Elizabeth, I read your interpretation of my explanation and got confused. Let me start again. "An indenture was originally a contract between two or more parties, written in duplicate or counter part all on the same piece of paper or parchment, words or letters of the alphabet being written between the two counterparts. The counterparts were then separated by cutting or tearing along a wavy or indented line through these words or letters (hence the name "indenture"), and each party received one of the counter parts. In case of later dispute as to the authenticity of either of the counterparts they could be fitted together to settle the question. (Ladner of Conveyancing in Pennsylvania page 141.) Also see Theodore Plucknett"s, A Concise History of the Common Law at pages 612-613. Although I have a copy of Van Der Linden's Institutes of the Laws of Holland and Xeroxed extensive portions of Simon Van Leeuwen's Commentaries of the Roman Dutch Law, neither of these book speaks to the format of legal instruments. An "indentured servant" is merely a man or a woman, who has entered into an employment contract for a specific term of years for an already agreed upon consideration. The parent of a minor, who has apprenticed his or her child to a master, has also entered into an education/employment contract for a specific period of time for stated consideration. These were called Indentures of Apprenticeship. (Black's Law Dictionary p. 911) It is the subject matter and terms of the individual contract, which are important not the format in which the contract is drafted. When I began working with the rangers at the Saratoga National Historical Park, they used to get all excited when they found an "Indenture", until they got tired of my asking them if the instrument were a deed, a mortgage, or an employment contract. Saying that a legal document is an "indenture" is as specific as saying that the said instrument was written on pink paper. The color of the paper, as well as, the format in which an instrument is written falls into the "so what" category. What is important is what kind of a contract are you reading. Sincerely, Leslie -------------- Original message -------------- From: Elizabeth Johnson <elizajohn@sbcglobal.net> > Thank you! As any good lawyer does, you have forced me to look at the bigger > picture. It does help because I had narrowed my thinking down to the issue of > indenture only in the terms of the person and the two most frequently seen > applications of the word in both Dutch and English histories, excluding legal > documents, and genealogies: The training of the person such as in the case of a > minor, who would be placed in an apprenticeships for training in exchange for > whatever was specified, money or labour, for a specific amount of time. It > seems that these are usually referred to by historians as apprenticeships such > as "he apprenticed to...." which then hints at the nature of the endenture. The > general term would be indenture. The other usage, which is what I see when, > reading through quite a few genealogies, is the word "indenture" combined with > servant. I believe that in the 17th Century, this particular type of indenture > placed the person into a state of servitude and > allowed them to be categorized as an indentured servant, for a period of time > in exchange for something of monetary value which in that era was often a > passage from Europe to a determined destination. > > What you are saying is, I believe, is what I originally thought but somehow > lost in my narrow focus: The discussion that started this train of thought was > the classification of several persons as endentured servants based upon the name > of the person or persons being combined with the words "indentured to". Being > indentured, in itself, does not and did not mean more than being in a contract > or a legal agreement with another person or persons with the terms of the > indenture determined by document itself. In short, an indenture is the general > term for the format in which any number of agreements could be written but > unless specifically stated in the documented itself, being indentured was not > synonymous with the word servant. > > I'm frequently rushing when I pose a question to the list and should probably > wait until I have the time to fully explain myself. > > lbpotter@comcast.net wrote: > Elizabeth, > > An "Indenture" is just one of many types of format in which any number of types > of contracts can be written. Deeds, mortgages, contract for the sale of chattel, > and employment contracts are just a few of the types of instruments, which are > commonly written in the "Indenture" format. All of the aforementioned > instruments can also be written in other formats. > > What is significant is not the format in which the instrument is written, but > rather the subject matter with which instrument deals. What is important is > whether the instrument a deed, a mortgage, a contract for the sale of chattel or > an employment contract. > > Hope that this helps. > > Sincerely, > > Leslie Potter > PA Atty ID # 16580 > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: Elizabeth Johnson > > > It wasn't too long ago that I asked a similar question and didn't get a chance > > to thank those who responded. I'm still on the same subject, but from perhaps > a > > little different angle. If one boarded a ship in Texel, and paid for his own > > trip and had a contract for specific services, for a specific time and wage to > > van Rensselaer, it is my impression that this is a contract as it is called > but > > not an indenture. A second party, on the same ship, has his passage paid but > by > > whom is unknown. He may have paid his own. The next mention of this second > > person is when he draws his wages from the colony. Contract or indenture? or > is > > it possible to tell? > > > > Any help is appreciated > > > > Elizabeth > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > DUTCH-COLONIES-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message