Eve: This was the point I made. Someone would only go ahead with a non-existent "John Doe" as bondsman if he fully intended to go through with the marriage, and quickly. In this case the marriage happened the next day. But it's still of interest that the bishop's clerk allowed this, because he too, presumably, understood that John Doe didn't exist. Clearly the theory and practice of providing bondsmen who "should have been men of substance" sometimes differed. Paul Prescott > >I do have one ancestor pledging along with a fictitious bondsman > I hope he was either willing to carry out his intentions, or persinally > solvent then. If you defaulted, first your goods and chattels would go, > then you would be put in prison as a bankrupt, if 'unable to meet your > obligations'. > > -- > Eve McLaughlin > > Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians > Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.611 / Virus Database: 391 - Release Date: 03-03-2004