Deed, Samuel and Sabrina Davenport Canfield to Emma Smith, 1 October 1836
Deed, Samuel and Sabrina Davenport Canfield to Emma Smith, 1 October 1836
Source Note
Source Note
Samuel Canfield and Sabrina Davenport Canfield, Deed for property in , Geauga Co., OH, to , 1 Oct. 1836. Version copied 12 Nov. 1836 in Geauga Co., OH, Deed Record, vol. 23, pp. 92–93; handwriting of ; Geauga County Archives and Records Center, Chardon, OH. Includes seals.
Historical Introduction
Historical Introduction
In the nineteenth-century , married women were not legally allowed to own land because of the common law principle of coverture, also known as unity of person. Under coverture, when a woman was married her legal identity was subsumed under her husband’s, and all property that had belonged to her came under her husband’s control. A married woman could not own land, earn money for herself, or enter into contracts or litigation without her husband’s approval and involvement. Married women’s ability to own land began to change in the 1840s as laws were passed in some states granting this right, but such laws were not in place in or during JS’s lifetime.
Although statutes in and prohibited married women and minor children from owning land, JS and many of his contemporaries in the had land deeded to their wives. On rarer occasions, they deeded land to their children or to another man’s wife or children. Occasionally, a man might ask that, as part of a land transaction, the deed be made in his wife’s name. Some land transactions appear solely in a married woman’s name, and it is unclear in many of those instances if she was the purchaser or if the transaction was simply done in her name. The reasons for these actions are not specified in contemporary records, but transactions like this may have been a means of providing for a wife and children as a form of inheritance in case of death. Alternatively, such transactions may have been initiated to make it hard for creditors trying to seize property for unpaid debts.
There were a number of deeds made in and in which JS’s wife or their children were named as the owners of the transferred or purchased property. In these instances, the legal principle of coverture meant that even though the property was in Emma’s or the Smith children’s names, it was ultimately JS’s property. Given his legal right to sell or transfer the property as he saw fit, the Joseph Smith Papers includes these deeds with the other land transactions featured on the project website.
Footnotes
- [1]
“Coverture,” in Bouvier, Law Dictionary [1843], 1:392; Salmon, Women and the Law of Property, 14–18.
Bouvier, John. A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States of America, and of the Several States of the American Union; With References to the Civil and Other Systems of Foreign Law. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Philadelphia: T. and J. W. Johnson, 1843.
Salmon, Marylynn. Women and the Law of Property in Early America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986.
- [2]
See, for example, Letter, Don Carlos Smith to Oliver Granger, 11 July 1841.
- [3]
- [4]
This becomes clear in a few cases where the property may have been purchased or transferred to Emma Smith or one of the Smith children, but JS then sold or transferred it.
Samuel Canfield To
To all people to whom these presents shall come Greeting Know. ye that we samuel Canfield of Geauga County and state of Ohio <& Sabrina [Davenport] Canfield my wife> for the consideration of one hundred and sixty dollars <good & lawful money> received to our full satisfaction of of the Town of County of Geauga and state of Ohio do give grant bargain sell and confirm unto her the said the following described tract or lot of Land situate in number nine in the ninth range of Townships in the in the state of And which is also in the County of and is known as part of Lot No. forty two, and is bounded as follows to wit on the north by said surveyed assor Reuben Field by Edson surveyor, on the east by said Fields land, on the south by the south line of of said Lot No. 42, and on the west by the centre of the highway lately laid out supposed to contain about eight acres be it the same more or less, but subject to one half of the above <mentioned> highway
To have and to hold the above granted and bargained premises, with the appurtenances thereof unto her the said & to her heirs, and assigns <forever> to their own proper use and behoof. And also we the said Samuel Canfield and my wife Sabina, do for our<selves &> heirs executors and administrators covenant with the said , and <her> heirs and assigns, that at and until the ensealing of these presents we are well seized of those premises, and as a good indefeasible estate, in fee simple and have good right to bargain and sell the same in manner and form as is above written, and that the same is free from all incumbrances whatsoever, and furthermore we the said Samuel and Sabrina <my wife> do by these presents bind ourselves, and our heirs forever warrant and Defend the above granted and bargained premises to her the said & her heirs and assigns against all lawful claims and demands whatsoever. And I the said Sabrina Canfield do hereby <remise> release and <forever> quit claim unto the said and to her heirs and assigns, all my right and title of dower in and to the above described premises
In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands and seal this first day of October A D one thousand eight hundred and thirty six
Samuel Canfield seal
Sabina Canfield seal
Signed sealed acknowledged and delivered in presence of Austin Butler
The State of Ohio)
ss. [scilicet])
Personally appeared Sabrina Canfield & Samuel Canfield. to me personally Known as the signors and sealers of the above instrument, and acknowledged that they did voluntarily sign and seal the same and that the same is their free act and deed. [p. 92]
Source Note
Source Note
Document Transcript
Document Information
Document Information
Footnotes
Footnotes
- [1]
TEXT: Instances of “seal” enclosed in hand-drawn representations of seals.
Go to page