Frederic Harrison to GE, London, 29 January [1866]
Title
Frederic Harrison to GE, London, 29 January [1866]
Title
Frederic Harrison to GE, London, 29 January [1866]
Sender
Frederic Harrison
Recipient
George Eliot
Date(s)
- 1866-01-29
Place
London
Letter Content
Frederic Harrison to GE, London, 29 January [1866]
MS: Tinker Collection, Yale. Hitherto unpublished.
New Sq. | January 29.
My dear Mrs. Lewes,
I am quite ashamed of the revisions and counter-propositions of my [opinion] in re [Bycliffe v. Transome]; but I now send you an amended version of my view of the law in this case which affects the purpose of my last sketch, without the absurd blunder that contained. My object has been to economise as much as possible (as you required) the names used.
I have been giving you a great deal of trouble by my want of clearness at first. I hope you will pardon the liberties I have taken with the memories of an honourable family. Of course my little hypotheses are only meant to draw attention to the legal necessities which occur to me. However you work it up, perhaps you will let me consider it, as some legal difficulties might lie hid. Believe me
Sincerely yours
Frederic Harrison.
Early in the 18th century a certain Transome of Transome Court settled his family estates by will in the following manner
To John Transome during his life: and subject thereto
To Thomas Transome and the heirs of his body in tail MALE i.e. to his SONS AND HIS SON'S SONS --: with an ultimate remainder
To Henry Bycliffe, (the cousin of the testator) his heirs and assigns for ever.
John Transome duly entered and possessed the estates. In his life-time Thomas Transome became embarrassed and ultimately levied a fine without the concurrence of his father the tenant in possession, whereby he created a base fee in favour of one Durfey and barred his own issue but not the remaindermen.
This Thomas Transome had been married and had sons who lived under the care of the grandfather and were moderately provided for by him out of other family property. In the course of Thomas' decline and ruin his wife died -- and to escape his creditors he went abroad and was little heard of until in a year or two he was proved to have died obscurely in France, his father still living and remaining in possession.
On the death of John the father, Durfey entered into possession having unquestionably purchased the estate and interest of Thomas and his issue and as these were notoriously alive and likely to continue, the Bycliffe family gave themselves little concern about so remote an interest.
Durfey indeed succeeded in satisfying the Bycliffes and in placing on his own title some proof (by a fictitious or antedated consent of the father John) that the entail had been fully barred against remaindermen as well as against Thomas and his issue in tail. At length the Durfeys, who took the name and arms of Transome claimed to be and were acknowledged as tenants or owners in fee of the entire property.
At the beginning of the 19th century however the male issue of Thomas Transome was in danger of extinction, the knowledge of which roused the Bycliffes to renew their inquiries. They discover ample proof that a base fee only had been created, that their remainder was not barred and they determine to dispute it. In the first years of the 19th century the last male descendant of Thomas Transome dies and then the litigation commences and the estate is desperately contested by the Bycliffes. They are on the point of succeeding, in spite of the devices of Jermyn to destroy their evidence and to produce a living male descendant of Thomas Transome.
Things are in this state when some inquiries into the early history of the Thomas Transome line lead the Bycliffe lawyers to prosecute some investigations in France, and Maurice Christian Bycliffe being abroad on service undertakes personally to conduct a somewhat delicate and secret inquiry -- which is to ascertain the truth of a story which they have reason to believe, of the connexion of a certain noble French family with Thomas Transome.
Maurice obtains an introduction to the head of this family, receives strong evidence of a possible kinship, is welcomed by them, and marries the only daughter Annette.
He learns in fact this -- that Thomas Transome when he fled from England was married secretly a second time to a French lady, by whom he left a son. This son was educated as a Frenchman, married a French lady of birth, took her name and was eventually ennobled. The father of Annette is his last male representative.
The issue of Thomas Transome is therefore not extinct for he has left (in France) another branch of male descendants. The Bycliffe title is therefore estopped or postponed until this man's death.
Information of so very precious a character Maurice is unwilling to entrust to any other; and at all risks and cost, even leaving his wife and child to follow him he makes his way to England to consult his lawyers about this great discovery.
The proof however is far from legally perfect, and its bearing on the case is still full of difficulties and involves Maurice in much labour and anxiety. In the meantime Jermyn pounces down upon him, throws him into prison as a fraudulent debtor, and Maurice dies leaving his affairs in disorder. His child cannot be traced, and, as his news has for the time barred his own claim, his lawyers readily leave the case to go by default.
The father of Annette the real last male descendant of Thomas Transome dying after Bycliffe -- his daughter is a minor and time does not run to bar her by statute. At some period after the death of Bycliffe not necessary to define, the father of Annette dies and upon this event the case stands thus.
The last male descendant of Thomas Transome is now dead and the base fee in Durfey's favour is determined. The right of Bycliffe, which is a fee not an entail, now descends upon his daughter Esther and for the first time a good title in the remainderman arises. But she is an infant and therefore is not barred by the statute of limitations even if 20 years have elapsed since her right accrued.
Esther is also the sole heiress of the last of the Thomas Transomes and also the heiress of the Transome the original testator, but as the estate of Thomas Transome was limited to the heirs in tail male (and not in tail general) {and this is the more usual way} neither she nor her mother were any obstacle to the determination of the base fee -- which exists only in male descendants of male.
Esther however as heiress unites the Bycliffe and the old Transome descent in herself and on clear proof of this must infallibly succeed in ejecting from their ancient estates, Harold the Durfey-Transome, the descendant of the man who ruined and supplanted Thomas.
MS: Tinker Collection, Yale. Hitherto unpublished.
New Sq. | January 29.
My dear Mrs. Lewes,
I am quite ashamed of the revisions and counter-propositions of my [opinion] in re [Bycliffe v. Transome]; but I now send you an amended version of my view of the law in this case which affects the purpose of my last sketch, without the absurd blunder that contained. My object has been to economise as much as possible (as you required) the names used.
I have been giving you a great deal of trouble by my want of clearness at first. I hope you will pardon the liberties I have taken with the memories of an honourable family. Of course my little hypotheses are only meant to draw attention to the legal necessities which occur to me. However you work it up, perhaps you will let me consider it, as some legal difficulties might lie hid. Believe me
Sincerely yours
Frederic Harrison.
Early in the 18th century a certain Transome of Transome Court settled his family estates by will in the following manner
To John Transome during his life: and subject thereto
To Thomas Transome and the heirs of his body in tail MALE i.e. to his SONS AND HIS SON'S SONS --: with an ultimate remainder
To Henry Bycliffe, (the cousin of the testator) his heirs and assigns for ever.
John Transome duly entered and possessed the estates. In his life-time Thomas Transome became embarrassed and ultimately levied a fine without the concurrence of his father the tenant in possession, whereby he created a base fee in favour of one Durfey and barred his own issue but not the remaindermen.
This Thomas Transome had been married and had sons who lived under the care of the grandfather and were moderately provided for by him out of other family property. In the course of Thomas' decline and ruin his wife died -- and to escape his creditors he went abroad and was little heard of until in a year or two he was proved to have died obscurely in France, his father still living and remaining in possession.
On the death of John the father, Durfey entered into possession having unquestionably purchased the estate and interest of Thomas and his issue and as these were notoriously alive and likely to continue, the Bycliffe family gave themselves little concern about so remote an interest.
Durfey indeed succeeded in satisfying the Bycliffes and in placing on his own title some proof (by a fictitious or antedated consent of the father John) that the entail had been fully barred against remaindermen as well as against Thomas and his issue in tail. At length the Durfeys, who took the name and arms of Transome claimed to be and were acknowledged as tenants or owners in fee of the entire property.
At the beginning of the 19th century however the male issue of Thomas Transome was in danger of extinction, the knowledge of which roused the Bycliffes to renew their inquiries. They discover ample proof that a base fee only had been created, that their remainder was not barred and they determine to dispute it. In the first years of the 19th century the last male descendant of Thomas Transome dies and then the litigation commences and the estate is desperately contested by the Bycliffes. They are on the point of succeeding, in spite of the devices of Jermyn to destroy their evidence and to produce a living male descendant of Thomas Transome.
Things are in this state when some inquiries into the early history of the Thomas Transome line lead the Bycliffe lawyers to prosecute some investigations in France, and Maurice Christian Bycliffe being abroad on service undertakes personally to conduct a somewhat delicate and secret inquiry -- which is to ascertain the truth of a story which they have reason to believe, of the connexion of a certain noble French family with Thomas Transome.
Maurice obtains an introduction to the head of this family, receives strong evidence of a possible kinship, is welcomed by them, and marries the only daughter Annette.
He learns in fact this -- that Thomas Transome when he fled from England was married secretly a second time to a French lady, by whom he left a son. This son was educated as a Frenchman, married a French lady of birth, took her name and was eventually ennobled. The father of Annette is his last male representative.
The issue of Thomas Transome is therefore not extinct for he has left (in France) another branch of male descendants. The Bycliffe title is therefore estopped or postponed until this man's death.
Information of so very precious a character Maurice is unwilling to entrust to any other; and at all risks and cost, even leaving his wife and child to follow him he makes his way to England to consult his lawyers about this great discovery.
The proof however is far from legally perfect, and its bearing on the case is still full of difficulties and involves Maurice in much labour and anxiety. In the meantime Jermyn pounces down upon him, throws him into prison as a fraudulent debtor, and Maurice dies leaving his affairs in disorder. His child cannot be traced, and, as his news has for the time barred his own claim, his lawyers readily leave the case to go by default.
The father of Annette the real last male descendant of Thomas Transome dying after Bycliffe -- his daughter is a minor and time does not run to bar her by statute. At some period after the death of Bycliffe not necessary to define, the father of Annette dies and upon this event the case stands thus.
The last male descendant of Thomas Transome is now dead and the base fee in Durfey's favour is determined. The right of Bycliffe, which is a fee not an entail, now descends upon his daughter Esther and for the first time a good title in the remainderman arises. But she is an infant and therefore is not barred by the statute of limitations even if 20 years have elapsed since her right accrued.
Esther is also the sole heiress of the last of the Thomas Transomes and also the heiress of the Transome the original testator, but as the estate of Thomas Transome was limited to the heirs in tail male (and not in tail general) {and this is the more usual way} neither she nor her mother were any obstacle to the determination of the base fee -- which exists only in male descendants of male.
Esther however as heiress unites the Bycliffe and the old Transome descent in herself and on clear proof of this must infallibly succeed in ejecting from their ancient estates, Harold the Durfey-Transome, the descendant of the man who ruined and supplanted Thomas.
Citation
Frederic Harrison, Frederic Harrison to GE, London, 29 January [1866], Complete George Eliot Letters(2026), George Eliot Archive, edited by Beverley Park Rilett. https://GeorgeEliotArchive.org, Accessed September 7, 2026. https://www.georgeeliotarchive.org/items/show/91847