Hi Tony
I will try and clarify this for you a little. In the first instance, the
£5.00 per annum would be one man's contribution to the 'pot', rather as we
would contribute to a charity today by agreeing to pay so much a month
towards the upkeep of, say, an African child.
In the case of Bondsman, have you heard the expression 'your word is as good
as your bond', ie. we have a deal, shake hands on it - in this there is no
written agreement, but one party agrees verbally to fulfill an agreement -
the more modern equivalent of a written bond. It is where someone provides
a service for another person and expects something in return ie an IOU. A
good example would have been where someone wanted to emigrate to America but
didn't have the money to pay the fare. Someone already living there would
agree to pay the fare providing the emigrant then worked for them for a
given period without payment, the emigrant was thus 'bound' for that period
in order to pay off the debt.
In the final case you quote below I would translate it as follows: Griffiths
has provided a service for the other two (perhaps paid off a debt) they must
now pay him back with interest, in whatever manner was agreed, they are now
'bound' to him. For example, if the agreement was to work for him for a
given period, he, of necessity, may well, in addition, be providing food and
lodging for them for that period so he would expect much more than his
initial £10 in return.
Our ancestors may not, on the whole, have been well educated but they
understood the value of their money and in many cases exacted their 'pound
of flesh' for the use of it.
Vera
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Francis [mailto:afrancis@mail.pacificcoast.net]
Sent: 18 June 2003 23:06
To: POWYS-L(a)rootsweb.com
Subject: RE: [POWYS] Bonding /Boughrood/Backrhyd, Radnorshire.
Thank you Vera,
What you say suggests that the described charity of £5 per annum would
only go a very small way towards paying for one apprenticeship.
In the given example of a bond "Richard Davies of Penyarth BOND to
William Pughe of Nantmeichied yoman, for the sum of £20" - it isn't clear
to me who pays whom for the non-performance of some unstated obligation.
I'm guessing that Richard Davies has promised to pay £20 to William Pughe
if he, Richard, fails to perform something to William's satisfaction. It's
hard to imagine what good such a bond would be in court, without any
description of the job to be performed.
If you'll allow me to lean further on your knowledge, I'd appreciate an
explanation of the following bond: "Richard Davies and Owen Owens of
Peniarth, Montgom. are bound to Griffith Thomas of Llanvylling in the sum
of £20 for £10".
I'm guessing that Richard and Owen have together undertaken some
undescribed job for Griffith, for which Griffith has offered to pay £10. If
Richard and Owen fail to perform, they will pay £20 to Griffith for his £10?
So Griffith gains £10 with his proof of disatisfaction?
It seems to me that these bonds both fail to describe your "b)the
condition, which states the action required", so what was their point? Was
is all a waste of paper or am I missing something?
Cheers and thanks again,
Tony
-----------------------------------------------------------
From: "Vera Brown" <vera.brown1(a)btopenworld.com>
Subject: RE: [POWYS] Boughrood/Backrhyd, Radnorshire.
Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 10:42:02 +0100
X-Mailing-List: <POWYS-L(a)rootsweb.com> archive/latest/10896
Apprenticeships: The Statute of Apprentices (1563) forbade anyone to
practice a trade without having served a 7 year apprenticeship. A child
(most boys but occasionally girls) was bound to a master by an
apprenticeship indenture for which the parents or, in the case of paupers,
the overseers, had to pay a premium to bind the child to the master.
Bonds: Legal documents requiring the performance of a particular action.
The Bond is written in two parts 1) the obligation recording the penalty
for
non-performance b)the condition, which states the action required.
Bonds
were used for the administration of a deceased person's estate before
letters of administration could be granted; also, well-known, are marriage
bonds which would be required if a couple were to be married by licence.
The sums required for both the above could be quite hefty sometimes running
into the hundreds of pounds.
Vera Brown
General Secretary
Powys FHS