 |
| Source |
Ann Powers was born in Newfoundland around 1785. Her marriage to James Alford, a sailor, on August 27, 1801, is recorded in the ledger of the Dutch Reformed Church in New York City. Seventy years later, she wrote her will in New Castle, New York, leaving money and several prized possessions to her friends. No relatives are named in Ann Alford's will; they are uniformly friends, and all who are explicitly named are female.
In a society where legal and social machinery conspired to keep property in the hands of men, and where familial ties were valued over non-familial ones, it is touching to witness the freedom of a woman to distribute her property among her female friends. Even more so than the pecuniary gifts, the choice of Ann's personal possessions illustrate the close bonds of friendship, as well as the way in which objects could function as conveyors of meaning and memory. Ann was 87 years old when she died; the recipients of her dresses were more than 30 years younger than she. Would the recipients actually wear the dresses? Or would they be kept for sentimental reasons only? It is worth noting that in the estate inventories of the 19th century, a person's "wearing apparel" was often the most valuable item in the list.
The other objects, while likely meant to evoke sentiment, seem more useful: the counterpane (bedspread) given to Emeline Benedict; the gold watch given to her daughter; even the bed and bedding left to Caroline Peters of Cincinnati (how exactly was that transaction accomplished?). While the idea of inheriting your elderly friend's bedsheets may seem a bit odd today, beds and bedding were very valuable in the 19th century, second only to apparel in the average person's inventory of possessions.
Here is the will in its entirety:
Will of Ann Alford
In the name of God, amen: I, Ann Alford, widow, of the town of New Castle, County of Westchester and State of New York, being of sound mind and memory do make, publish, and declare this my last will and testament, in manner following, that is to say:
First. I order my executors hereinafter named to pay all my just debts and funeral expenses.
Second. I give and bequeath unto my beloved friend Emeline Benedict, widow of John Benedict of the town of New Castle, the sum of one hundred dollars, my black silk dress, my brown or slate colored dress, and my white counterpane.
Third. I give and bequeath to my beloved friend Deborah Benedict, daughter of Emeline, my gold watch.
Fourth. I give and bequeath to my beloved friend Caroline Peters, wife of John Peters of the city of Cincinnati and state of Ohio, my bed and bedding.
Fifth. I give and bequeath to my beloved friend Hannah H. Sarles, wife of William A. Sarles of the town of Bedford, county of Westchester and state of New York, the sum of one hundred dollars and all the rest and remainder of my wardrobe not hereinbefore disposed of.
Sixth. I give and bequeath to my beloved friend Sarah Ann Jackson, widow of George Jackson of the town of Bedford, county of Westchester and state of New York, the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars, and in case of the decease of the said Sarah Ann Jackson before receiving any benefit from the provision herein made for her benefit, then the said sum of one hundred and fifty dollars bequeathed to her shall be for the benefit of my beloved friend Hannah H. Sarles, wife of William A. Sarles of the town of Bedford, county of Westchester and state of New York.
Seventh. I give and bequeath unto my beloved friends Mary Seaman of Norwalk and state of Connecticut; Phebe Chase, wife of Edward Chase of the town of Bedford, county of Westchester and state of New York, and Susan, daughter of Gilbert Van Tassel of the city, county, and state of New York, each the sum of fifty dollars.
Eighth. I give and bequeath to my beloved friends Frances Cecelia Wheaton and Maria Henrietta Wheaton, children of Miles B. Wheaton of the city of New York, each the sum of fifty dollars.
Ninth. And I further provide in case of the death of any one of the parties to whom I have left any legacy or given any articles (except in the case of the said Sarah Ann Jackson) then the provision so made to them shall not become void but shall revert to their heirs at law.
Tenth. I give and bequeath all the rest, residue, and remainder of my estate, goods and chattels, of what nature or kind so ever to the children of my beloved friend John Romer, of the city, county, and state of New York, who shall remain unmarried at the time of my decease, share and share alike.
Lastly. I hereby nominate and appoint my friends John Romer and Miles R. Carpenter of the city, county, and state of New York executors of this my last will and testament, hereby revoking all former wills by me made.
In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal this twenty-fifth day of September in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and seventy one.
Mrs. Ann Alford
The above instrument consisting of one sheet was at the date hereof signed, sealed, published, and declared by the said Ann Alford as and for her last will and testament in presence of us, who at her request and in her presence and in the presence of each other have subscribed our names as witnesses hereto.
M. W. Fish, Bedford, Westchester Co., NY
H. S. Banks, New Castle, Westchester Co., NY
----
Emeline Benedict, the recipient of $100, two dresses, and Ann's white counterpane, would have been 55 years old in 1871. Her daughter Deborah would have been around 30. John Benedict, their husband and father respectively, was a farmer who died sometime before 1870. Just two years earlier, Ann Alford was a boarder in the Benedicts' house, as shown in the 1870 federal census.
Hannah H. Sarles would have been 46 years old when she was named as the recipient of the remainder of Ann's wardrobe, as well as $100. She was a milliner, her husband a shoemaker.
Sarah Ann Jackson, who would have been 38, was born Sarah Ann Van Tassel. Phebe Chase and Susan Van Tassel were her sisters. Sarah Ann was recorded as a milliner in the 1860 census and a seamstress in the 1870 census. Her husband, George W. Jackson, was a tailor. Phebe Chase's husband Edwin was a tin smith; they married in 1861 and had three children. Phebe, one of her children, and her other sister Ardelia are buried in the cemetery.
Mary Seaman, who appears to have been unmarried, would have been 46, and in 1880 was living with her sister and brother-in-law, the Sherwoods, in Norwalk.
Miles B. Wheaton was a builder in New York City; his wife was Julia A. Wheaton. In 1871, their daughters Frances and Maria would have been 14 and nine years old, respectively. Their son William would have been five, but Ann didn't leave anything to him.
I haven't been able to identify which John Romer it was who is identified in Ann's will (there were several living in New York City in the 1870s, all with children). However, I find it interesting that Ann stipulated that only the yet unmarried children were to receive an inheritance.
If there's one pattern that I can discern running through the people named in Ann's will, it is that they tend to be women who exercise a relative amount of independence from men. Emeline Benedict was a widow; her daughter Deborah was single. Mary Seaman was single. Sarah Ann Jackson and Hannah H. Sarles were married, but both practiced trades of their own (milliner/seamstress and milliner, respectively). Frances and Maria Wheaton were unmarried adolescents.
Of course, this is only a theory, but perhaps Ann Alford had a soft spot for women and girls who, whether by choice or circumstance, provided for themselves either partly or totally. Perhaps, having no living children of her own, she befriended women and girls whom she could imagine as daughters and granddaughters. Perhaps some of these women also sought out Ann to fill a familial role in their lives. In the case of the Benedicts, it seems plausible that Emeline, in addition to being Ann's landlady, also served as her caregiver.
While this is all conjectural, these are the kind of relationships that I like to explore, the ordinary ties between neighbors and friends that were so essential to a community, yet can also feel very ephemeral as the stories and meanings behind the gifts to "beloved friends" are left unspoken and undocumented.
I get an image of a strong, capable, well organised and mentally independent sort of woman. The fact that she left the 5-year-old boy out of the will seemed a little harsh at first, but maybe she had the strength of mind to see it in practical terms. Maybe she realised that he would have all the advantages and that his sisters were the ones who needed the help. In light of our previous discussion, it's notable that she lived to such an old age. I'm curious to know:
ReplyDelete1. She was evidently of substantial means. Even $50 was a lot of money back then. How did she come to this, being married to a mere 'sailor?' Was he, perhaps, a ship's captain?
2. Why did she make a will at age 87? Was she aware of her impending demise? What was the cause of her death?
3. Why does her gravestone use her maiden name? Was that normal?
This is a very human and quite touching story.
As always, your questions force me to stop and consider things more carefully. (I have a tendency to breeze over details in my excitement to come to conclusions, which if I believed in astrology I would attribute to being a Gemini.)
ReplyDelete1. I've been frustrated by the scarcity of the evidence I have found about James Alford and Ann Powers. I haven't found him in any of the censuses, and her in only one. By that time she was in her eighties, but notably the sections for real and personal estate are both left blank. Emeline (Emily) Benedict, on the other hand, had $5000 in real estate and $375 in personal estate. Adding up the amounts left to her heirs, Ann Alford must have had at least $600, not including her possessions. Perhaps the census taker missed these, or perhaps he lumped them in with Emeline Benedict's property?
Of course that doesn't answer your question, which is how did Ann come to have such wealth in the first place. I can't say, but there are some possibilities. She might have come from a wealthy family, or perhaps had relatives or friends who left her money in their wills. Going by the birthdate implied by her tombstone (age 87 in 1872), she would have been only 15 or 16 at the time of her marriage. Her husband may have been older or he may have been equally young, in which case he would have had time to build a career and yes, perhaps, rise to the level of a captain. Of course this is all just imagining.
It's worth noting that many of the people buried in the cemetery were well off (perhaps not rich, but definitely comfortable), especially those who lived in the later 19th century. Most made their living through farming, trades, or business. Few if any were "gentlemen" (in the sense that they had family money and didn't have to work) but I imagine most would have benefited from some amount of support from their parents in the form of some money or property left to them in a will. The will I am looking at next assigns a man's blacksmith shop and tools to his son.
2. Ann's will was written September 25, 1871 (not 1872, which was a typo on my part, now corrected). She died on February 19, 1873. It is possible that she was in declining health and knew the end was near, although she was not yet on her deathbed. Or perhaps her friends pressured her to write it (to be a bit more cynical).
I don't know the cause of her death. Unfortunately prior to 1880 there was no standardized system for recording deaths in the US. I may be able to find some record of it in the town archives.
3. It wasn't common, but I have seen it. I tend to see it as a reflection of the desire to perpetuate the woman's natal identity, for whatever reason. In certain cases it seems to indicate that the woman's family had some social standing, perhaps greater than that of her husband's (this is certainly true for cases in which the woman's father is named on the gravestone in addition to her husband). Perhaps it was an expression of Ann's independence. It's difficult to say, as it may have meant different things in different circumstances.
Breeze over details? Give over! Your attention to detail sometimes makes my brain vibrate, sometimes uncomfortably. The problem here (though it's actually rather a nice trait) is that you extend the details into a human story, and you do so humanely. That makes the person come to life in my imagination, and then I want to know more because I'm quite interested in individuals (if I believed in astrology I would put it down to being a Sagittarian, the opposite sign to Gemini.) Sorry if I'm being a nuisance.
ReplyDeleteBring on the blacksmith! (And thanks for talking to me. Not many people do, thankfully.)