Letter – Nicholas Walton, Hugh Boag to William Corbett – 9 Oct 1736

To William Corbett Esqr

      Ravensworth Castle  Octor 9th 1736

Sr         

      We acquainted you last Post that we would Send you this day an Abstract of all the biddings made to us Since Michs day, which is done herein Accordingly.

	By your last letter we perceive the Directors will confirme no agreement before Mr Boag be in London yett Notwithstanding that you have an Accot in the Abstract of Such Substantial bidders as the Directors may if they think proper Confirm & whenever they doe you will find a Convenience in having Such as we think their proper Tennts pointed out and in that Manner from the Rest as all others who are thought improper Tennts are blank’d thro the last Column in this Manner.

	We find a verry great difficulty in the manner of Treating with Tennts as they all Expect at the Close of each days bidding to know who is the best bidders and whither they may Expect to be Tennants or Not.  This we think but a Reasonable thing and therefore those that have offered for Lands or Collierys what we realy think it deserves we have disclosed the best bidders of that day in which they made their offer & those we Recomend to the Board for their Confirmation

	But herein there is a difficulty Arises which we No ways can Avoid, therefore we begg leave fairly to State it to the Directors with our Opinion’s thereon and then they will Judge of it and determine it in Such a manner as they think fitt.

	A Tennt offers for his farme a Certain Rent and Such a Rent as the Receivers think it deserves, they upon that declare the Tennant the best bidder as being in every respect quallyfyd to be the Hospitals Tennant.  The next day of bidding A nother person comes and offers for the Sd Farme an advance Rent.  Qry whether the person that made the first offer ought not to have the preference as the last bidder is Suposed to bidd out of prejidices, An instance whereof you find in the Abstract Sent herewith in Dr Lamberts farme Middle Dean Raw and Haydon Town farme, We begg leave to give our opinion that the first offerer being Substantiall Shou’d have the preference.

	Joseph Machilly who has offered for Graymare Colliery, a greater Rent than we think that Colliery deserves, is a Person reputed of but an Indifferent Character, & as it is so we have deferd declaring him the best bidder till his Character be enquired into, Wm Elliott is to find Security for Page Croft, which has also hindred us from declaring him Tennant, but all the rest we believe are good Tennants.  Mr Barras has offered the full value of Throckley & more than we thought she deserved, but we have yett a prospect of another offer next Thursday.

	You will observe that another £100 advance is offerd for Scremmerston Colliery, from a proposal we made to the Offerer to drive a drift or Levell from the Sea Banks to drain the Water off the Colliery, at the Hospitalls Expence, which may be £400, or £500, but in order to ascertain the Expence, we have sent a Judicious Man in Colliery Affairs to Scremmer. to make a Calculation of it & in case it be found practicable & to Cost no more than £500, the Hospitall will be repayd that Sum in Six years so the Interest & gain during a 21 years Lease abt £1500.

	Collonel Liddells offer for Peatstack hill being only a Fifth & as a fourth has been offerd for it, we have putt a Query thereon.

	As soon as Mr Boag can be ready to Sett out for London, he will, but as there is more busyness to be done here, than can be done by one Person it can not be till next week at soonest

	The 19 Inst the Court will be held at Newlands, the 20 at Hayden Bridge, the 21 & 22d at Wark & the 26 at Alston.  28 & 29 to Receive Rents & treat with Tennants at Keswick, so that the Recer who is left behind will be absent from Newcastle at Least 14 days.

	We are greatly in convenience by Mr Aynesleys trifling with us about the delivery of the Court Rolls & other papers in his hand & he has at last refused delivering any except two Sheets of paper with the Tennants names who have appeared at Haydon Bridge & Wark wch he has delivered to Mr Airey, we Shall therefore be obliged to make the best we can of such old Court Rolls as are amongst the old papers found at Dilston

	The Freeholders at Tarrettburn who claim a right to the Colliery & on whom Ejectments have been served, have imployed Mr Aynesley to to appear for them, so that we Shall have a Tryall about that Affair; it will therefore be verry proper to have a Coppy of the Grant from the Crown of the mannor of Wark & Tyndall to (the predecessors of the Derwentwater family) Theophelus Earl of Suffolk which you may have in Rolls Chappel.  There is as we are informed two of these Grants, the latest of which is supposed the best, tho it may be proper to have both.

	The advance upon the Lands etc in the Derwentwater Estate according to our computation is no more than £1066 1 11/2 & the reason for the difference between these Sums is owing to £100, which was wrong deducted in taking the profit of the Lead Mines from the whole.  In the first Letter we wrote about that advance, it was called £1166 1 11/2d to which the wrong deduction was added wch made it £1266 1 11/2d whereas that £100, which was wrong deducted in the first Letter, Shoud have been taken from the £1166 1 11/2d & then in the Postscript of the 2d Letter which was of the 18th Septemr last, the advance woud have appeared as it realy is £1066 1 11/2d as follows

Computed Value of the Derwentwater Estate  £8214.10.101/4

Rentall at Mayday 1736                      6328. 9. 83/4

   Total advance                           £1886. 1. 11/2



From which deduct the advance of Lead mines  820

   Advance of Land & Colliery              £1066. 1. 11/2



			We are Sr    Your most Obedt Servts

						Walton & Boag