4,043
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
== Explanation ==It was common with commercial and government (Royal) controlled enterprises in earlier years, in which citizens were employed to undertake paid services, to require them to sign a '''Covenant''' of good behaviour and to limit their activities to the requirements of their employer.
It was common with commercial and government (Royal) controlled enterprises in earlier years, in which citizens were employed to undertake paid services, to require them to sign a Covenant of good behaviour and to limit their activities to the requirements of their employer. In order to ensure that the terms of the Covenant were respected, it was practice to obtain ‘Guarantees’ from (usually) two citizens (or, ‘Sureties’) of repute. They would be required to issue '''bonds ''' whereby they undertook to pay a certain sum of money in the event that the employee broke the terms of his Covenant.
A Researcher asked: Did females sailing to India to take part in a prearranged wedding require a Bond in the year 1812? Once a bond had been obtained, was a new bond required each time the person returned to India after a trip back to England? <br>
The answer is in principle, yes. She would have had to obtain permission to travel to India in 1812 - as, indeed after the 1813, when the Act of Parliament loosened restrictions on travel there and signalled the inauguration of the 'Miscellaneous Bonds' which FIBIS has transcribed. There are earlier series of bonds to be found at the British Library and she may feature in them. Depending upon the importance of the lady in question, she might have been permitted to travel without the need for a bond, in which case she might feature directly in the minutes of the Court of Directors.
Once married, it is believed that she would not have required a further bond to return to India from a visit to England and this may be confirmed if she is not found in the Miscellaneous Bonds for any return made after 1814.
remove material from roots list and add link to original discussion
This was the practice adopted by the [[Honourable East India Company]] for all its employees, from its inception in 1600 until its loss of monopoly in India in 1834 and sometimes beyond. Every British citizen wishing to travel to India required the authority of the Company and, in general, was only given that authority if he was an employee of the Company. Exceptions to this were soldiers of the [[East India Company Army|Companies armies]] and officers and soldiers of the [[British Army]] travelling to India, but they were subject to other military forms of obligation to the Company.
==FIBIS resources==
''in the Presence of''
==External links==
*[http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/india/2009-09/1253305673 Archived Roots list discussion] on whether a woman required a bond if travelling to India for a pre-arranged wedding in 1812 (Sep 2009)
[[Category:East India Company records]]
