Sunday, June 01, 2014

Question from Peter - Inquisitions post mortem

Dear Friends,

Re Inquisitions post mortem.

Please could someone shed light on the role of Trustees per the following IPM below.

What are the duties of Trustees?

Why was the Trusteeship passed down the Peck family for several generations?

What does having the role of trustee tell us about the Peck family?

What does the Peck trusteeship tell us about the nature of their relationship to Sayvile?

What other genealogical and social nuggets can we glean from this IPM regarding the Peck family?

So many questions - sorry and thank you.

John Sayvile, Knt. 21 March, 12 Hen. VIII. (1520/1)

One Thomas Sayvile, great-grandfather of the said John,was seised of the manor of Folrigge, co. Lancaster. By charter, dated at Folrigge, St. Hilary's day, 8 Hen. V., he conveyed the same to trustees (amongst whom was Henry Sayvile of Copley, Esq.), entailing it on his heirs male.

(The last surviving trustee was Richard Peke, from whom the trusteeship has descended to John Peke, now living, son of Richard, son of Richard, son of John, son of the afore- said Richard Peke).

John Sayvile, Knt., died 20 March, 20 Hen. VII. Henry Saivile, Esq., is his son and heir, and
heir of the aforesaid Thomas, viz., son of John, son of John,son of John, son of the said Thomas. At the date of this inquisition he is 22 and upwards. By Letters Patent,5 Nov., 2 Hen. VIII., the wardship and marriage of the said Henry Saivile were granted to Richard Hastings, Knt.
Vol. ii., no. 11.

Very many thanks,
Peter

4 comments:

PhD Historian said...

It would appear that the original Thomas Sayvile of circa 1421 established a trust to hold his property, so that legal ownership passed from Thomas to something like a corporation. Established by specific royal charters, trusts held all the property and other assets of the founder and maintained those assets for the benefit of whomever the original trust charter designated (usually the lineal heirs of the person who established the trust). In the pre-modern era, reasons to establish a trust included the strong possibility that the future heir would be a minor or a female, neither of which would be legally empowered to manage his/her own affairs. Trusts were also established by property owners who anticipated being out of the country for an extended period, in order to safeguard the individual’s property during that period of absence. (Did Sayvile accompany Henry V to France in June 1421?) The practice is still very much in use today as a way to minimize death duties or estate taxes.
Trusts were (and are) managed by varying numbers of trustees who, though usually compensated in some way for their services, are not themselves able to enjoy the full benefit of the property or assets. They are simply legal guardians, empowered to make any necessary major decisions about the management of the estate. For example, selling of assets or purchase of additional assets would require trustee approval. But trustees were not usually involved in day-to-day hands-on operation of the estate. They were more nearly akin to modern corporate boards of directors than to office-based senior management. Trustees were usually appointed from among the family and closest friends and associates. In pre-modern practice, offices of trusteeship were often inheritable, passed down through a family according to the same principals as property inheritance (primogeniture, etc).
From the way Inquisition is worded, we know that Henry Sayvile of Copley was appointed by Thomas Sayvile as one of the original trustees. Henry’s trusteeship then became part of his own inheritable estate, eventually passing to his lineal male heirs. I suspect that at some point the estates of Henry Sayvile skipped a generation, passing directly from grandfather to grandson, and the intermediate (non-inheriting) generation was represented by a female who married someone surnamed Peck/Peke. That is, Mr Unnamed Sayvile had only female issue, and eldest daughter NoName Sayvile married a Mr Peck. Mrs NoName Sayvile Peck had a son by Mr Peck but predeceased her own father, Mr Unnamed Sayvile. Thus Mr Unnamed Sayvile’s estate, including his office of trustee to the ancestral Sayvile trust, passed directly to his grandson Mr YoungMan Peck. And it remained thereafter with Mr YoungMan Peck’s heirs, including “John Peke, now living.” That is only speculation, however. A lot more genealogical research needs to be done before the precise nature of the relationship between the Sayviles and Pecks can be sorted out.

Peter Cockerill said...

Dear PhD Historian you are ace.

According to the Visitations of Yorkshire John Peck son of Richard
married Isabel Lacy daughter of John Lacy!

Thank you so much for your fulsome explanation I am very very grateful.
Peter

shtove said...

This is your source, yes?

https://archive.org/stream/genealogicalmaga3189unse#page/29/mode/1up

That seems to be an interpretation of the original record. The term trustee is modern - it should be feoffee.

PhD's description is excellent.

Peter Cockerill said...

Apologies for long delay in replying to shtove.

Yes the link is my source.

I now have a concern however about the text in brackets. Is this text an insert by the editors of the magazine or part of the original IPM?

Peter