Money

‘A large income is the best recipe for happiness I ever heard of’

Mansfield Park

Love and money are the two aspirations for Jane Austen’s heroines, yet our research suggests that money did not always bring happiness. Whilst the eldest son inherited his father’s estate, it did not necessarily make his life easier than that of his younger brothers, since the inheritance came with a sense of duty towards his dependent relatives.

On his father’s death, Henry Temple’s mother wrote to him about his responsibility to his sisters:

‘you will be a second Parent, a more than Brother and in you my dearest Harry they will have a consolation for all their other affliction.’

Henry was clearly expected to take on the care and protection of his sisters, as they were still unmarried. This was not surprising given the relationship between Henry and his siblings, they clearly got on well together and he had previously taken much interest in their education, for example recommending that they take lessons from a particular dancing master.

 

It appears that a similar sense of duty was felt towards half-siblings, despite Jane Austen’s negative portrayal of Henry Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility. Indeed, her own nephew James Edward Austen-Leigh took on responsibility for his half-sister Anna, keeping up a regular correspondence with her, in spite of

‘sitting down under the double disadvantage of having nothing to say, and no time to say it in; I must trust to providence for making a nice long letter.’

He also attempted to provide for Anna financially. Mrs Leigh-Perrot (his great-aunt) made him her heir, leaving him £10,000 on the condition it would be in property and land since they were not subject to the legacy tax of 10%. This meant that in the meantime James’ income would be lowered, something that caused him to worry about providing for Anna,

‘I will have more difficulty in paying her the little I give her.’

This implies there were alternative forms of inheritance; it was not always as straightforward as passing money from father to son.

 

In Mrs Leigh-Perrot’s case having no children of her own meant that her and her husband's money could be passed to other relatives. James discusses these possibilities in a letter to his mother and mentions that he has ‘great expectations’ that his sister Caroline will benefit from it. Since his father was only a clergyman, and therefore not very wealthy, this would have made the burden of providing for his relatives easier for James.

 

James Edward Austen-Leigh

 

Furthermore, these example show that women were not passive or ignorant about inheritance matters. Mrs Leigh-Perrot was conscious of who she wanted to receive her money and was aware of the taxation her money would be subject to.

In many cases inheritance was straightforward with the estate being passed from father to son. This was accepted as the norm, and therefore not likely to be challenged by younger sons or daughters. Indeed, there were many disadvantages of being the heir, such as having no choice of career, the expectation of providing for family members and the pressure of maintaining the estate and family reputation. It appears that female members of the family were well looked after by their male relatives in most cases, particularly by their brothers, displaying the strength of sibling relationships.