Daughters and Fathers

[jdavid]

Unlike their gender counter parts women did not enjoy the benefits of having property passed through their lineage side. (46) Public record left most women with the names of “wife of” or “daughter of” or even “sister of.” (49). Patriarchal society left males as head of the house and wives and children were dependent on the father. Women’s clothing even showed their lower status to men was they wore ankle-length petticoats. Most men refused to place their wives as sole heirs to t heir land estates (49). Married daughters where more important and single daughters when the land owning father had no sons to give his land to. (47)

[ccpender]

In English laws, daughters received little consideration in relation to land ownership. If a father was willing land to a child, it was to the oldest male. The portion that could have gone to the daughter was given to the husband of the daughter. This was different, however, in the New England colonies where the children of New England landowners were all given partials of the land (even females). Notable, though, is that the oldest males of the family usually received double portions of the land allotment. (pg. 46-47)

[dwhannah]

Women rarely had an independent existence. Women were referred to as the wife of, or the daughter of, or the sister of some male member of the family (49). As far as the pattern for inheritance was considered, it was through the male line and the daughters were very rarely considered for inheritance (46). The daughters were provided at times a small dowry to take into a marriage. If the daughter did not marry the responsibility was left to the eldest male to care for her as a part of his inheritance. Inheritance came with responsibility to the members of the family who could not care for themselves. In New England they followed the European tradition of “Favored heir plus burdens. (47)”

[Sherryd]

"The land belonged to the male line" (pg. 46). This pretty much sums it up. the land was given to the males in the family. Some passed all of the land to the eldest son, while others provided land for all of the sons. If a family had no sons, the land would be given to a married daughter and her husband for one of their sons. Sometimes, they created a male heir by giving the land to a brother's son instead of the daughters in the family.

[cboynton]

The daughters of property owners did not carry the same respect as the sons.  The first son was in many cases the sole inheritor of the father’s property.  This was especially common in Virginia as, “English laws of inheritance provided for the primogeniture (all lands passing to the eldest son) when there was no will.”(46)  The colonists wanted to keep the land in the family name.  In the New England colonies, the land was dispersed among all of the children in some cases. The eldest son usually received a larger portion than the other children. The daughters of parents with no sons received willed lands from their father after they were married.  In most cases, the daughters did not receive the same treatment as the son which goes back to the lack of women’s rights.

[jasuwi]

In the early days of the colonies, most property was handed down to the eldest son with portions going to other sons. At times property would be given to the husband of a daughter. Wood says, “The Revolution made a major change in the patterns of inheritance particularly in recognizing the equal rights of daughters and widows in the inheriting and possession of property.” (p.183) Most states gave women and daughters the right to own and control property.

[nicolesmith]

Life for daughters was a lot different then it is now. All property owning fathers wanted sons to pass their family name to, and land belonged to the male line. Where there were no male heirs, the father gave the estate to a married daughter and her husband to hold in a trust for one of their sons; or sometimes they created male heirs by selecting a brother's son, particularly ifthe nephew bore the testator's own Christian name. (47)