The Mystery in the Old Will

#52ancestors
Week 9: Where There’s a Will

The Mystery in the Old Will

By Myra Vanderpool Gormley ©2018

 It looks like an ordinary will and starts out that way, although it soon becomes apparent that the 80-year-old testator, Isaac Pierson, had specific ideas about who and what his widow and his heirs were to inherit. The Will was made 31 March 1859 and probated eight months later in Preble County, Ohio.

I give and bequeath to my present and beloved wife in lieu of her dower in the farm I own in state aforesaid, township and county, one-half of all the monies and credits that are in my possession at death, but if my wife would rather choose, the sum of $20,800 . . .  I will in addition to the above to my present wife one mantel clock now owned by me and a closet, a corner cupboard and furniture.

His “present wife” was his second wife, Elizabeth (née House) Utz, widow of Lewis Utz. She and Isaac Pierson married in December of 1834 (his first wife, Hannah Ayers, died in March of 1834). They both had children by their first spouses, but they had no children together. Isaac and Hannah (his first wife) had had seven children, but only four were living at the time Isaac made his Will; the other three had died young and left no heirs.

I will and bequeath my daughter, SARAH, and her children 30 acres of land off of the north side of my farm that I now own in Twin Township, Preble County, Ohio.

Fathers sometimes gave  their daughters land, especially if they were newlyweds, but Sarah Pierson had married William Hixson Jr. in 1831 — 28 years earlier, so this bequeath was somewhat out of the ordinary, but perhaps there was another reason — something my research had not yet turned up. It might throw some light on why I had been unable to find Sarah in the 1850 and 1860 censuses as she was not with her husband and children in those Preble County, Ohio enumerations.

And I have given to each of (my) children something heretofore to give them a start in the world and considering that I have given to my son Briam [sic] A. Pearson $100 more than I gave to [each] of my other children, I therefore make it his duty after my death to see that there be paid only $5 to REBECCA's children, $25 to my daughter MARY, and $25 to my daughter SARAH for the purpose of making these all equal . . .
[caps on the daughters’ names are mine].

Did he really mean to give only $5 to Rebecca’s children (she had two) rather than $25?  I re-checked the Will to be sure, and the transcription is accurate. It is impossible to know for sure why the Testator did this since he did not record his reasons, but perhaps he had already given her children money or property. The Will continues:

 and the balance of my property after the debts are fully paid to be divided equally among all my children by my executor in the manner he may think most profitable  . . . I appoint John VANWINKLE and William UTZ as my executors to settle up the estate and they shall have full power to execute any instrument of writing that may be necessary for a conveyance of a title and the title so conveyed shall be as good as if I had made it myself.

Then, evidently he remembered additional things he wanted to include:

. . . and further as I have forgot to mention, I will to my present wife the young bay mare that I have always considered should be hers and the buggy . . .

And then he threw the curve:

. . . also that SARAH is not to have any more after she gets what I have willed to her -- the 30 acres of land and the $25 she is to have from my estate. [and in almost a conversational letter-style manner, he continues giving instruction to his son] Biram, after she gets this, her interest in my estate, she is not to have any more.
The balance is to be divided among my other children or their heirs. I desire that sale of my personal property be made.

So, Sarah, what did you do or not do that evidently displeased your father? More importantly, where did you disappear to and why can’t I find you and unravel this mystery?