Letters – Robert Lilburn to John Wilkinson – 11 Aug 1706

Document Type: Letters
Date: 11 Aug 1706
Correspondent: Robert Lilburn
Recipient: John Wilkinson
Archive Source: NRO 324/W3/19
  • Transcription
  • Notes
  • Comments (0)
  • Change font
    If columns/tables do not appear straight, change font
Cos: Wilkinson

	Yours of the 10th inst I have considered, and as  [I am} sure you intended no insecurity to them in this affair by your Demands but hitherto have chiefly regarded that safety in prompt payment: as my forbearance to make a demand till now, does sufficiently testifie my good intentions; yet being immediately accountable for the same that must excuse me if I oppose your short answer wth such reasons as are conceived undeniable in this case.

	Mr Brummell upon oath Deposeth that three & thirty tennes of coles, & upwards were by Sr Wm Blackett’s appointment Delivered to me or my order<wch> includes all those coles sold by me, to himselfe, & perhaps 500 other persons, as well as those sold to yu: now certainly you will not have <infer>, that he, & all these persons are not safe because they have paid me, for wt was sold to them; seeing those sold to <yu> are charged in the same manner, & by the same Person; as those wch were sold to <yu> besides them: were my order for those coles as well as they for the rest; now if Mr Brummell had forborne to charge me wth ym yet yu had, yu had my demand been of none effect; but since he has & thereby exonerated Sr Wms Exec[utor]s in acct for so many coles, wthout all doubt my Demands on yu for them are just; who were but my ordr for the selling of these coles. But supposeing yu as Sr Wms Execr yu have yu done Mr Brummell a great wrong & put him in a very evil case, for thereby yu will deinigh yr own witness, who saith they are Delivered as well as those that I have the money for and yu now come & infer theya re not delivered. If yu had thus intended herein to demur yu had done will if yu had left those cole out of the charge & that I had neither been chargeable therewth nor had cause of demand upon yu these reasons well considered doe significe that answer not satisfactory and is no more in effect yet if A were to pay <sme> 20 £ or my ordr and I ordr B to receive it & thereupon A vouches my Ordr for paymt to B by wch means B wthout all doubt is accountable to me for the aforesd £20 and in answer to my demand for the same tells me that he is advised that he can’t safely pay the sd £20 to me now I perswade my selfe that yu will not conclude the answer to be a sufficient barr of payment to

	Yr assured <…d> & ser[van]t   Rob: : Lilburne

Our services to all <wth yu> as if named
date unclear, poss 11th

Leave a comment

We welcome further information or corrections on topics and incidents mentioned in individual letters. It might take a while before your comments are checked for adding to public view within the website. We cannot undertake further research in response to questions.

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *


General Discussion
Suggested correction or addition


  Return to search results or refine/create new search
The Dukesfield Smelters and Carriers Project aimed to celebrate and discover the heritage of the Dukesfield Arches & lead carriers' routes between Blaydon and the lead mines of Allendale and Weardale. A two year community project, it was led by the Friends of the North Pennines in partnership with Hexhamshire and Slaley Parish Councils and the active support of Allendale Estates. It was funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund and the generous support of other sponsors. Friends of the North Pennines: Charity No:1137467