Elizabeth Jane Vanderplank

  Notes:

On her marriage details she is ; "otp, spinster, full age, father Samuel, gentleman"

Witnesses at wedding were Saml Vanderplank (father or cousin presumably), Sarah A Wright, Thomas Holbrook.

The Gentleman's Magazine 1850; Obits;"Warwick Feb 12 at Priors Marston, Eliz-Jane, wife of J.P.Wright, esq. only child of Samuel Vanderplank esq of Long Bucky, Northamptonshire"

From Wright v Vanderplank (see the 'George-Powell annexe for the full text') we see that;
*She was the only child of Samuel.
*She was entitled , under devises made in her favour by her mother's family to;
a.An estate in Northamptonshire worth £180 a year, as tenant in tail in remainder expectant on the death of her grandmother, who died in 1831.
b.An estate in Leics. worth £120 a year, as tenant in tail
c.A mansion and 200 acres in Warwickshire for an estate in fee (which means it was freehold and hers to do with what she wanted).
The last two-mentioned estates fell into her possession in the years 1824 (the year her mother died) and 1848 (the year Miss Bradshaw died) respectively.
(The Law Journal Reports (1949) Pg 757 mention "... of proceedings in this court mentioned in the bill, I mean the suit of Vanderplank v. ...The lady was also entitled to the reversion subject to the interest of a tenant for life (Miss BRADSHAW), to an estate at Priors Marston, producing annually ..." so sounds like the "Warwickshire Mansion" was definitely PM, and the same property as the Bradshaw's. Ahloiab Bradshaw (qv) had contracted to buy this property before his death and it is mentioned in his will.
*Her father took the receipts for the Northants and Leics estates whilst she was a minor, and kept no receipts.
*She was sent to school at a cost of £60 per year for a number of years
*She had a governess, and Vanderplank "kept up an establishment for her, with a carriage and horses and a groom, and she had the benefit of that establishment".
*Her father issued a suit (costing circa £700) - Vanderplank v King, to institute her rights to a portion of the Northants estate.
*In Feb 1843 she came of age. On 6th July following, then residing with her father, she executed an indenture which released the Northants estate to her father for his lifetime. This was the centre of the subsequent Wright v Vanderplank case.
*In Nov 1844 she married JPW. In March 1845 she executed a settlement under which, upon her decease, JPW became entitled to such estate 'in fee' (freehold).
*She died in Feb 1850.
*On 15th April 1853 JPW issued proceedings against late wifes father claiming that the indenture was only signed due to fraud and undue influence. It also asked for an account of the rents recd during her minority.
* Her father "raised questions not very reasonable or handsome about the dau's marriage outfit being too expensive", and suggested JPW should pay for it. Vanderplank did pay for it eventually however. There is a letter text from JPW to Vanderplank that I need to type out.
*Basically JPW lost the suit, primarily it seems because of the time delay, reservations having originally being expressed as early as 1845. Also there was a letter from JPW to Vanderplank about selling the Northants property which acknowledged his interest in it. JPW's answer was that he was trying to organise a compromise. The judges implied that if he had acted sooner he might have won the case.
****
The Law Journal Reports 1949 ""... of marriage was set on foot between the plaintiff Mr. Wright, and the lady, ... the Priors Marston estate in priority to the life estate of the husband. ..."

From Doug C research; She died of hypertrophy of the heart, dropsy. certified. on 12 Feb 1850 in Priors Marston, Warwickshire. Same date as dau birth.
****
She is the 'Vanderplank' in Vanderplank v King (her father suing on her behalf).
From Vanderplank v King; Richard Hanwell's will dated 1792 devised all his freehold messuages, closes, meadows, tithes, rents, hereditaments and real estates situate in the town fields, and parishes of Long Buckley (presum.Buckby?), Walford, Guilsborough and elsewhere unto his dau Jane King and to her assignes, for and during her life, and from her decease to the use of all and every the child or children of his said dau Jane King, whether male or female. But, long story short, in the event of her line finishing it passes to his grandson William Hanwell Lucas and his assigns etc. If they both died then 2/3rd to go to the testators' two sisters Sarah and Elizabeth and 1/3 unto his nephews and nieces. The testator died in 1792.
At the time of death of the testator his dau Jane King was living and had 3 children;
Elizabeth born in 1785
John born in 1787
Jane born in 1790.
Wm Hanwell Lucas, the son of a deceased dau of the testator, and John, the son of the dau Jane King, were his co-heirs.
In 1793 after the death of the testator Matilda, another child of his dau Jane King was born. The testators dau Jane King died in Feb 1831.
Of the four children of Jane King;
Jane died in 1799, without having been married.
Elizabeth married Samuel Vanderplank in 1821 and died in 1824 leaving the plaintiff Elizabeth Jane Vanderplank, born in 1822, her only dau surviving.
John married in 1813 and had 3 dau born in 1814, 1815 and 1817
Matilda married in 1819 and had 3 children born in 1822, 1823 and 1826.
Wm Hanwell Lewis died in 1810, having devised his real estate upon trust for his wife for life, with remainder to his children, remainder to the right heirs of his father. The widow afterwards married D.Bishopp. The heir-at-law of his father was T.F. Lucas, who became bankrupt.
After the death of Jane King, John King, her son, entered into the receipt of the rents and profits of the estate. The bill was filed in 1836 by Elizabeth Jane Vanderplank, the infant dau of Elizabeth against the said John King, who was the surviving co-heir of the testator, - the devisess of the deceased co-heir Wm Hanwell Lewis, - the dau Matilda, and her three children and Samuel Vanderplank. The bill suggested that John King had brought an ejectment against Samuel Vanderplank who was the Plaintiff's natural guardian, and was in the occupation of part of the premises; that Samuel Vanderplank who have no defence to the action, inasmuch as he had for several years paid rent to John King in respect of the premises; and that as to the Plaintiff's share of the estate, John King must be deemed and treated as having entered thereon in the character of guardian and trustee for the Plaintiff. The bill prayed that John King might be ordered to account to the Plaintiff for one-third of the rents and profits of the estates recieved by him since the death of Jane King , his mother, including the produce of timber felled, and that one-third of the future rents and profits might be secured for the Plaintiff's use.
Vice-Chancellor's judgement; I think he ruled that Matilda shouldn't get anything, but the other branches should share - hard to say for sure tho' . Need to read in more detail !

Elizabeth married John Perkins/Pirkins# Wright, son of William# Wright and Sarah A.# Perkins, on 12 Nov 1844 in Long Buckby, Daventry, Northants. (John Perkins/Pirkins# Wright was born on 21 Mar 1820 in Pattishall, Northants, christened on 28 Mar 1820 in Pattishall, Northants and died on 27 May 1881 in Priors Marston, Warwickshire.)