Letter – Henry Richmond to John Cross – 23 Mar 1764

To Mr John Cross                                                                      Newcas[tle] the 23rd March 1764               

          in Leeds, Yorkshire



Sir                    Inclosed herewith are copies of two letters which have passed between Mr J[o]n[atho]n Fenwick of York and me about £500 part of £2000 owing him upon Sir W[alte]r Blacketts & William Peaseth Esq[ui]re joint Bond dated I believe the 12th May 1758 at £4 perCent[u]m; wch £500 Mr Fenwick wants Sir Walter to pay him in on the 12th May next. But there will be a Difficulty in his getting Sir Walter a Sufficient discharge for this Sum unless Some person at Leeds, whom Sir W[alte]r can depend upon will take the Trouble of seeing two Endorsem[en]t made in such Terms as are mentioned in the inclosed Copy of my Letter  to Mr Fenwick. One of them to be made upon the Bond and the other upon the assignment thereof to Mr William Ward, his Father in Law  as a Security for an Annuity of £70 a year payable to the said Mr Ward. You will see by Mr Fenwicks Letter that he has proposed getting you to attend the making these Endorsem[en]ts and I have mentioned this to Sir Walter who desires you will take the trouble of doing this piece of Business, in case Mr Fenwick apply’s to you about it. It will be right that you should read so much of the Bond and Assignm[en]t as to satisfy yourself that the said Endorsem[en]ts are made upon such a Bond and such an Assignm[en]t as are here in part described. And when they are made you will be so good as testify the same to me and let me know the date of the Bond. For after this is done I am to agree to Mr Fenwick’s drawing a Bill upon me for the said £500 and the half Years intrest of the whole £2000 due the 12th May. The regular Way to have settled this matter would have been for Mr Fenwick to have brought the Bond and the assign[en]t hither, that the Endorsem[en]t might have been made and the money paid here; but I suppose Mr Ward is not able to travail so far and that he is not willing to part with his Security out of his own hand. So there is no Way but this. For Sir Walter cannot safely pay the whole or any part of this £2000 without Mr Wards Concurrence under his hand. I shall be very glad to hear that you are well. P.S. Sir Walter came here last Monday and is a good deal better of the cold which he had before he came from London. I am etc        H R