Can you work out what the words are?.....

Post by **paddyscar** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:20 pm

Lesley:

Could the second word begin with Volu? As in a word implying voluntarily, since it seems the intent is to itemize whose responsible for success and/or failure? (Well, it seems that way to me, but ...)

Frances

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 7:49 pm

Hi Frances
Possibly - looking through the Concise Scots Dictionary for any likely suspects now. Also thought it just might be a T

There are other capital Vs in the document - they seem a little more open than this example, and a bit shorter. The other capital Ts don't seem to quite match either though.... with your V I had a thought it might be some Latin derived word starting Valis/Velis... I dunno...looking something like "Valispure" (I'm making 'em up now!!) but I'm not seeing anything which fits so far....

Thanks for the suggestion, though. We'll crack it yet!
Best wishes
Lesley

Post by **AnneM** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:11 pm

The first word is certainly ommissions but I'm stuck with the second. I don't think it's the not delivery hereof as that does not make sense and legal documents usually make at least some sense!!!

Will strain my eyes some more having another look.

Anne

Post by **AnneM** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:17 pm

Hi again

My view is that what the second word says is "I dispense" so that the sentence reads "and I dispense with the ??? delivery hereof"

What that word is I'm not sure but it can't be not.

Anne

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:08 pm

Hi Anne
Thanks for your help. The I dispense bit looks very convincing. Well done! =D>

and legal documents usually make at least some sense

I'm not, however, sure that I agree with the above statement

Seriously, although I appreciate there is obviously a reason and a history to it all. but to a mind with no legal training at all, I do wonder sometimes how the heck they came up with some of the convoluted and long winded phrases!

As to the other bit I wonder now if not is an abbreviation - could it be short for something like notarial? - would that make sense?

Best wishes
Lelsey

Post by **AnneM** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:14 pm

Hi

My guess is that it is meant to say need for and the for has been omitted but again that is a bit of a wild guess.

Anne

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:38 pm

Hi Anne
Concise Scots Dictionary gives this possibility:
not(t) used as past participle of need
which would almost fit with your thoughts, Anne.

Mind you, it also gives: note, not law a formal record, esp in a court register.

Best wishes
Lesley