- Comments (0) Change font
If columns/tables do not appear straight, change font
Glynde June 1763 Sir I reced the Favour of Your Letter dated 19th. May, but I cannot agree to what you propose in Regard to the Price of your Lead Ore for the 13 Years ending 31st. Decr. 1762, as I understand that a Bing of Austin [Alston] Moor Ore is not at any time sold for so much as a Bing of Weardale Ore, that the Owners of the Dues of Austin Moor have for a considerable Part of that time been under the Disadvantage of having but one Buyer of their Ore, and having no Smelting Mill of their own, and that 50s. p Bing is much below the Price of Weardale Ore either at present or upon a Medium for the last 13 Years. I agree to the Price of the latter being fixed at the Medium Price it has been actually sold at, or has been worth in Proportion to the Price of Lead for those Years in which no Weardale Ore has been sold, if any, within that time; which is I think all that can be desired. [on cover:] June 1763/ Draft of Answer to Sr Wr Blackett’s Letter to Ld Bp of Durham 19th Ult Relating to the Price of Weardale Lead ore for the Last 13 years
Appears to refer to letter from Bishop Trevor of Durham given as 16th May in Richmond’s outgoing letterbook: NRO 672/E/1E/2. Presumably drafted by Halhead for the Bishop. 15th June used here.