An estate is not a death date

The printed 1794 partition is now read

Conrad’s 1974 volume, page 242, act 1201, dates the petition January 8 and partition January 12, 1794. It prints the widow’s name as Marguerite (Madelaine) Visi (Edelmeier). A note identifies her as Jean Edelmeier’s daughter. Her half share is 583 piastres. These are the inspected printed scholarly abstracts; the eighteenth-century manuscript remains unread. Neither partition date is an established death day.

Evidence: E287

Seven heirs and two Champagne husbands

The abstract’s seven-heir list names Jean-Louis, André, Joseph, Catherine, Madelaine, Marguerite and Mariane. Its opening names four adults, with Catherine and Madelaine represented by husbands Jean-Baptiste and André Champagne. Preserve those different lists and Louis/Jean-Louis wording rather than inventing an explanation. The name variants and whether there were successive wives remain unresolved; the record does not establish that all seven heirs were this widow’s biological children.

Evidence: E287

Retrieve the complete documents

The original acts, all their sheets and reliable transcriptions are the next step. A 1758 receipt is not a wedding; later receipts do not establish a widow’s death. Preserve the named enslaved people and the nature of the transactions when examining the originals.

Evidence:

Later widow records sharpen the question

A funeral abstract describes Marie Eldemaire, widow of Louis, dying March 13, 1830, with burial the next day. A separate 1831 abstract names Catherine Champagne as daughter of deceased Louis and Magdeleine Delmaire. Hall’s 1803 extraction already calls Catherine the widow of Jean-Baptiste Champagne, and Conrad’s appended 1803 receipt corroborates that husband’s deceased status. Marie, Magdeleine and the 1794 variants are source forms to reconcile, rather than permission to silently merge wives.

Evidence: E232, E233, E237, E287

INSPECT THE EVIDENCE

The recovered original pages

Printed 1794 partition · full-size image ↗