It is always much harder to disprove something written on a family tree than it is to write it there in the first place. Was it a guess, was it based on a record I haven’t found (quite possible as I have done little specific Callow research), or was it copied from someone else who gave no sources?
If anyone can help with this it would be much appreciated.
These people are not from my direct family – I was sidetracked, but I want to correct a particular Corteen tree if I can.
This tree has “Jane CALLOW was born in Cardle Veg, Maughold, Isle of Man”.
Jane CORTEENE als CALLOW was buried in Maughold on December 4 1705, ten months after her marriage, on the same day that her daughter Jane was baptised. She had married William Corteen [1688-1733] an eldest son and heir of Thallooqueen, on 13 February 1704/05 in Maughold.
I think that Jane was the daughter of John Callow who died in 1696, whose will has “he bequeathed to his only daughter Jane twelve pounds xx guinea, the choice two of all the white blankets, a little chest with her mother’s wearing apparel as well linen as wool, with whatever else has been shaped for herself, including herein xx the child's part of goods by the death of her mother, requiring her to committing all the aforesaid goods (excepting her wearing apparel) to the custody of his trusty friend Robert Christian, and further oblige her under the penalty of forfeiting half the aforesaid goods to her brethren that she should not presume to marry or espouse herself to any man without the advise and full consent of Vicar Allen and the said Robert Christian praying xxx to be to her instead of a father in advising and directing her upon all xxx occasions for her good”. [Transcript Joyce M Oates]
The reason that I think this was her father was because when Jane Corteen als Callow died these same two men ensured that her daughter would not lose her mother’s inheritance, in an agreement attached to her decree (in poor condition with the right-hand side worn and folded).
“KK Maughold Feb 20th 1705
Whereas it hath pleased Almighty God to take to his mercy ye soul --
Jane Callow who lived but ten months after her Esspousall to William
Corteen, and has left an Infant Daughter of whom she dyed in trav--
& to whom all her portion of worldly goods descends by right in Law.
And whereas ye major part of ye said portion was laid out after
her intermarriage in buying Black Cattle, Horses & other materials
necessary for tillage & housekeeping. And yt now tis very difficult
to prove what money and goods she brought to her said Husband & impossible for
him to account for all ye money yt was disbr..sed by ym both in ye sd ten months--
For this cause, & for ye prevention of all animosities & contention
Her said Husband Will: Corteene, And Will: & Jon. Callow Brethren to
ye said Jane, & ye only next of kindred (now in ye Isle) to this her ~
Infant Daughter : Have this day mutually agreed in manner as followeth
Imprs. The said Will: Corteene doth hereby p.mise & oblige himself
His heyres & Executrs to pay or cause to be paid into ye hands of William
& Jon. Callow, at or before Lammas day next ensuing (for ye use of the
said Child) the full & compleate sum of ten pounds sterling in Manx
value ; and this he is to give in full consideration of all ye many goods
& chattels wch his said wife brought him ; Only her wearing apparel
of Lynnen & woolen with half a Guynny & one Heffer is excepted;
wch said goods are left to be prized, & Inventoryed with ye ten pounds
and to be forthcoming for ye use of ye Executrix. ~
2ly. The said Will. Corteene doth hereby p.mise & engage himself to give
to his only Daughter by his late wife of his owne p.per goodes (if she lives
to woman’s Estate) the sum of twenty shillings, provided yt she sted=
fastly persevere in ye faith she was Baptized in and not revol- to Quakerism
Lastly. To all ye above Articles & Covenants . we Will. & Jon. Callow on
the child’s part (as Supervisors) And Will. Corteene on his owne part
have jointly agreed to stand to & observ & perform all & singular the
promises & yt in penaltie of twenty pounds, ye one half to – the Lord & the
other half to ye party or parties p.forming Conditions. Dated a- bove
Tho: Allen
Robert Christian
Will. Callow his X mark
John Callow his X mark
Will Corteene his X mark”
What is particularly interesting about this agreement is not only that it was written by the same two men, but that it also had the reference to Quakerism. It is also interesting that when daughter Jane acknowledged having received the money in 1735 she signed the document herself in a clear hand.
The full transcript is at: lawsonsiom.freevar.com/wills/1705_017.html
The most likely Jane Callow I found who had two brothers William and John were the children of John Callow, Ballaskeig.
Jane daur of John Callow, Ballaskeg, bapt 4 Sep 1681.
William son of John Callow bapt 6 Jul 1679
John son of John Callow bapt 29 Jun 1680
Edward son of John Callow bapt 30 Mar 1683 [who was in Dublin when he received his inheritance in 1705]
Robert son of John Callow bapt 9 Jan 1686/87
Jon CALLOW Balnaskeg buried May 19 1696
So eldest son William was only 17 when left in charge of all the younger children.
The Radcliffes write in their Maughold book [p.271] that John Callow of Ballaskeig died in 1695 (–was 1696) when eldest son William was 16 (17), and that John married Jony Callow the daughter of William Callow a Quaker from the next farm. This fits the ref. that Jane Corteen should not become a Quaker (like her grandfather) in the agreement attached to her mother’s decree.
They also say John Callow & Jony Callow married in 1678 (contract? Not in par reg. – there is only one marriage recorded in the Maughold par reg between 1672 and 1679) and that Jony died c.1689.
The only will I can see, if this is correct, is CALLOW, Jony 1688-2 Mau E 0991645
Did she die in childbirth having: Christopher son of John Callow bapt 6 Jan 1688/89? (Not in par. register.)
The full transcript of John Callow’s will is at: www.iomfhs.im/lawsons/twill/1695_001.html
The problems with my theory are 1. that this Jane Callow was bapt 4 Sept 1681, when her possible husband William Corteen wasn’t bapt until 28 Feb 1688/89. (As the heir his land would have been attractive, as would her inheritance?). And 2. that only two of her brothers were named in the agreement. “And Will: & Jon. Callow Brethren to ye said Jane, & ye only next of kindred (now in ye Isle) to this her Infant Daughter”. Edward was in Dublin, but where was youngest son Robert Callow bapt 9 Jan 1686/87?
Can anyone see the alternative link to Cardle Veg., Maughold for Jane Corteen als CALLOW?
Her daughter Jane Corteen married John KERRUISH on 2 October 1735 in Maughold, and died in February 1750/51.
Sue