Chat
|
Daily Search
|
My GenForum
|
Community Standards
|
Terms of Service
|
|
|
I thought it best to attempt a clarification anent the succession of the partnership at the Dumbarton Glass-work, even though it is contained in the text, it is possible that my previous version may have left some things to question:
Although Alexander Houston may well have retired in 1822 (before his death), it is this event that preciptated a change in the copartnery of the Glass-works, when a new partnership was formed between John Dixon, senior, his brother, Jacob Dixon, senior, and Jacob’s eldest son, Jacob Dixon, junior. But before February 1822, the elder John Dixon of Leven Grove had died, when the partnership again changed with the elder Jacob Dixon naming his nephew, John Dixon, junior (the eldest son of John Dixon, senior) as a partner in his father's stead, and Jacob’s eldest son, Jacob Dixon, junior, continued as the third partner. Tragedy again struck on Oct 6, 1828, when John Dixon, Esq. of Levengrove died, and the copartnery again changed, leaving Jacob Dixon, senior, and his eldest son, Jacob Dixon, as sole living partners until their deaths, just 26 hours apart, in September 1831.
There are also some other dates to bear in mind: Richard Dennistoun of Kelvingrove who sold Leven Grove to John Dixon had himself not purchased Kelvingrove until 1806, so to have been referred to by this name in the sale to John Dixon, the latter's purchase of Leven Grove must have thus occurred after 1806 and closer to the time when Dixon became provost of Dumbarton in 1810. Following the death of Dixon (before February 1822) Jacob Dixon, senior, succeeded as provost of Dumbarton in 1822, vacating his position as provost of Helensburgh which he had held since 1816, and was succeeded on his death by his son Anthony Dixon, as provost of Dumbarton from 1831 to 1832. So as it appears now, there is no direct connection between John Macaulay and Leven Grove other than the fact that John Dixon senior of Leven Grove was a son-in-law by marriage. It would seem unlikely that John Macaulay ever resided at Leven Grove unless there was a house there before Dixon acquired the estate from Colgrain's younger son, Richard Dennistoun of Kelvingrove (died circa 1826)? If Macaulay had feued Leven Grove from Dennistoun, a record of this feu would most likely reside within Colgrain's muniments, that is if anyone really wants to know?
In 1782, Lord Provost Patrick Colquhoun acquired the lands of Woodcroft and renamed it Kelvingrove. He built the mansion the following year, perhaps from designs by Robert Adam, and laid out gardens. Colquhoun sold Kelvingrove in 1792 to John Pattison (1755-1807), who enlarged the estate by acquiring lands to the north and three years later sold it to the merchant Richard Dennistoun. It remained in the Dennistoun family until 1841 when it was sold to the merchant Colin McNaughtan. Glasgow Corporation acquired the estate, neighbouring Woodlands and some other land in 1852 and used much of the land to lay out the "West End Park", better known as Kelvingrove Park. The house became Glasgow's first municipal museum in 1872 and it was extended four years later. It was demolished in 1899 and the Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum was erected in its place, a little to the east. [The History of Glasgow, from the Earliest to the Present Time (1872) Edited by John M’Ure: Proprietors of Kelvingrove, p1141-42].
Pet. And Complt., Richard Dennistoun. – June 3, 1863
Bankruptcy – Complaint
This was a petition and complaint under the 54 Geo III., c. 137, at the instance of Richard Dennistoun, Southport, Lancashire, against a deliverance of the trustee on the sequestered estates of the late Richard Dennistoun, of Kelvingrove, sometime merchant in Glasgow. The sequestration was awarded in 1826, but has not yet been wound up. There are at present funds in the hands of the trustee, and with the view of participating in the approaching dividend, the petitioner has lodged a claim and affidavit with the trustees, to the effect that he is entitled to draw a dividend as the assignee of Messrs Mackay, Macqueen, and Co., who were creditors, he alleges, of the bankrupt to the extent of £50,000, in consequence of a final compromise made with a former trustee in 1830. The trustee rejected the claim on various grounds, and the petitioner appealed by way of the present petition. Counsel were heard yesterday and to-day. [The Journal of Jurisprudence, 1863 (1863), vol. VII, p398]
Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:
|
| http://genforum.genealogy.com/macaulay/messages/1680.html | ||
 |
Link to GenForum Add Forum |
|