Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
John Brandon

Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 20 jan 2007 00:32:09

_English Reports_, the massive standard edition of English law reports
running to 178 volumes, contains the following item (83: 1131):

"[15 Charles II.] GIFFORD against BOND AND POCOCKE. Judgement.

The plaintiff giveth a warrant of attorny to acknowledge
satisfaction of any judgment that is, or may be had against bond [sic;
recte Bond], whereby execution may be had: by vertue of this, the
attorny may acknowledge satisfaction on a judgment had against Bond,
Pococke, and Becks, for if any of the parties be sufficiently named,
its [sic] enough; and judgment against three, is sufficient for
acknowledgment of one against two; but not contra'."

Would the date of this (15 Charles II) be 1664 or 1675? I'm thinking
1664, but could it _possibly_ be 1675?

Bond is Nicholas Bond and Pococke is John Pococke. See

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC2 ... holas+bond

Gjest

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av Gjest » 20 jan 2007 03:15:37

John Brandon wrote:
_English Reports_, the massive standard edition of English law reports
running to 178 volumes, contains the following item (83: 1131):

"[15 Charles II.] GIFFORD against BOND AND POCOCKE. Judgement.

The plaintiff giveth a warrant of attorny to acknowledge
satisfaction of any judgment that is, or may be had against bond [sic;
recte Bond], whereby execution may be had: by vertue of this, the
attorny may acknowledge satisfaction on a judgment had against Bond,
Pococke, and Becks, for if any of the parties be sufficiently named,
its [sic] enough; and judgment against three, is sufficient for
acknowledgment of one against two; but not contra'."

Would the date of this (15 Charles II) be 1664 or 1675? I'm thinking
1664, but could it _possibly_ be 1675?

Probably neither. Charles II's reign (for legal purposes) commenced
immediately upon his father's execution, i.e. 30 January 1648/9. Thus,
15 Charles II ran from 30 January 1662/3 until 29 January 1663/4.

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 20 jan 2007 16:55:26

Sniff. Picking nits as usual, Michael.

But at least you've stopped your obsession with rating all my posts "1
star" ...

Gjest

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av Gjest » 21 jan 2007 02:14:54

John Brandon twittered:

Sniff. Picking nits as usual, Michael.

Wipe your nose and stop snivelling, child. It's called accuracy; you
might like to aspire to it one day, when you grow up.

But at least you've stopped your obsession with rating all my posts "1
star" ...

Still paranoid, I see. You asked a question, and I answered it for
you. An adult might reply with thanks, but as usual you respond with
immature abuse. I'm sorry you feel so threatened. As it happens, I
don't usually waste time reading your largely off-topic posts, let
alone rating them. Have a nice day.

MA-R

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 21 jan 2007 19:29:10

Wipe your nose and stop snivelling, child. It's called accuracy; you
might like to aspire to it one day, when you grow up.

Actually, I believe we are the same age (though I would have guessed
you were 20 years older from your sour, fussy ways). Didn't Leo give
you a birthyear of 1968 in his listing of descendants of King John?
That is my date of birth as well.

Still paranoid, I see. You asked a question, and I answered it for
you. An adult might reply with thanks, but as usual you respond with
immature abuse. I'm sorry you feel so threatened. As it happens, I
don't usually waste time reading your largely off-topic posts, let
alone rating them. Have a nice day.

Patronizing little creep ...

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 21 jan 2007 19:46:58

You asked a question, and I answered it for you.

Actually, you didn't answer it. My question, in essence, was whether
the regnal years of Charles II were always figured from 1649, or if
they _might sometimes_ be figured from 1660.

You gave me a schoolmarmish slap on the hand for not knowing that the
death of Charles I occurred in _1648/9_ rather than just plain _1649_.

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 30 jan 2007 23:10:33

A search in the catalogue of the National Archives gives the following
references for Bond v. Gifford (or variant title of Bond v. Giffard)

C 9/21/5
C 9/22/24
C 9/24/9
C 5/593/15
C 22/956/7

With dates of 1651, 1659, 1660, and "between 1649 and 1714."

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 30 jan 2007 23:17:40

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC7 ... AJ&pg=RA4-
PA516&lpg=RA4-PA516&dq=%22nicholas+bond%22

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... AAAMAAJ&q=
%22nicholas+bond%22&dq=%22nicholas+bond%22&pgis=1

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... AAAIAAJ&q=
%22nicholas+bond%22&dq=%22nicholas+bond%22&pgis=1

John Brandon

Re: Gifford against Bond and Pococke

Legg inn av John Brandon » 30 jan 2007 23:28:43

I wonder if the following suit from 1675 wouldn't be applicable,
seeing that John Godfrey of Canterbury was one of Gifford's investors
about this time ...

C 10/126/32

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»