These are some legal EDMONDS documents I found in the Wiltshire Co Archives, some of which I may have transcribed and uploaded elsewhere...
These first three is one Indenture concerning Ezekiel Edmonds (elder brother of William Bennett Edmonds), of 1851.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
These next three concern the same Ezekiel Edmonds, being a sort of pre-nup (all the rage back then if you aspired to greatness!) of 1835, just before his marriage to memory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
These next two sets, both concerning a John Edmonds, are "strays". This John Edmonds had a wife Cordelia, and he lived in Buckinghamshire, BUT - both documents were in the Wilts CRO, although no-one there could ever give me a reasonable (in fact any) explanation as to WHY! The coincidence is that William Bennett Edmonds mother-in-law (the EVANS lady) was born in Buckinghamshire. But this could have no connection. It remains a mystery for you to solve!
This first set of three are of 1829 and is an agreement of some kind.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This next set of four is John Edmonds' will of 1853.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is John Hinton, the father of Ruth Hinton, who married John Edmonds and were the parents of William Bennett Edmonds (see "The Cloth Dynasty That Went Nowhere"). Note that this is a summary of what it's all about as you'd lose the will to live if you had to read the original word for word - even if you could.
The Will of John Hinton of Bradford in Wilts, proved 1822
This Will is from the Gen Records Office in London. It is long and repetitive and rather testing to read, with several codicils, and it's full of tedious legalese. This is the essence of it …
John Hinton made the original will 15th April 1815, about seven years before his death. He describes himself as "a Dissenting Minister of the the Gospel", implying at least that by 1815 this was deemed to be his profession, although he probably made what wealth he had in the wool and cloth trade in Bradford-on-Avon, which was the mainstay of the town for two or three hundred years up to about 1840.
Oddly he doesn't open with the usual "In the name of God amen" and the state of his mind, but gets straight into it, setting aside funds for his funeral and probate expenses. Provision for a living wife usually then goes in about here, but none is mentioned, so it assumes he is a widower.
Next he names three local men of standing (but not specifically yet as his executors), and their survivors, heirs, assigns blah blah blah –
Samuel Salter of Trowbridge, Clothier
William Harcomb(?) of Trowbridge, Clothier
Charles Cadby of Bradford, Timber Dealer
- and gives them 500 pounds to invest as a trust fund for the "maintenance bringing up and education" of his grandson John Heal, the son of his late daughter Ann Heal, during the life of the boy's father (not named), and then adds qualifiers should the grandson die before the father and any children of the grandson splitting it equally on reaching the age of twenty one. This maybe implies that John Heal the grandson is already within striking distance of reproducing, or John Hinton expects to live a long time yet. It's interesting to note that the will clearly makes it's (first) mistake here in referring once to the grandson as "my son John Heal".
In the names of the three same men he then puts aside two lots of fifty pounds as trust fund for the poor Members of two baptist churches, the one in St Margaret St in Bradford (presumably his "local") and in Beckington (a village a few kms south of BonA, in Somerset).
He then makes a straight bequest of fifty pounds to his "servant Hannah Hinton" but doesn't qualify the relationship if any, maybe some distant relative keeping house? And next he bequeaths ten pounds each for the three men for acting as his executors (although he hasn't actually declared them such as yet).
Next he directs that his "two daughters Elizabeth Heal and Ruth Edmonds" can dispose of all his "wearing apparel" as they want.
Curious to note that both the dead daughter Ann and the living one Elizabeth, carry the Heal surname. Did they each marry brothers or close relatives? Or did the unnamed son-in-law remarry the sister on the death of his wife?? There are quite a few Heals in BonA in this period.
He then gets into the disposal of what sounds like the bulk of his estate, described as (commas mine for clarity) - "…my Messuages or Tenements, newly erected Clothing Factory, Land and Hereditaments at Greenland in the parish of Bradford aforesaid, and also all other my Messuages or Tenements, Land and Hereditaments and premises, monies, and securities for money, household goods, and furniture…" - all sounding like a decent lump of real estate and business interests.
He directs that his three executors (heirs, survivors, assigns endless blah blah blah) to liquidate all of it, pay out the above legacies and probate and funeral expenses, and the balance to be divided - "…equally between my said daughters Elizabeth the wife of William Heal of Bradford aforesaid (then inserted here, via a margin note, presumably missed out) – 'fundholder and Ruth the wife of John Edmonds of Bradford aforesaid' clothier…" - through investment in what sounds like conservative stocks and securities.
He then deals with the fate of the two daughter's equal half inheritances, that the remainder of it on their deaths should be divided equally between any children once they reach twenty one, and then there's some kind of crossover contingency between the two daughters if either of them should die before their children reach twenty one, in which case the surviving daughter acts as trustee of the minor's estate until they do come of age. (I don't know anything about Elizabeth, but Ruth probably had at least the first two of her three surviving kids by this).
Having dealt with the predictable stuff, he then gets to some refinements, specifically - "…that in case the said John Edmonds at any time or times hereafter shall be desirous of retaining or of borrowing or taking up at interest any sum or sums of money not exceeding together the amount or value of the said last mentioned equal half part…" – implying that he half expects the Edmonds son-in-law, who is also in the clothing business in BonA, to want to borrow against this asset, and wants to keep it (safe?) businesslike, so he requires his trustees – "…to accept the personal bond security or such other security of the said John Edmonds for the repayment thereof…".
He closes his initial will by specifically declaring the three men as his executors and re-outlines the manner in which he expects them to look after the trust fund for his two daughters, and signs it on 15th April 1815, witnessed by John Bush his solicitor and two other local worthies.
~ ~ ~
About two years later, on 1st March 1817, he adds the first Codicil, still describing himself as "of Bradford … Dissenting Minister of the Gospel".
He opens with a general reiterative description of the estate, but then gets straight into some kind of provision for a specific (newly married?) Heal grandchild, but seems to incorporate a kind of subtle qualification of the inheritance, that it is - "… unto my daughter Elizabeth Heal the wife of William Heal of Bradford aforesaid Innkeeper (although he was described as a fundholder originally) and her assigns for and during the term of her natural life without the control or interference of her present or any future husband…" – as if he wants to clearly spell it out?
He then gets into presumably the main reason for the codicil – "…my granddaughter Eliza the wife of Richard Ollerton as one of the daughters of my said daughter Elizabeth Heal… "- and goes on about what this grandchild is entitled to under the original terms, but doesn't seem to change that, only adds – "…and I being desirous of securing a provision for her and her children over which her present or any future husband shall have no control…" – again suggesting he means to keep all of this just for his daughters and their children?
It takes a page or two to labour through all the ramifications of there being now a married grandchild, even touching on great-grandchildren! All this suggests that his daughter Elizabeth is much older than Ruth, as at this time Ruth is still probably childless (although according to other records has been married for some 14 years?), their surviving eldest William Bennett Edmonds not being born till about this time.
But at no point in this codicil does he mention specifically the half going to Ruth, or any qualification concerning it.
He signs and dates this codicil on 1st March 1817, before his solicitor and two new witnesses.
~ ~ ~
But, then he also makes another Codicil, dated the same as above, in which he opens by describing his real estate more fully, and the terms of his trustees – "…to pay and divide out equal Moiety or half part of the trust monies therein mentioned unto and equally between my two daughters Elizabeth the wife of William Heal of Bradford aforesaid Innholder and Ruth the wife of John Edmonds of Bradford aforesaid Clothier…"- but then doesn't really add anything new, or change anything, other than to say that all this is – "…for the sole separate use and benefit of my said daughters and their children…".
He also signs this one on 1st March 1817, before the same witnesses.
~ ~ ~
About 18 months later, on 29th of October 1818, he draws up a third and much longer Codicil, still describing himself the same way.
He re-states at length that his original will says blah blah blah, what his estate comprises of, who his executors are and how they should handle the trust, and that they must – "…pay and divide out equal Moiety or half part of the trust monies therein mentioned unto and equally between my two daughters Elizabeth the wife of William Heal of Bradford aforesaid Innholder and Ruth the wife of John Edmonds of Bradford aforesaid Clothier … … …upon trust for the sole separate use and benefit of my said daughters and their children…"- and goes on with some legal qualifications needed because of these Codicils, but then adds, as if really making sure it's spelt out – "…it being my will and desire that the whole of the two Moieties of my said trust estate and premises shall be held by my said trustees for the sole separate and independent use of my said daughters respectively and their issue…"
He then gets back onto the original five hundred pound trust for the son of his dead daughter, that at any time after the death of the grandson's father – "…to advance and pay him the said John Heal, from time to time and at any time when they may think fit, for his benefit and advancement in the world, the whole or any part of this said legacy of five hundred pounds to and for his own absolute use…"
But then he goes on – "…and whereas my sons in law Mr Heal and Mr Edmonds stand indebted to me for money lent and advanced to them respectively at interest and I have by my said will given and bequeathed to or in trust for my said daughters the wives of the said Mr Heal and Mr Edmonds certain legacies…" – suggesting that the husbands have since borrowed from the old man for business purposes, and he wants this not only taken into account, but seems to give his daughters and the trustees some leverage over the husbands in case things look like they are going pear-shaped?
He says – "…that they my said trustees … …are hereby directed whenever it shall appear to either of them to be expedient and necessary for the security or more safely carrying into effect the trusts of my said will, or either of my said daughters shall request my said trustees … … to call in from her husband and require payment of the said several sums of money respectively in order that the same may be placed out at interest upon such security as in my said will is mentioned … … and also in case it should happen that any loss or deficiency should arise by the nonpayment or non receipt of the said debt or principal money and the interest … … owing from the said Mr Heal and Mr Edmonds…" – then he says such loss will count against the respective daughter's half share in the trust income.
Bearing in mind that the older wool and cloth industry in BonA was just beginning to struggle at this point under pressure from the new industrial muscle of the Midlands (and went bust completely in 1841 with the collapse of the main local Bank) you can probably sense the background uncertainty of the old man and his hard-won wealth. Also interesting to note that while John Edmonds went bust in 1841, his brother Ezekial (and his son) fared much better, to be deemed the last surviving old wool/cloth mill family in the town.
For some reason he then adds a fourth executor, with the same powers as the others, one "Robert Hooper of Bradford aforesaid, Surgeon".
He signs this Codicil on 29th October 1818, before three new witnesses.
~ ~ ~
Dated the same day as the above, he adds this odd little bit after the end of the third Codicil – "I John Hinton the said testator do hereby authorise and empower my said trustees at any time during the life of my said wife (this is surely meant to be "daughter", a further important relationship mistake gone unnoticed, as till now the word "wife" hasn't been mentioned, and wives always figure in the opening) Elizabeth Heal to advance and pay over to my said daughter any part of the legacy by me given to or in trust for her to and for the sole and separate use of my said daughter, it being my wish and desire that my said trustees shall have a power and discretion to assist my said daughter at any time when they in their judgement may deem it for her benefit…", and adds a provision for the ten pounds for his new executor.
This may suggest that his daughter Elizabeth is ailing? Needs a bit of extra support? Is now a widow?
He signs this separately, also on 29th October 1818, before the three same witnesses.
~ ~ ~
The will is "Proved" at London, in the usual manner, on 22nd July 1822, implying that John had recenty died.
~ ~ ~
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>