Where there's a will..., Teesdale Mercury

Where there's a will...

Nov 22, 2007

Old wills are fascinating documents. They give us a glimpse into a vanished world. Sometimes, though, wills tell us something more. Family rifts and secrets sometimes surface in wills. Illegitimate children can be finally acknowledged in wills and occasionally close relatives are given nothing. A few wills leave you wishing you knew a bit more about the people concerned.

One such will is that written by a widow from Barnard Castle on April 26, 1631. The lady's name was Wynifride Midleton, or as we would spell it, Winifred Middleton. Winifred didn't die until December 1635 - some four years after the date of her will. This was distinctly unusual for that time. In the 17th century, people usually didn't write their will until they were on their deathbed. Winifred was clearly a well-to-do woman. She disposed of many valuable goods and her will is full of the names of the upper echelons of Teesdale society. Sir Talbot Bowes and his brother owed her money; her sister was married into the Conyers family and representatives of two of Teesdale's gentry families, namely Ambrose Appleby and Laurence Raine, were witnesses to her will.

Winifred must have had some sadness in her later life because, as well as losing her husband, George Middleton, in 1626, both her children, Jane and Elizabeth, were also dead. Jane had been married to Israel Fielding and died childless but Elizabeth, who was married to John Dent, had a daughter named Jane. So at least Winifred had a granddaughter to comfort her. Jane was her closest relative and next of kin and she was aged 13 in 1631. Barnard Castle parish registers give us the additional information that Jane was married in May 1636 at Barningham to Sir Francis Anderson of Bradley, knight.

At first glance, Winifred's will is typical of a wealthy widow of her day. She gave 40 shillings to the poor of Barney on the day of her funeral - that should have guaranteed a good attendance - and 20 shillings just before the Christmas following. She gave an embossed silver bowl with a cover to her son-in-law Israel Fielding. To her grandchild she gave her ‘lesser peece of guilded plate with the cover, one silver salte with a cover, my brewing leade racks and spit withal, all my cupboards, tables and bedsteads before not bequeathed'. It's interesting that equipment used for brewing ale was part of a gentle lady's possessions. Then, as was customary, after other bequests Winifred left the remainder of her estate to Jane, her grandchild and heir. Winifred requested that her good friend Mr Thomas Glover, the vicar of Startforth, should preach at her funeral and asked to be buried within Barnard Castle Church near to the grave of her husband.

All this was perfectly proper. However, when it came to bequests to her servants the will suddenly became controversial. Do we detect a whiff of scandal here? It's true that Winifred gave her old servant Isabell Shepheard the conventional sum of five shillings, but with another of her servants it's a quite different matter. Winifred's will was exceptionally generous to her servant Charles Sanderson and even extended to his wider family as

well.

Firstly she gave to Charles all the ‘interest, rights and title in a little parcel of ground called the Lunnygarth' with right of access to it through the little mains. To Charles she also left a cow gate on the little mains - we would call it the Demesnes today.

And it didn't stop there! Winifred also gave Charles half of her corn crop plus all her ‘plowe geare and waine geare and whatsoever els belongeth unto husbandry'. And then she gave him the bedstead and the cupboard in the room he occupied in her house plus all the furniture and household stuff in the house. Charles' son, also called Charles, was given £5 towards his maintainance at school. Two other Sandersons are mentioned in the will. Jane Sanderson, described as Winifred's god-daughter and servant, was given £3 6s 8d for the apparel for her wedding plus Winifred's old riding suit. Then Christopher Sanderson, ‘now an apprentice at London' was given five shillings a year during the time of his apprenticeship.

Why was Winifred so generous to this family? Winifred described Charles as being, ‘ever trustie and faithfull in all my affairs an imployments wherein I have used him'. She also said that Charles had provided the husbandry gear at his own expense when first he came into her husband's service. Winifred's actions were distinctly unusual. People didn't reward servants in that way in the 17th century. We can tell that she expected the will to be challenged since she bequeathed her sister Alice Conyers £10 on condition that neither she nor her husband would contest the will or even question or contradict the executors or their servants.

The bequests of the executors themselves - including her granddaughter - were dependent on them looking after Charles Sanderson ‘to defend him and keep him harmless'. They were also required to defray any expenses incurred if he ‘was molested, questioned or troubled'. In effect, if necessary he was to be paid damages by the executors. What on earth was going on? It would be interesting to know the background to this will. Winifred's family appears to be in conflict in some way. And what about Charles Sanderson? The Sanderson family were lords of the manor at Eggleston during the 17th century - was Charles Sanderson a poor relation? And why did he receive so much from Winifred's will?

Can anyone shed any light on the story?

First published in the Mercury, November 14, 2007