How did 18th century bonds work?

[M_ONeill]

So I have received a scan of a bond from 1791 where my 5x great grandfather was a signatory to a bond for £400. The short version (minus the legalese) is that a neighbouring farmer in the parish had got himself deep in debts/arrears with his landlord, the local baronet. The bond states that in consideration for the farmer getting more time to pay, my ancestor agreed to act as surety.

What I want to know is how this worked in practice. Was the £400 a downpayment that my ancestor would get back if the neighbour settled his debts by the alloted date, or was it a fine that would only be paid in the event of the neighbour not settling the debts in time?

[Guy Etchells]

So I have received a scan of a bond from 1791 where my 5x great grandfather was a signatory to a bond for £400. The short version (minus the legalese) is that a neighbouring farmer in the parish had got himself deep in debts/arrears with his landlord, the local baronet. The bond states that in consideration for the farmer getting more time to pay, my ancestor agreed to act as surety.

What I want to know is how this worked in practice. Was the £400 a downpayment that my ancestor would get back if the neighbour settled his debts by the alloted date, or was it a fine that would only be paid in the event of the neighbour not settling the debts in time?

It is impossible to give an accurate answer without seeing what you call the legalese (the devil is in the detail).

From your post it sounds like a straightforward contract that if the neighbour settled his debts by the alloted date there would be nothing to pay but if he did not your great grandfather would pay the Baronet £400.
Payment of the £400 would not cancel the debt and the neighbour would still owe that to the Baronet and probably be evicted but there is a possibility the payment could cancel the debt. The full text is important.
Cheers
Guy

[M_ONeill]

Thanks for the reply, Guy! Apologies for the slow response - wanted to wait until I was at my PC with the bond document saved on it.

I'll post some excerpts, skipping the preamble:

'...Edward Farmer of Muckhall in the parish of Acton Round ... farmer and Thomas Smallman now or late of Weston in the parish of Monkhopton ... are held and fairly bound to Sir Richard Acton of Aldenham Hall in the Parish of Morville ... Baronet, in the total sum of four hundred pounds of Good and Lawful money to be paid to the said Sir Richard Acton or his [?] attorney, his executive adminstrator or [?] for which payment well and truly to be made'.


'... Whereas the above bound Edward Farmer is Tenant to the said Sir Richard Acton for a farm and premises situated at Upper Muckhall ... for the Rent whereof the said Edward Farmer is now and was at Lady day last indebted and in arrear to the said Sir Richard Acton in a large sum of money the whole of which the said Edward Farmer is not at present able to pay ... without much inconvenience and injury to himself and in consideration of ... further time to the said Edward Farmer for payment of all Rent and arrears ... the said Thomas Smallman hath agreed to become surety ... for all such Rent and arrears as shall be then due'

[Chilternbirder]

The terminology has changed but we regularly took guarantees like this when I worked for a bank in the 70s and this century Amigo Loans has based their business model on them.

[Guy Etchells]

The new details you have added show your 5x great grandfather has agreed to cover the debt owed and the future rent due during the extra time up to the sum of £400. In other words if the tenant does not pay he will pay the rent and arrears up to a total of £400.

Supposition : The extra time given is probably to allow the tenant to either harvest and sell his crop in the field (grain or animals). 

Cheers
Guy

[M_ONeill]

Thanks, Guy! My final question is about what this document can tell me about Thomas Smallman’s economic situation. Even as a nominal debt £400 seems like it would have been a lot of money in the 1790s! My instinct would be that he’s doing quite well as an independent farmer. Does that idea stack up?

[Guy Etchells]

Thanks, Guy! My final question is about what this document can tell me about Thomas Smallman’s economic situation. Even as a nominal debt £400 seems like it would have been a lot of money in the 1790s! My instinct would be that he’s doing quite well as an independent farmer. Does that idea stack up?

Not necessarily he could simply be another tenant of the Baronet who has never defaulted on payment and therefore trusted to keep his word. He could even have been seen as a rough enforcer type of person who would make the tenant pay up no matter what, we cannot make judgements without evidence.

The amount is more than likely an arbitrary amount in a similar what that marriage bonds insert an arbitrary amount way above most people's means to pay and in this case way above the debt and future rent.
Cheers
Guy

[Guy Etchells]

I have also been thinking about the history of Shropshire in the late 18th century. grain prices were rising back to former levels due to export bounties and the wars with France pushed domestic demand and prices up. In addition enclosures were taking place with the results that farm rent jumped from £15 to £40 up to £100 to £400. Common grazing was drastically reduced due to the enclosure and some farmers exchanged say 20 acres sheep grazing for a few acres of arable land, this in turn started a vicious circle where less animals meant less manure for fertilising the arable land resulting in poor yields.

In short it was a period of change and insecurity in farming
Cheers
Guy

[M_ONeill]

Thanks for the context, Guy! My assumption is that Thomas Smallman was fairly trusted in his community. His signature is found on the Monkhopton parish registers as Churchwarden for 1770, so he was seen as safe enough for a key to the church, at least! 

Thanks again, I'll close this topic as complete!