Letter – Henry Richmond to Walter Blackett – 30 Mar 1762

To Sir Walter Blackett Barot. M.P. at the Cocoa tree in Pall Mall London 

                                                                                                            Newca 30th March 1762

Hon[our]d Sir :   On Saturday last I sent by Fryer Todd the London Carrier, the box of Dr<missing, torn> directed to Mr Darwin within which I have put the Lease and Release 2nd of April 1733 and the Fines and Recoveries which were levyed in consequence thereof and have advised Mr Darwin accordingly.

   Inclosed is the paper about Chollerton Chancel which you left with me <torn>  bid me send and write something about. I have therefore informed myself <as> well as I can, without going to Councel, and find it ought not to be expected to contribute towards to the repair of the Chollerton Chancel in proportion to the present improved value of the Tithes of Chipchase and Birtley. But in proportion only to the modus of £4.6s.8d which you receive in lieu of the great Tithes of those Estates. As to the Owner of these Estates; it does not appear that his paying you this modus will exempt him from contributing, towards the repair of the chancel, in proportion to the present improved value of his Ti<thes> Because, tho’ modus’s may be deemed to have been originally the full <………….> of the Tithes, and tho’ the payment of them may have been established by custom or composition; yet these being only private transactions for the benefit of the parson or Impropriator and the Owner of the Estate, they cannot, if <……> Andrews’ Opinion in Law, dissolve the connection between the Right of Tithe and the charge of repairing the chancel. And the very Payment of a modus implies that there is such a Right of Tithes in somebody purchased as it were by this annual payment called a modus and it seems not material whether this Right is in the Owner of the Estate, or in another. As to his claiming an Exemption from these repairs on account of his repairing Birtley Chapel, it seems not reasonable. For chapels being built for the convenience of the proprietors of particular villages or Townships they ought in reason to put up with the Inconvenience of repairing them, And not be < missing, torn> with draw themselves from the mother Church expect <…> in Tithes  have no further connection with it. Neither does it appear that the Great <Tithes> are applicable to the repairs of such chapels. For the parishioners of <………..> in this town lately commenced a suit against Sir Matthew White in the E<cclesia>stical Court to compel him to repair their chancel because he has the great T<ithes> of Gosford Parish, within which St. Nicholas stands. But they soon dropt the <Suit> and have paid the costs and repaired the chancel themselves.

   I gave Mr. N. Fenwick your Letter: he has not paid me any Money yet but promises he will very soon.

   I am glad the Silver proved more, both in weight and value than I computed it to be.

I do not know how the £2000, which you want against Christmas can be raised; for here is no demand yet for Lead, and if we cannot get a quantity sold soon, the want of money will be very great, even for necessary occasions.

                                                    I am etc      HR