undoubtedly important to the immigrants\u2019 success, but this\u00a0success was possible in part because parents had significant control over the family in\u00a0life and this control continued after death. Most European immigrant families\u00a0functioned in a corporate culture. In these households the father was the definitive\u00a0head and relied almost solely on their wives and children for farm labor. While fathers might set up elder sons on farms of their own, all other children had to wait until the\u00a0death of their father for their share of the farm. These parents exerted much more\u00a0control over the lives and futures of their children. This method contrasted with the\u00a0\u201cYankee\u201d one, where families exerted less control on their offspring; and the result of\u00a0this was fluidity on the land and less control within the family unit. This created a\u00a0more independent outlook on life \u2013 parents gave their children more freedom, but in\u00a0return could depend upon them less.[29. Ibid., 170.]<\/p>\n

That those in Scotch Settlement followed the corporate model is hinted at in their\u00a0wills. While a man granting the farm to his widow for her natural life provided her\u00a0with a home and economic security, at the same time it denied an independent living to\u00a0his children. Many heirs could not inherit either land or cash until the death of their\u00a0mother; in two cases this wait was 24 years. The \u201cpseudo-entails\u201d tied sons to the land\u00a0whether they wanted to remain in the community or not; as to leave would forfeit not\u00a0only their claims to the land, but also the claims of their children. At times parental\u00a0control was explicitly stated in the wills. For example, Daniel Smith, who died in 1834,\u00a0decreed that his wife should maintain and school their 5 children: \u201c\u2026 providing they\u00a0remain with and continue to be submissive and obedient to their dear mother my said\u00a0beloved wife.\u201d[30. Columbiana County Probate Court,\u00a0Estate Records, 1803-1900<\/em>, vol. 8, pp. 246-47.]<\/p>\n

The causes of the massive emigrations from the Scottish Highlands of the\u00a0eighteenth and nineteenth century have been a matter of debate since they began.\u00a0Many believe that the Highlanders left involuntarily, the victims of eviction due to\u00a0economic and social reorganization. After being abandoned by their landlords, the\u00a0Highlanders were left to fend for themselves either in Scotland or the New World.\u00a0Essentially, many historians believe that the only reason the Highlanders looked for land outside Scotland is that their land in Scotland \u2013 rented to be sure \u2013 was taken away\u00a0from them. A counter to this argument, most notably advanced by J.M. Bumsted in The\u00a0People\u2019s Clearance, is that Highlanders voluntarily emigrated in order to maintain their\u00a0traditional culture.[31. J. M. Bumsted,\u00a0The People’s Clearance:\u00a0<\/em>Highland\u00a0<\/em>Emigration to\u00a0<\/em>British North America<\/em>, 1770-1815\u00a0<\/em>(Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1982), 65, 70.] This work suggests that neither argument is completely valid. The\u00a0evidence found in these wills, combined with evidence from their letters home \u2013 almost\u00a0all of which contain references to the availability of land in Ohio \u2013 suggest that these\u00a0Highlanders did leave voluntarily, but not to maintain their traditional lifestyles.\u00a0Rather, they left to obtain a better way of life, which included the purchase of land.<\/p>\n

Probate records reveal that many immigrants were able to live comfortably and\u00a0adapt to the needs of their new environment. Those of Scotch Settlement may not have\u00a0been wealthy, but they were able, with hard work, to obtain land and the necessities of\u00a0life without fear of eviction or rent increases, as well as to maintain a distinct cultural\u00a0community for several decades. These data would be largely unknown without\u00a0examining wills; and they provide excellent insights, not only into family composition,\u00a0but to the community created after emigration.<\/p>\n

Table I – Wills of Scotch Settlement Residents as recorded in the Columbiana County Probate Court, 1803-1853<\/h4>\n

\"Table1\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"Table1b\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Table II – Estate Records for Scotch Settlement Residents as recorded in the Columbiana County Probate Court, 1803-1853<\/h4>\n

\"Table2\"<\/a><\/h4>\n

\"Table2c\"<\/a><\/h4>\n

\"Table2d\"<\/a><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By: Amanda Epperson In the name of God Amen. I Alexander McIntosh of the County of Columbiana in\u00a0the State of Ohio a farmer, being sick and weak in body, but of sound mind\u00a0memory and understanding (blessed be to God for the same) do make and publish\u00a0this my last will and testament in manner and form … Continue reading “I Devise and Bequeath”: Property and Inheritance among the Scottish Highlanders in Scotch Settlement, Columbiana County, Ohio<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1622,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39918],"tags":[43822,42030,41842,14154,43826],"class_list":["post-1082","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-volume-3-issue-1-spring-2005","tag-3-1","tag-amanda-epperson","tag-article","tag-property","tag-scotch-settlement"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1082","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1622"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1082"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1082\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1122,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1082\/revisions\/1122"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1082"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1082"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.uakron.edu\/nojh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1082"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}