SA ONS Yd COR erage eg ee ee 
‘Nie 
DATING EVENTS—NEW MANAGEMENT | 91 
_ which is'not there mentioned) were the ones under which they 
began the copartnership.* 
_ There was then but one set of Articles under which the com- 
pany was operated till its termination in 1608, and these bore date 
of April 20, 1602. This is unequivocally settled by the identifi- 
cation of the Articles by both Kirkham and Evans in the earlier 
suit with those of the later suit; the declaration of both Evans 
and Painton as to the date; Evans’s willingness to bring the Ar- 
ticles into court: and the fact that the Court had the Articles 
before him in rendering a decree against Kirkham’s petition in 
the later syit.? 
[Since writing the above, I have found two separate copies of 
the 200/. bond, each under date of April 20, 1602; also one copy 
of the 50/. bond under same date. Both were made on the same 
day as the Articles merely as security for fulfilment of the con- 
tract. 
This settles the question of date. 
These two bonds are valuable in many respects. The 50/. bond 
is quoted and discussed later. The 200/. bond is especially valu- 
able as containing the terms of the Articles of Agreement. By 
these it is seen that the partners were to share the profits and 
expenses. But the only expenses provided for are rent and re- 
pairs. No mention is made of the chief items of expense,—as 
maintenance of the company, apparel, and furniture.* This is 
suggestive in itself and is corroborated in its significance by other 
211-12; 240-41). [Also infra, 92*.] 
Another bond was given at the 
same time by Kirkham et al. to 
Evans for 50/. But there is no. 
danger of confusing it with the Ar- 
ticles. It is taken up in proper or- 
der under James I. [But cf. also 
*In reading the forty pages of 
documents in these two suits, it is 
dificult to keep apart the Articles 
of Agreement and the 200/. Obli- 
gation based on them. Hence I 
note here that the Articles were 
drawn up by Evans (G.-F. 245b) 
with date of April 20, 1602 (ibid.), 
and “concluded” or agreed to by 
all (G-F., 211b, 216a). Kirkham 
and partners in their behalf drew 
up a 2007. bond or “Obligation” 
(G.-F., 211c, 216a), which was 
signed by Evans and Hawkins as 
a guarantee to carry out the Arti- 
cles. The two instruments were 
coincident. The Obligation seems 
to recite much of the Articles, and 
is given substantially twice (G-F., 
infra, 102°.] 
*It would not seem necessary to 
give such elaborate proof were it 
not that F. G. Fleay, op. cit., 132- 
33, 209, by his misdating has thrown 
events into confusion, and led later 
writers in the field into gross error. 
Also in reading the documents pub- 
lished in his work, one should first 
of all blot out the dates he has in- 
serted. 
°Cf. infra, 101-2, 113, 128-29, 178. 
205 
