Was Fogg cheated of £1,000 by Gifford?

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
John Brandon

Was Fogg cheated of £1,000 by Gifford?

Legg inn av John Brandon » 29 jan 2007 23:55:25

As I've noted before, an article by Andrew Rapoza--"The Trials of Dr.
Phillip Reade, Seventeenth-Century Itinerant Physician"--which traces
the history of an early New England quarrel, records the statement
that the traveling doctor Philip Reade first "called John Gifford a
'cheating dog' for somehow cheating Reade's kinsman of one thousand
pounds." Rapoza was unable to account for this outrageous claim, but
I recently noted that Philip Read stood surety for Gifford's partner,
Ezekiel Fogg, several years previous to the accusation ...

http://books.google.com/books?vid=OCLC0 ... ogg&pgis=1

Two entries in the _Essex County Deedbooks_ reveal the reason that
Fogg may have said Gifford cheated him of £1,000. In Deedbook 4:106
(1674/5), Fogg entered a "caution" or "caveat" only that "meeting [in
London] with Mr. Jno. Gifford of Lyn, in New England, [he] did then &
there covenant, bargaine, contract & buy of ye sd John Gifford three
fourth parts of all his interest, right, title ... in ... ye
Silverworkes."

http://www.salemdeeds.com/%5Chistoric/00004/0106.tif

Yet, several years, later (1677/8), Fogg made a deed in which it is
stated that "whereas ye said Ezekiell Fogg stands possest in his owne
right of one quarter or fourth part of a certaine ironworke ...
formerly caled or knowne by ye name of the 'Silverworke' ... ye prime
cost of ye premisses being valued in England at ye sume of two
thousand pounds sterling," he deeded this quarter share over to
Hezekiah Usher, as attorney to Charles Gosfright, to whom he owed a
certain debt.

http://www.salemdeeds.com/%5Chistoric/00005/0446.tif

So Fogg represented his interest as three quarters in 1675, and as one
quarter in 1677; which would be a difference of £1,000 on a property
worth £2,000 in all.

This may be the source of Philip Reed's contention that his kinsman (?
Ezekiel Fogg) was cheated of £1,000. In the first deed, Fogg had
alleged "that his deedes [showing his three quarters' interest] is
mislaid & cannot be found at present" and that he was only recording
this item in the Salem records "as a caveat." The whole thing seems
highly irregular to me; and it may be, in fact, that Fogg was
attempting to cheat someone rather than being cheated himself.


Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»