From: richard@ex-parrot.com   
      
   On 12/09/2019 12:08, Ian Goddard wrote:   
   > On 12/09/19 10:23, Richard Smith wrote:   
   >> So it seems it was a misunderstanding.  It was commonly but wrongly   
   >> thought that the will could be overturned if a child was not given some   
   >> sort of bequest, however small.   
   >   
   > I suspect that, Blackstone notwithstanding, nobody was going to take a   
   > risk.   
      
   Blackstone's /Commentaries/ wasn't published until the 1760s, though it   
   is based substantially on a series of lectures he delivered in the   
   1750s.  Probably the material on testaments was not yet written by 1753,   
   and even once it had been published, it will have taken time to have   
   become well-known.  But, in my experience, one shilling bequests had   
   largely stopped by the end of the 18th century, and I feel sure that   
   Blackstone's assurance that they were not necessary was a large part of   
   the reason.   
      
   Richard   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)