journal article
The Modernization of Mayo Greenleaf Patch: Land, Family, and Marginality in New England, 1766-1818The New England Quarterly
Vol. 55, No. 4 (Dec., 1982)
, pp. 488-516 (29 pages)
Published By: The New England Quarterly, Inc.
//doi.org/10.2307/365378
//www.jstor.org/stable/365378
Read and download
Log in through your school or library
Read Online (Free) relies on page scans, which are not currently available to screen readers. To access this article, please contact JSTOR User Support. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.With a personal account, you can read up to 100 articles each month for free.
Get StartedAlready have an account? Log in
Monthly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 10 article PDFs to save and keep
Yearly Plan
- Access everything in the JPASS collection
- Read the full-text of every article
- Download up to 120 article PDFs to save and keep
Purchase a PDF
Purchase this article for $10.00 USD.
How does it work?
- Select the purchase option.
- Check out using a credit card or bank account with PayPal.
- Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
Journal Information
The New England Quarterly, founded in 1928, is best described by its subtitle, A Historical Review of New England Life and Letters. Through major essays, memoranda and edited documents, reconsiderations (of scholarly editions, influential interpretive texts, and essays published in NEQ), essay reviews, and book reviews, NEQ authors help readers evaluate the history of civilization in New England. NEQ publishes essays covering any time period, from the presence of Native Americans through the present day, and any subject germane to New England's history, for example, the region's diverse cultural production and political philosophies, its race relations, labor struggles, religious controversies, and the organization of family life. The journal's focus also broadens beyond the region to treat the migration of New England ideas, people, and institutions to other parts of the United States and the world.
Publisher Information
The New England Quarterly is an independent journal that is overseen by The New England Quarterly, Inc., a nonprofit organization with a board of directors. It receives support from its sponsors: the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, University of Massachusetts Boston, the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the Massachusetts Cultural Council. The journal's stated mission is to encourage the study of New England's history and culture and, through quarterly publication and related activities, to enlighten the public about their significance and diversity. Starting with Volume 80 (2007), The New England Quarterly has been published by The MIT Press. Please visit here for information on subscriptions and current issues.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
The
New England Quarterly © 1982 The New England Quarterly, Inc.
Request Permissions
journal article
Parents, Children and Property in Late 18th-Century ChanceryOxford Journal of Legal Studies
Vol. 32, No. 4 (Winter 2012)
, pp. 741-769 (29 pages)
Published By: Oxford University Press
//www.jstor.org/stable/41811710
Read and download
Log in through your school or library
Purchase article
$51.00 - Download now and later
Purchase a PDF
Purchase this article for $51.00 USD.
How does it work?
- Select the purchase option.
- Check out using a credit card or bank account with PayPal.
- Read your article online and download the PDF from your email or your account.
Abstract
The late 18th-century court of Chancery established a balance between the respective interests of parents and their children in the family's property. The court required parents, especially fathers, to provide for the maintenance and education of their minor children themselves, even where money was made available for these purposes from a non-parental source. It prevented parents from intercepting gifts given to their children by third parties. It permitted parents, however, to make their children's entitlements to marriage portions conditional, for children marrying before majority, on the children's choice of spouse being consented to by a parent or parental surrogate. Chancery's overall intergenerational policy was notably anti-dynastic: it made sure that younger generations, specifically those just reaching adulthood, marriage and parenthood, were endowed with sufficient property to give them at least a measure of independence from their elders, and some power over their own children.
Journal Information
The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.
Publisher Information
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies © 2012 Oxford University Press
Request Permissions