Daniel Parke - The Dunbar Lawsuit
This notorious rascal, murdered on 7 December 1710, 22 years before George Washington is born, leaves a legacy on our George Washington -- a law suit.
This Daniel Parke who leaves this legacy wasn't just murdered. He was mutilated afterwards.
"a mob of the privileged citizens of Antigua
"attack'd and forc'd his Guard,
entred his House,
broke open his Chamber-Door,
and Shot him. ...
they broke his Back-bone, dragg'd him by the Heels down the Stairs;
shot him again in several places;
and some,
whose Marriage-bed, 'tis thought, he had defiled,
revenged themselves on the sinning parts,
which they cut off and expos'd."
Source:
"Tragical End of Colonel Parke, Governor of the Leeward Islands," in The Political State of Great Britain (London, January 1710-11), 339.
In 1757 our Colonel George Washington had to ask Colonel Stanwix and Lt Gov Dinwiddie to take a few days off to attend the latest development of a law suit.
But that was his half brother's estate.
At the same time another worrisome estate evolves.
GW's future wife, Martha, hears word of the estate of this Daniel Parke taking a turn for the worse.
A lawsuit that had festered in the courts for 30 years reared its ugly head in 1757, likely brought to Martha's attention shortly after her husband's unexpected death.2
[Martha Dandridge's first husband, Daniel Parke Custis, died July 8, 1757]
This was the Dunbar case, which, if lost, had the potential to put George Washington, the new administrator of the Custis estate, on the hook for £10,000.
In July 1757 the Privy Council [in London England] reversed the Virginia court’s decision,
which meant that the case should go back to Virginia for retrial.
This meant the suit to put debt on Martha was back on.
But when does our Colonel George Washington handle "that" estate?
He resigns from the VA Regiment end of 1758 and doesn't marry Martha until 6 January 1759.
He begins inquiries on Martha's estate 20 April 1759.
At this time of July 1757, GW is already involved in handling a different estate.
Shortly after Martha's first husband dies,
Colonel George Washington writes
to Colonel Stanwix 30 July 1757,
This request for leave is for GW to handle the estate left by his older half brother, Lawrence.
Back to Martha's Estate:
Here's the sequence:
Daniel Parke is the murdered rascal.
He is the father of Francis Parke .
She marries John Custis IV who begets Daniel Parke Custis who marries Martha Dandridge who then marries George Washington after her first husband Daniel Parke Custis dies 8 July 1757.
Got it?
Why is this called the Dunbar Case?
A decade after Daniel Parke's death, John Custis [the father of Martha's first husband ] opened a letter from a man named Dunbar Parke.
Formerly named Thomas Dunbar, Dunbar Parke had married Daniel Parke's Antiguan daughter and taken her last name.
Having discovered new debts in Daniel Parke's Antiguan property,
Dunbar wanted Custis to pay them. Dunbar interpreted Daniel Parke's will to mean that all his debts would be left to his Virginian daughters, and all of his profits to his estate in Antigua.
He demanded that John Custis pay £10,000.
Custis wrote to a colleague, "if these whores and bastards get their demands my son is ruind."
Compiled by Jim Moyer 11/27/2019 under construction, more detail coming, update 10/10/2021
How did this Happen?
Why do we talk about this guy on the Fort Loudoun Winchester VA website?
It is because Colonel Washington, while here in Winchester VA had to deal with the estate this murdered man left behind to Martha.
.
Douglas Southall Freeman writes,
“Sir Godfrey Kneller probably painted Col. Daniel Parke …”
But Wikipedia cites John Closterman, painted this portrait in 1706, in the collection of the Virginia Historical Society.
Notice the miniature is of Queen Anne, set in diamonds.
There’s a story behind that.
Daniel Parke is murdered 7 Dec 1710 by a mob.
.
He was the Governor of the Leeward Islands.
.
The murder occurred at the Governor’s Mansion in Antigua.
.
After looting his place, they discover diaries telling of debauchery with their wives and daughters.
.
They knew some of that. They just didn’t know the full extent of it.
.
He leaves a fortune, part of which ends up in Martha Dandridge Custer Washington’s hands.
What did this Scoundrel do?
Again Kathryn Gehred writes a short bio, about his "short happy life" in an article for UVA Miller Center:
Daniel Parke married a woman named Jane Ludwell, with whom he fathered two children.
Abandoning them in Virginia in 1690, he travelled to London and returned with another woman.
Although he described her as a "cousin," rumors spread that she was a married woman Parke had lured from her husband. The rumors were in part confirmed when she gave birth to a son who took the surname Parke.
After a disappointing political career in Virginia, Parke left both families and returned to England, with no guarantee of continued financial support for them.
He served as the Duke of Marlborough's aide-de-camp at the Battle of Blenheim in 1704, and personally delivered news of the victory to the queen [Queen Anne].
[This is why you see in Daniel Parke's portrait, a miniature of Queen Anne, set in diamonds]
Shortly afterwards, he became governor of the Leeward Islands.7
Daniel Parke's reign as governor of the Leeward Islands was nasty, brutish, and short.
According to a magazine account, ‘The Tragical End of Governor Parke’ (published shortly after his death on Dec. 9, 1710), a mob of the privileged citizens of Antigua "attack'd and forc'd his Guard, entred his House, broke open his Chamber-Door, and Shot him.
After which they broke his Back-bone, dragg'd him by the Heels down the Stairs; shot him again in several places; and some, whose Marriage-bed, 'tis thought, he had defiled, revenged themselves on the sinning parts, which they cut off and expos'd."8
Before meeting this spectacular end,
Daniel Parke drew up an unusual will,
described by his son-in-law John Custis as "unnaturall."9
He left all of his property in Antigua and the Leeward Islands to the infant daughter of a married woman.
By doing so, he in effect claimed this daughter as his child, and left her a larger and more profitable estate than what he had left his legal children.
Even more unusual,
he stipulated that the little girl would only receive her inheritance
if she would "alter her name and call herself Parke,"
a stipulation that extended to her heirs as well.10
For those numbered footnotes listed above,
see this article here:
[ My note: As an aside,
(April 30, 1781 – October 10, 1857)
is why his name has Parke in it.
He is responsible
for as many myths
about George Washington
as Parson Weems was.
George Washington Parke Custis' father
was the stepson of
He and his sister Eleanor
grew up at Mount Vernon
and
in the
Washington presidential household.
Upon reaching age 21,
Custis inherited
a large fortune
from his late father,
.
.
.
.
Character of Colonel Daniel Parke?
Below is a quote saying he is A SPARKISH Gentleman and acts as the greatest HECTOR in town.
.
The accounts of Col. Parke’s character which have come down to the present day show him in a very unfavorable light, but as they are all from sources hostile to him and to his friend, Governor Andros, they should perhaps be accepted with a “grain of salt.”
.
The earliest notice of him occurs in a memorial by Commissary Blair, attacking the administration of Andros.
.
Hector brought back to Troy, from a Roman sarcophagus, c. 180–200 AD from wikipedia. Touch or Click to Enlarge.\
He says:
“There is a handsome young man of that Country [Virginia] one Mr. Daniel Parke, who to all the other accomplishments that make a complete sparkish Gentleman has added one upon which he infinitely values himself, that is, a quick resentment of every the least thing that looks like an affront or Injury.
.
He has learned, they say, the art of fencing, and is as ready at giving a challenge, especially before Company, as the greatest Hector in the Town.” .
[My note: And why Hector? Because Hector fought everyone and won. Until his last fight.]
.
“Virginia Gleanings in England” is an article from The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Volume 20, published 1912.
.
Above quote on bottom right of 2nd page.
Compiled and update by Jim Moyer 11/27/2019, updated 10/10/2021
Appendix, Notes:
.
Douglas Southall Freeman:
This is the ultimate writer on anything George Washington.
He is also the ultimate teller of the story of the Dunbar Lawsuit:
From Douglas Southall Freeman's Young George Washington, Volume 2, Pages 276-302, published 1948, Charles Scribner's Sons:
Go to Pages 276-301 on the Chapter, "Courtship with Legal Entanglements."
I. Queries to John Mercer, 20 April 1759
From George Washington to John Mercer:
Queries to John Mercer Williamsburg 20. April 175⟨9⟩
Sir, Be pleased on the other side to answer the following queries in a full and ample manner and oblige very much, Yr most Obedt Servt1 Go: ⟨Washington⟩
First—
Does the Law require that all the Personal Estate (Negros only excepted) of the late Colo. Custis be sold, in order to lay of[f] his Widows dower and daughter’s part. or can it be done by the Inventory & appraisment—or lastly by dividing the Estate as it stands at this present—Which of these three is the Right Method? & has Mrs Washington a ⟨C⟩laim to one third of the Chattels of every kind whatsoever?
Second—
What Steps are necessary to Effect this in either Case? & how is the Money and Bonded Debts to be divided?2
Third—
Has Mrs Washington a Right to take any part of the Furniture or Personal Estate (negroes excepted as before) at the Appraisment price? or is she under a necessity of taking the whole or none?
Fourth—
Whether if the Law does not require the whole Personal Estate to be sold, I have notwithstanding a power, or can obtain one (& by what means) to sell such parts as I ⟨consider⟩ to be for the Estate Interest?
Fifth—
Is Mrs Washington obligated to render ⟨an Acco⟩unt of every thing Inventoried & appraised? I mean Household goods that perhaps are broke or worn out, Plantation Utensils that are lost or used—Liquors &ca that may have ⟨bee⟩n Drank—and if She is what sort of an Acct is requird by Law? and whether that account shoud be previous to a Division of the ⟨Estate?⟩
Sixth—
Has she not a Right to have her Expences of every kind borne, as well those which may Relate to her particular self, as to House keeping &ca in general? Does that Right still continue till a Division be made, or did it cease upon her Marriage[?]3
Seventh—
Whether is it necessary to get appointed Guardian, and Manager of ⟨the⟩ Estate & ⟨of the⟩ Children—or do I become so as Husband ⟨to her illegible⟩ obtaind the administration? But ⟨mutilated⟩ that some ⟨one other than myself⟩ shoud be choose Guardian till a Division ⟨of⟩ the Estate & a Settlement be made.4
Eighth—
If Dunbar obtains his Suit at Law against Colo. Custis’s Estate, how far will Mrs Washington’s Dower be liable?5
Ninth—
If the Money and Chattels which in any other Case ⟨woud⟩ have become my absolute property, shoud be made liable—am I accountable for the Principal & Interest, of what I may now receive—or the Principal only?
Founders Online Footnotes:
ADS, ViHi: Custis Papers.
John Mercer (1704–1768), of Stafford County, was a lawyer who since the early 1740s had been retained by the Custises, first by John Custis (1678–1749) and then by his son Daniel Parke Custis (1711–1757), to counsel them in the Dunbar case. See note 5.
From 1757 he acted in the same capacity for Daniel Parke Custis’s widow, later GW’s wife, and for her two children. Mercer, who obtained a large loan from Martha Custis, served as GW’s attorney in the settlement of the Custis estate until shortly after the final settlement in 1761.
1. See Editorial Note, 20 April 1759–5 Nov. 1761, and doc. II.
3. As Schedule A (doc. III-A) and most of the related documents (III-A–1 through III-A–8) demonstrate, GW and his wife claimed, used, disposed of, and accounted for goods from the estate in various ways. See also Mercer’s Answers, third through sixth (doc. II).
Footnote 4.
Upon Daniel Parke Custis’s death Martha Custis became the common-law guardian of her children and would remain so, unless another were appointed, until the children reached the age of 14.
Talk of appointing a male guardian seems to have first come up in the fall of 1758
as a result of developments in the Dunbar case (see note 5).
John Mercer wrote Martha Custis 11 Oct. 1758:
“However as you seem’d determined in Case the Suit should be renewed to have some Gent. of Reputation & Fortune appointed Your Sons Guardian I enquired in a round about manner of the Speaker [John Robinson] if such a thing had ever been proposed to him, he said not, but added, that it would be to no manner of purpose as he would not upon any Account undertake it, as it would be attended with so much trouble as must necessarily accompany the management of so large an Estate (as your Son was intitled to) & at such a distance from him. As I observed that I apprehended you would be satisfied with his being appointed his Guardian for the management of his Law Suits, in which his Advice and Character might be of great benefit to the young Gentleman & that his Estate might be continued under the same management as at present, he said upon that Condition if you desired, he would very readily undertake the matter & do your Son all the Service he could either by his advice or Interest. This, Madam, I thought proper to advise you of, as you may thereby be better enabled to form your Resolution upon that head” (ViHi: Custis Papers).
Then, on 2 Nov. 1758,
two months before her marriage to GW, Mercer wrote Mrs. Custis:
“I received all the Papers together with your Letter and should have awaited on the Speaker in two or three days after but I heard he was gone for a few days out of Town. On Saturday last I applied to him & he promised to be in Court that day but something prevented. however this Day he came to Court & was admitted not only your Sons but your Daughters Guardian to defend & prosecute such Suits as may be for their Interest, for it seems that not only your Son but yourself & Daughter will be Parties to the Suit of Dunbar here” (ibid.).
In his response (doc. II), Mercer suggests to GW that his marriage to Mrs. Custis puts him in the position to assume the guardianship “in her right,” but he advises him to delay doing so until after the estate was divided and finally settled.
GW seems to have taken his advice, for it was not until 21 Oct. 1761
at the time of the final settlement of the estate that the General Court appointed GW guardian of the two children, in place of John Robinson (Order of the General Court, ViLxW: Washington’s Account Book).
For GW’s decision in April 1759 to secure an order from the General Court giving him the administration of the children’s property, see Editorial Note, 20 April 1759–5 Nov. 1761, n.6.
GW remained the manager of the property of the two young Custises until 1773, when Patsy died and Jacky was preparing to marry, rendering each year annual accounts of the credits and debits of their estates for the preceding year.
Footnote 5.
At this time the Custis estate again was being threatened by the claims first brought against it as early as 1723
by one Thomas Dunbar, renamed Dunbar Parke, of Antigua.
When Daniel Parke Custis’s grandfather Daniel Parke (b. 1669) was murdered in 1710 at Antigua where he was in residence as the British governor of the Leeward Islands, it was discovered that Parke had left his Antigua property valued at more than £30,000 to Lucy Chester, the young daughter of a Mrs. Catherine Chester of that place.
The Antigua property was to pass to Lucy’s heirs provided that upon her marriage she and her husband changed their name to Parke.
Under the terms of the will, Colonel Parke’s daughter Frances Parke Custis, the mother of Daniel Parke Custis, was to get her father’s Virginia and English property, out of which Parke’s legal debts, presumably in Virginia and England, were to be paid.
Nearly fifteen years after Parke’s death, and long after Frances Custis herself had died, John Custis, Frances’s husband and Daniel Parke Custis’s father, received notice from Dunbar Parke, who had taken the name upon his marriage to Lucy Chester, that the Frances Parke Custis estate must reimburse him for up to £10,000 which had been paid out of his wife’s inheritance to settle Col. Daniel Parke’s Antiguan debts.
The point at issue was whether Parke’s will required only that the Custises pay his Virginia and English debts or that they pay all of his debts, including those in Antigua.
Lawyers on both sides remained active off and on from the mid–1720s.
At the time of John Custis’s death in 1749 (Dunbar Parke died in 1734) the case still had not come to trial.
Dunbar’s heirs renewed the suit in 1750.
When the trial was finally held before the Virginia General Court in April 1754, it was dismissed.
In July 1757 the Privy Council [in London England] reversed the Virginia court’s decision,
which meant that the case should go back to Virginia for retrial. BACK TO PREVIOUS
It was upon word of this that Martha Custis suggested to John Mercer the appointment of a male guardian for her children (see note 4), and it was with the reopening of the case in mind that GW posed his eighth and ninth questions to John Mercer.
For a masterly explanation of the ramifications of Daniel Parke’s mischievous will, see Freeman, Washington, 2:278ff.
Source:
.
Lawrence Washington's Estate
Shortly after Martha's first husband dies,
Colonel George Washington writes
to Colonel Stanwix 30 July 1757,
permission for leave.
But this request for leave is for GW to handle the estate left by his older half brother, Lawrence.
I took the liberty in a letter of the [ to Dinwiddie on 10 June 1757 ]
to ask leave
to be absent about 12 or 14 days, i
f circumstances in this quarter wou’d permit:
but having heard nothing from you since,
I am inclined to address you again on that head;
because as the 1st of August is the time appointed for the meeting of the Executors (of which I am one) of an Estate that I am much interested in a dividend of;
and have suffered much already by the unsettled state it has remained in.
This Estate does not lie more than a days journey from this place;
so that I could return very quickly,
if occasion required it.6
I am, with very great Esteem, Your most obt hble Servant,
Stanwix gave permission originally in his letter to GW of 20 July in response to GW's first request for leave, 8 July 1757.
Sources:
.
.
NOTES:
Links for further research
.
Douglas Southall Freeman:
This is the ultimate writer on anything George Washington.
He is also the ultimate teller of the story of the Dunbar Lawsuit:
From Douglas Southall Freeman's Young George Washington, Volume 2, Pages 276-302, published 1948, Charles Scribner's Sons
More links:
Queries to John Mercer
This is the source for below
When George Washington began his courtship of the recently widowed Martha Dandridge Custis in March 1758, she served as administratrix of an estate that included 17,500 acres of land as well as more than £1,500 of liquid assets.1
With such a dowry at only 27 years old, Martha had her pick of potential husbands. Despite proposals from wealthier suitors, she chose George, a military man about one year her junior.
As George soon learned, most of the Custis estate was to go to Martha’s children when they came of age. Martha’s first husband, Daniel Parke Custis, had died without a will, requiring his estate to be divided among his heirs: a third for Martha to control in her own right, a third to her son John Parke “Jacky” Custis, and a third to her daughter Martha Parke “Patsy” Custis. By law, when he married Martha, George Washington assumed ownership of her third of the estate. As for the other two-thirds, he became caretaker, ensuring that the amount of property left to the Custis children by their father would in fact come into their hands when they came of age. If Washington mismanaged the estate, he would be held responsible.
picture caption: Martha Washington (née Dandridge) before her marriage to Daniel Parke Custis. Image: New York Public Library.
That obligation quickly proved rather burdensome. A lawsuit that had festered in the courts for 30 years reared its ugly head in 1757, likely brought to Martha’s attention shortly after her husband’s unexpected death.2
This was the Dunbar case, which, if lost, had the potential to put George Washington, the new administrator of the Custis estate, on the hook for £10,000. Washington wrote to Martha’s lawyer with concern: “If the Money and Chattels which in any other Case would have become my absolute property should be made liable—am I accountable[?]”3
While the legal details of the case could be described as dry and tedious (Martha’s lawyer wrote despairingly that one “cannot possibly know what trouble I was at during the sixteen years I was concerned”), the initial cause of the lawsuit was anything but boring.4
It began with Daniel Parke’s will. Parke, the grandfather of Martha’s first husband, was a man whom historians struggle to describe with professional objectivity. Malcolm Hart Harris, author of Historic New Kent County, considered him “one of the most notorious scamps of the colonial period.”5
One of Parke’s contemporaries called him “a complete sparkish gentleman” and “the greatest Hector in the Town.”6
Unsubstantiated stories about Daniel Parke abound; one such tale claims that in a fit of vengeance, he physically dragged a political opponent’s wife out of her pew during church services.
Junius Brutus Stearns, The Marriage of Washington to Martha Custis, Virginia Museum of Fine Arts
John Closterman, painting of Daniel Parke, 1706At 15 or 16 years old, in 1685, Daniel Parke married a woman named Jane Ludwell, with whom he fathered two children. Abandoning them in Virginia in 1690, he travelled to London and returned with another woman. Although he described her as a “cousin,” rumors spread that she was a married woman Parke had lured from her husband. The rumors were in part confirmed when she gave birth to a son who took the surname Parke. After a disappointing political career in Virginia, Parke left both families and returned to England, with no guarantee of continued financial support for them. He served as the Duke of Marlborough’s aide-de-camp at the Battle of Blenheim in 1704, and personally delivered news of the victory to the queen. Shortly afterwards, he became governor of the Leeward Islands.7
Daniel Parke’s reign as governor of the Leeward Islands was nasty, brutish, and short. According to a magazine account, ‘The Tragical End of Governor Parke’ (published shortly after his death on Dec. 9, 1710), a mob of the privileged citizens of Antigua “attack’d and forc’d his Guard, entred his House, broke open his Chamber-Door, and Shot him. After which they broke his Back-bone, dragg’d him by the Heels down the Stairs; shot him again in several places; and some, whose Marriage-bed, ’tis thought, he had defiled, revenged themselves on the sinning parts, which they cut off and expos’d.”8
Before meeting this spectacular end, Daniel Parke drew up an unusual will, described by his son-in-law John Custis as “unnaturall.”9
He left all of his property in Antigua and the Leeward Islands to the infant daughter of a married woman. By doing so, he in effect claimed this daughter as his child, and left her a larger and more profitable estate than what he had left his legal children. Even more unusual, he stipulated that the little girl would only receive her inheritance if she would “alter her name and call herself Parke,” a stipulation that extended to her heirs as well.10
Parke’s eldest daughter Frances Custis, unhappily married at that point to John Custis, inherited her father’s debt-ridden Virginia estate in 1711. Her husband sold almost all of the property to pay off Parke’s debts, and later wished “I had never heard of that famous name of Parke…”11
A decade after Daniel Parke’s death, John Custis opened a letter from a man named Dunbar Parke. Formerly named Thomas Dunbar, Dunbar Parke had married Daniel Parke’s Antiguan daughter and taken her last name. Having discovered new debts in Daniel Parke’s Antiguan property, Dunbar wanted Custis to pay them. Dunbar interpreted Daniel Parke’s will to mean that all his debts would be left to his Virginian daughters, and all of his profits to his estate in Antigua. He demanded that John Custis pay £10,000. Custis wrote to a colleague, “if these whores and bastards get their demands my son is ruind.”12
Custis drafted a furious response: “I know the expence of going to Law as well as any man; having never bin free from it ever since I first took upon me the management of this unlucky estate of Coll Parke’s… wch If I had never heard of would have been well for me […] I would go to Law the whole course of my Life; spend the last penny I have in the world rather than I will pay one farthing of your unjust and unreasonable demand.”13
Jacky even included the name “Parke” in all of his children’s names, perhaps to protect their inheritance. Custis’s words proved prophetic. The Dunbar case lasted 50 years. George Washington paid lawyers to tend to the lawsuit into the 1770s, and complained that “every farthing, which is expended on [John Parke “Jacky” Custis], must undergo the inspection of the General Court, in their examination of my guardianship accounts.”14
Jacky even included the name “Parke” in all of his children’s names, perhaps to protect their inheritance. Eventually, the onset of the American Revolution ended the lawsuit, but it proved to be a headache for George Washington and a threat to his estate for much of his married life.
1. Joseph Fields, “Worthy Partner” (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1994), xx. 2. James Munro, ed., Acts of the Privy Council of England, Colonial Series (London: 1911), 4:288-290. 3. “I. Queries to John Mercer, 20 April 1759,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified February 1, 2018, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/02-06-02-0164-0002. Also available in print: The Papers of George Washington, Colonial Series 6:211. 4. John Mercer to Martha Washington, Jan. 4, 1758, Virginia Historical Society. , Colonial Series 6:211. 5. Malcolm Hart Harris, Old New Kent County (West Point, Va.: M.H. Harris, 1977), 1:11. 6. “Virginia Gleanings in England,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 20, no. 4 (1912): 373. 7. Ruth Bourne, “John Evelyn, the Diarist, and His Cousin Daniel Parke II,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 78, no. 1 (1970): 3-33. 8. “Tragical End of Colonel Parke, Governor of the Leeward Islands,” in The Political State of Great Britain (London, January 1710-11), 339. 9. John Custis to Cary, 1733, in Josephine Little Zuppan, ed. The Letterbook of John Custis IV of Williamsburg, 1717-1742, (Lanham, 2005), 135. 10. “Gleanings,” 372. 11. John Custis to Micajah Perry, Jan. 1724/5, Zuppan, Letterbook, 70-71. 12. Ibid. 13. John Custis to Thomas Dunbar, 15 Jan. 1724/25, Zuppan, Letterbook, 67. 14. “From George Washington to Jonathan Boucher, 9 July 1771,” Founders Online, National Archives, last modified February 1, 2018, http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/02-08-02-0332. Also available in print: The Papers of George Washington, Colonial Series 8:494-498.
.
Source for above
.Settlement of the Daniel Parke Custis Estate
From: Washington Papers | Colonial Series | Volume 6 | Settlement of the Daniel Parke Custis Estate
1Editorial Note (Washington Papers) Upon his marriage to the widow of Daniel Parke Custis on 6 Jan. 1759, GW assumed the management... 2I. Queries to John Mercer, 20 April 1759 (Washington Papers) Be pleased on the other side to answer the following queries in a full and ample manner and... 3II. John Mercer’s Answers, c.20–26 April 1759 (Washington Papers) Answers to the foregoing Queries To the first. All such Goods as may be liable to perish or be... 4III. Report of the Commissioners to Settle the Estate, c.October 1759 (Washington Papers) In Obedience to the Order of the General Court made the 28th of April in the Year 1759 we have... 5III-A. Schedule A: Assignment of the Widow’s Dower, c.October 1759 (Washington Papers) All the Lands in King William County 2880 acres N.B. the Marsh adjoing this Land is to furnish... 6III-A-1. Combined County Inventory of Slaves and Personal Property in the Estate, 1757–58 (Washington Papers) The Appraisements of the Estate of Danl Parke Custis According to the Returns made to the County... 7III-A-2. Account of Items in the Estate Used by Martha Custis, 1759 (Washington Papers) An Account of Sundrys taken and usd by Mrs Custis out of the Inventories No. £. s. d. ⟨19.⟩ A... 8III-A-3. Account of Items in the Estate Sold, 1759 (Washington Papers) Sale of the Estate Sundries Appraisd at Sold for £ s. d. £ s. d. 2 pair Andirons . 7.6 .15 3... 9III-A-4. Account of Items Used before the Division of the Estate, 1759 (Washington Papers) An Account of Sundries used before the Estate was Divided No. £ s. d. 19. 478 lb. Lead 3.19. 24.... 10III-A–5. Table of Disposition of Goods in the Estate, 1759 (Washington Papers) A Table Shewing at one view how every Article in the Inventories was accounted for at Settling...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
