Document A.140 · orphans court · transcription: verbatim
Sussex Co. Orphans' Court, April Term 1857, pp. 212-213 — FINAL SETTLEMENT AND DECREE OF DISTRIBUTION of the estate of Sarah E. Hunt, administrator John L. Everitt. $14,797.36 divided nine ways among her uncles and aunts — one of them Sabina R. Cooper.
A.140: Sussex Co. Orphans' Court, April Term 1857, pp…People named
| As written | Role | Identified as | What this document says |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sarah E. Hunt | deceased | ||
| John L. Everitt | administrator | ||
| Sabina R. Cooper | mentioned | Sabina R Everitt Cooper 1814–1894 | |
| David T. Cooper | mentioned | David Thompson Cooper 1800 | |
| Samuel C. Hunt | mentioned | ||
| Thomas Hunt | mentioned | ||
| Joseph G. Everitt | mentioned | ||
| Samuel A. Everitt | mentioned | ||
| Margaret G. Mayberry | mentioned | ||
| Diana A. Mattison | mentioned | ||
| Mary Everitt | mentioned |
What this document records
A nine way sibship stated outright
The decree names all nine next of kin and their relationship to the decedent — "Samuel C. Hunt and Thomas Hunt, Joseph G. Everitt, Samuel A. Everitt and John L. Everitt her Uncles" and "Margaret G. Mayberry the wife of Samuel Mayberry, Sabina R. Cooper the wife of David T. Cooper, Diana A. Mattison the wife of William Mattison and Mary Everitt her Aunts". Sarah E. Hunt died intestate with no issue, no siblings and no living parents — which is the only reason a court had to enumerate an entire uncle-and-aunt generation on the record, and what makes this document unusually generous. Thomas Hunt "has departed this life intestate" since her decease — his ninth goes to his personal representatives.
What it deliberately does not say
The decree does not say which side each uncle or aunt stands on, does not name Sarah E. Hunt's parents, and gives no dates of death. Five Everitts and two Hunts among nine invites an obvious reading; the document supplies none. Any sibship argument belongs in Sabina R Everitt Cooper.
The arithmetic checks
9 × $1,642.76 = $14,784.84; + $12.50 costs of the decree = $14,797.34, against the stated balance of $14,797.36. Consistent to two cents — the rounding of the ninth. A transcription that survives its own arithmetic is a transcription checked from the inside, independent of any re-reading.
Transcription and notes
Provenance, the nine-way uncle-and-aunt enumeration and why the court had to make it, what
the decree deliberately withholds, and the arithmetic check are in the source: and coverage:
headers and are not repeated here.
Pages 212–213 of the minute book. Marginal heading:
"In the Matter of the account of John L. Everitt the Administrator of Sarah E. Hunt deceased. — Final Settlement and Decree of distribution"
Data from the document [verbatim]
"Sussex Orphans' Court — April Term 1857. The Surrogate having audited and stated the account of John L. Everitt the Administrator of Sarah E. Hunt deceased and placed the same on the files of his office twenty days previous to this time, and the same appearing to have been advertised according to law, and being now reported for settlement and no exceptions thereto, the said account is in all things allowed as reported.
And it appearing to the Court that there is a balance in the hands of said administrator amounting to fourteen thousand seven hundred and ninety seven dollars and thirty six cents.
And that the said Sarah E. Hunt left Samuel C. Hunt* and Thomas Hunt, Joseph G. Everitt, Samuel A. Everitt and John L. Everitt her Uncles and* Margaret G. Mayberry the wife of Samuel Mayberry, Sabina R. Cooper the wife of David T. Cooper, Diana A. Mattison the wife of William Mattison and Mary Everitt her Aunts *— who are her next of kin — and that the said Thomas Hunt since the decease of the said Sarah E. Hunt has departed this life intestate*.
It is Ordered that the said sum, after deducting the sum of twelve dollars and fifty cents the Costs of this decree of distribution, be distributed and paid to them by the said Administrator as follows viz:
One Ninth part thereof amounting to the sum of sixteen hundred and forty two dollars and seventy six cents to the said Samuel C. Hunt — One Ninth part … to the personal Representatives of the said Thomas Hunt deceased — One Ninth part … [to the said Joseph G. Everitt] … — One Ninth part … [to the said Samuel A.] Everitt — One Ninth part … to the said John L. Everitt — One Ninth part … to the said Margaret G. Mayberry the wife of Samuel Mayberry — One Ninth part … to the said Sabina R. Cooper the wife of David T. Cooper — One Ninth part … to the said Diana A. Mattison the wife of William Mattison — And One Ninth part thereof amounting to the sum of sixteen hun[dred …]"
The two shares bracketed above run across the page turn and were not separately cropped; the nine-way division and the per-share figure are, however, stated explicitly and repeatedly.
The arithmetic, as a consistency check [desc]
9 × $1,642.76 = $14,784.84; + $12.50 costs = $14,797.34 against the stated balance of $14,797.36. Consistent to two cents (rounding of the ninth).