Pakenham History : Joseph Alfred Hardcastle MP And Nether Hall

Part 8 - Nether Hall : The Sale

59
Lady Herschel to Henry and Maria Hardcastle
24 November 1872

Original
Mine own dear Children, What can I say or do to help you either to do, or to suffer this bitterest of all trials? The destruction of all confidence and reverence when most it seems due.(126)

Let me tell you what I have done. In order to lead up distinctly to the sad story in your letter of yesterday, I showed William many previous letters from Mr Hardcastle, at the time of your marriage; from Sir John Hardcastle to Henry at the time of his father's marriage; and a copy of one from myself to William in India, at the same time giving him a correct statement of facts within my own knowledge, so that he might not afterwards plead ignorance of events.(127) And, as you may imagine, he is distressed beyond utterance at the state of things now, and admits that Mr Hardcastle's account of affairs cannot be taken as truth. William wishes much now to look over all these papers again at his leisure, for I am sorry to see that his mind is still very easily fatigued and overburdened, just exactly as Julia's and Constance's were after their fearful fever.

(126) Clearly, there had been a monumental row at Nether Hall during the autumn stay at Nether Hall.
(127) Sir William James Herschel, Bart, second Baronet (1833-1917).

He does not yet mention the subject to anyone, until he has mastered it as far as these papers and your last letter (giving some strange new facts) can make him do; and then I am sure he would be willing to give all possible moral support to poor dear Henry. And it seems to me that he, as Maria's brother, is the right person to step in to the breach, when he is well enough. Meanwhile, it struck me that Henry might get some support from one who ‘being dead yet speaketh',(128) and so I have copied the letter written by dear Sir John to Henry at the time of his father's marriage, which letter, having been intended more for Mr Hardcastle than for Henry even then, was doubtless passed on to his possession, and Henry may now be glad to have a copy. I would have sent the original copy in dear Henry's own handwriting, but it should be kept with the others for William's perusal; and Henry may now keep this one and make what use he pleases of it. How much of it seems written especially for this very time.

We are so thankful for the better account of the dear wee baby. Nothing can be nicer and sweeter than our family gathering here and the children's voices are so welcome in the passages. William goes to St Leonards on Thursday and sleeps for one night at 41 Warrior Square. Kate Gilson's sketch of the division of labour in the proposed biography of Dr William was very satisfactory: the women to undertake the arranging and copying the letters, in dates etc; Lord Houghton to make the selection and write any original matter as connecting links; and Mr Todhunter of Cambridge (a very clever and able man) to undertake the scientific part.(129) I gave my hearty approbation to the idea of the women's work, being the quiet underground labour, and the men's being in the front rank with the responsibility etc. Kate seemed delighted at being thus fortified in what she saw was entirely her own view of the matter.

Adieu, my dear ones and believe me your ready to help and loving old mother, Mama.

If Sir J.H's letter was forcible then, how much more so now when you have six children.

(128) Sir John Herschel had died on 11 May 1871.
(129) Richard Monckton Milnes, first Lord Houghton (1809-1885); Isaac Todhunter (1820-1884).

***

60
Joseph Alfred Hardcastle to Thomas Usborne
Nether Hall, 26 November 1872

No. 1

Copy in Maria Hardcastle's handwriting.
My dear Thomas, I have received your two letters. First as to the personal matters between us. What I said as to the price paid me for the property sold to you and Henry was said under the irritation of being told first that it was doubtful whether I could sell Nether Hall; and, secondly, that if I did I should no longer be paid the £500 which I have hitherto received, on the strength of which I married, which I looked upon as secured to me as far as it could legally be secured; and Henry's liability in honour to pay what I had never for a moment believed he could question.

I regret that I said what I did and, if it had not been for these circumstances, I feel now that I should not have mentioned the subject. But I did not refer to the 1868 bargains. I was and still am perfectly satisfied with them. What I referred to was the price at which I was made to sell those pieces of property which you afterwards bought of me, and especially the part of the house which belonged to me and the grounds on which it stood.

I then thought, and still think, that the purchasers had much the best of that bargain and that £600 was not half the value of that piece of property. I also resented John Corsbie's opinion on the subject being quoted and acted upon, as I fancy he knew nothing whatever about it. I have since resented Henry's asking me what I had spent upon the plot, when there was some talk of his selling it to you, that question never having been, so far as I know, raised by him when I was the seller. Now as to the wine and my debts to you in Greene's matter, I shall be very much obliged to you etc.

No. 2

Copy in Maria Hardcastle's handwriting
Nether Hall, 26 November 1872
My dear Thomas, I thank you for your letter from Chesham Street and for the very kind and affectionate interest you have before taken, and now take, in our affairs. I am very glad that you have persuaded Henry that it is best to sell. I was willing to do all I could to help him to retain Nether Hall, but I felt that it would be a very heavy burden upon him and that it was much more prudent in him to make no such attempt.

I hope there is no danger whatever of the £10,000 not being paid in full by the sale. If there is a deficiency, there is no doubt that I ought to pay interest on the deficiency out of the £500 which Henry proposes by your letter to pay me. If there be no deficiency, I think it would be right also to repay the capital of the deficit, year by year, by instalments out of that £500. But it would be very hard upon me to lose the whole £500 and, according to the terms of your letter, I might do so without even a penny of that £500 being applied by Henry (the retaining party) to the making up of the deficiency. So I read your letter, though I do not suppose that was its intention.

What I wish is simply to be paid the £500 in any case, subject of course to the terms of the agreement as to the brewery profits. If the £10,000 has been cleared off by a sale, to retain the whole of the £500 for my own purposes. If the £10,000 has not been entirely cleared off, to pay to Henry's trustees interest on the deficiency out of the £500 paid by him year by year to me; and also to devote a further part of the £500 a year to a yearly reduction of the deficit till it is all paid off. I simply mention this for the reasons stated above and now let me again thank you.

***

61
Sir William Herschel to Maria Hardcastle
Collingwood, 27 November 1872

Original
Dearest Maria, Thank you very much for letting me see your letters to mother. I am so sorry for all the trouble you have had to encounter during the last few days, and cannot wonder that you find silence impossible when your husband was in such distress. I can so well sympathize in his desire to see an end to the uncertainties that have clung so long around your path and his; and I hope that the result may prove, in spite of present conflict, to be a better ground, so far as such matters are a ground, for your relations with J.A. and Mrs Hardcastle.

That your little boy was spared to you after all will always be a happy memory of these broken days, and I trust that it will be one that will grow stronger and brighter as the pain of the present dies away. Please give Henry my love. Poor Carry is better I hear this morning, but not clear out of her feverishness by any means. We go to Hastings tomorrow for a day and night to see the old folks there.
Love from your affectionate brother, W.F. Herschel.

***

62
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
27 November 1872

Original
My dear Henry, Return me the two enclosures in reply to the second. I have written that, under any circumstances that may arise, I admit your father's claim against you for £500 a year, provided that he admits your claim against him for £10,000 cash on sale of Nether Hall. I added I had no fear but that sufficient money would be realized; but, in case of a small deficit, I would consider his proposal fair. But should the deficit be large, the matter would be serious to all parties and would require further consideration.

I hope that you and Maria are happy. I am sure you ought to be. I congratulate you both on the expunging of the cause of most of your disputes with your estimable parent.
Your affectionate brother, Thomas Usborne.

***

63
Henry Hardcastle to Joseph Alfred Hardcastle
5 Paper Buildings, Temple EC, 28 November 1872

Original. Copy also exists separately
My dear Father, Thomas has sent me your letters to him and I hope now that everything may be considered settled between us. If there is any further matter to discuss, Thomas has kindly consented to act for me and settle it.

Before leaving the subject altogether, I should like to say one word in my own vindication with regard to the conversation we had last week. I think it was rather unfair to me that you should have put point blank before me in the way you did a matter which you had, I understand, been considering for weeks, if not for months, previously; on which you had gone most carefully and fully with your lawyer into the question of your and my relative legal positions; and in which you had fully made up your mind before you ever breathed a word to me on the subject.

To the question you put to me, 'What shall you do supposing I sell Nether Hall, which I have made up my mind to do?', you knew that it did not matter in the slightest degree what answer I gave, as you had got me tight by an agreement from which I could not get out. Nevertheless, you went through the farce of asking me the question; and then you were angry when, on the spur of the moment, without giving me a moment for reflection or for consulting anybody, you got an answer which you did not expect. You must remember that you ran me into a similar corner when you came to inform me that you had already made a proposal of marriage (not that you were about to make one) and wished to know under the circumstances what I intended to do.

Whatever may have been your views about it, I always considered, and I still consider, that the agreement which I then entered into was made on the supposition that you would never sell Nether Hall and that I should always have a right to go there as before. Consequently, it appeared to me that, if you sold Nether Hall and I was deprived of that right, it was only natural and just that the agreement should be treated as waste paper and that we should reconsider our relative positions de novo.

If, in the letter you wrote to me at Chelmsford, you had stated the question which you proposed putting to me, and the proposal which under the circumstances you had to make, and had given me an opportunity of talking the matter over with Thomas Woodhouse and Blood before seeing you, you would have spared both yourself and me a great deal of pain.

I am glad to see from your letter to Thomas that I appear to have misunderstood what you said as to the price paid to you when you left the business. I certainly understood you to say that you considered that the £500 a year I agreed to pay you was the least sum you were entitled to receive in consequence of the sacrifices which you made when you left the business, and that it was not in any sense a present from me to you.

Now considering that you went out of the business in December 1868 (after Winnie's matter was settled) absolutely unconditionally, and with only a general kind of understanding that I would ‘find you an income' (I think that was the expression that was used at the time); considering also that it was perfectly optional with me to make that agreement on the strength of which you say you married (although you had made your proposal without consulting a soul), I don't very well see how you can in fairness to me go on asserting that the £500 a year is a matter of right and not a present from me to you.

As to what you say about the inadequate price paid to you for your public houses and the part of the house at Writtle which belonged to you, this can't in any way affect the question of this £500 a year, as they were not sold by you until some time after you married. I had nothing to do with making these bargains and I don't know what was to have prevented you, if you were dissatisfied with the price, from putting them up to auction.

I am sorry you should have 'resented' (rather a strong word I think) what you had spent upon the plot. I remember asking you the question and that you gave me a very curt answer; but I had no idea on what grounds you resented the question or that you could have any ill feeling towards me on the matter.

You may perhaps consider this an unnecessarily long letter, but I am desirous that you should clearly know my views and that, if possible, I may persuade you that I have not (intentionally at any rate) acted either dishonestly or unfairly to you. I shall for the future do my best to continue to keep the Fifth Commandment. And, if I fail and whenever I fail, I hope that, instead of storing up your resentment and letting me know of it through third persons, you will tell me of my faults 'to my head' and give me an opportunity for explanation or apology.
Your affectionate son, Henry Hardcastle.

***

64
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
30 November 1872

Original
My dear Henry, You have most foolishly written a badly expressed letter to your father, where with you cease to look upon him as a just man and affectionate parent. The letter was stopped by Mrs Hardcastle and sent to me to throw upon me the responsibility of stopping it or presenting it. I did neither, as, had I said forward it, I could have been accused of creating mischief; and, had I stopped it, she might have said your letter was so awful that even I would not let it go on.

I am sure, however, she means well and is an honourable woman. I do not send you her letter, as I think it true we should stop this passing of letters and commenting upon each others' to third parties; and, for the same reason, do you burn this as soon as you and Maria have read it.

If you want to live at peace with your father, do nothing, write nothing, and some day he will come to you with the accustomed tear, when you can make friends. Even if you get an angry reply to your letter, which Mrs Hardcastle may hand him, take no notice of it. Probably you will get no reply. Possibly Mrs Hardcastle will send your letter back with one from herself.
Love to Maria, your affectionate brother, Thomas Usborne.

***

65
Mary Hardcastle to Henry Hardcastle
Nether Hall, Bury St Edmunds, 1 December 1872

Original
My Dear Henry, I dare say it is not much more wise to interpose between father and son than it is to interpose between man and wife; and yet, as it seems accidentally in my power to prevent you from giving and your father from receiving very great pain, I feel it my duty to make an effort.

It happens that on Friday there was some delay in the delivery of our letters, so that your letter of Thursday 28 November was only given to your father as he was preparing to start for Ampton. He opened it, looked at the last sentence and then, being in a great hurry, handed it to me, begging me to see whether it would keep till his return, while he read his other letters and got ready. I told him that no immediate answer was necessary; and that is all he knows of its contents.

Meanwhile I was so shocked and distressed at the letter, feeling the pain and humiliation it would be to your father to receive it from you, that I began to think how I could avert this fresh mischief. And, seeing that Thomas was authorised by you to act for you to settle everything for you, I thought the best thing was to consult him, putting it to him that this letter was meant either gratuitously to inflict pain on your father or was a further effort to get free from the engagement 'to find him an income'.

Thomas writes back that neither of these is the right view, only that you have a way of conveying a contrary impression to what you intend; and that I must burn the letter, send it back to you, or hand it now to your father, according to what I think will be best for the peace of the family.

I accordingly send it back to you, that you may do what you wish about it. If you still think it is such a letter as you ought to send to your father, he will receive it on Tuesday here and the delay will not have made much difference. If, on reading it again, you think what you call a vindication of yourself, the which is really merely a long accusation of him, neither necessary nor becoming, and you decide to spare him the pain of reading it, I shall be truly glad.
Yours affectionately, Mary S. Hardcastle.

Note by Henry Hardcastle on back of the letter above (copy of letter sent)

Copy
My dear Mary, Nothing was further from my intention than to give my father gratuitous pain by what I wrote; and, as you think it would have had that effect, I am much obliged to you for preventing him from seeing it. I wrote (as I said) merely for the purpose of vindicating myself from the charge he had made against me; but, if you are satisfied that the vindication is unnecessary, I have nothing further to add.

***

66
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 1 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I have been rather desirous of seeing you, as I wished to explain my part in late transactions with regard to Nether Hall. You may remember that some time ago I told you that Hunter Rodwell had applied to me about it and I asked you how you felt with regard to a sale. Your answer determined me to say nothing to your father about it.

Some few weeks ago I had an interview with your father and found he was determined to sell. In fact, he wished me to make an offer of it. I urged that he should first communicate with you and he at once agreed to it. You saw him, I saw Usborne and you know the rest.

Your father has offered the estate, much to my annoyance, to Greene at £42,000 (forty-two thousand).(130) He, Greene, offers £40,000. I certainly should not have asked less than £45,000, but that is of no use now. The advantage you will gain is that your trustees will have £10,000 (as you are aware I took a mortgage to cover that sum, and this of course must be paid out of the purchase money). I do not think (taking the whole affair into consideration) that your interest has been neglected and I hope you agree with me. Believe me yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.
H. Hardcastle Esq., 4 Chesham Street SW.

(130) Edward Greene (1815-1891), brewer and politician.

***

67
Mary Hardcastle to Henry Hardcastle
Nether Hall, Bury St Edmunds, 3 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry, I am very much gratified by your note received this morning and I am sure you will not have any cause to regret your act of forbearance. Yours affectionately, Mary S. Hardcastle.

***

68
Joseph Alfred Hardcastle to Henry Hardcastle
Nether Hall, 9 December 1872

Original
My dear Boy, I have this day concluded the bargain with Greene for £41,000. Thomas would have told you that it was in progress, but I did not wish to say anything about it till it was complete. I believe that it is a good bargain; and Hunter Rodwell, who conducted the last stage of it, thinks so too. Mr Blood thought I ought to have asked more, £45,000 instead of £42,000, but under the circumstances I think I am right.

I do not feel able to say much about it except that, now it is done, I am more than convinced it was the only thing to do. If you had attempted to take it upon yourself, it would have been a burthen for life; and, much as I should have liked you to carry out your plan, I felt it was impracticable. But I am not the less sorry on your account, however much satisfied I may be on my own. The pain of parting with Nether Hall is more than made up for in my mind by the sense of relief; but still I grieve very much that you should not have been my successor. I fancy the purchaser will take most of the furniture, at least such as we do not want.

Jack and I had two very pleasant days in Norfolk. We found nine woodcock, eight killed, one lost, and got seven. One we ate, two he took, two he gave me, and a brace of hen pheasants I have sent you today. I thought I should not be wrong in doing so. Yours affectionately, JAH.

***

69
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 12 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, Is Mr Powell aware that, under the agreement between you and your father, you indemnify him from any claims by the trustees on account of the £500 interest on the £10,000? Therefore if your father were to die owing an arrear of interest, his representatives would say your estate should pay it. Under your arrangement with your father, it is impossible there can be an arrear of interest during his life; and at his death the interest question ceases by payment of the £10,000. I do not suppose that your father would at all events willingly consent to the trustees holding the surplus of the Nether Hall sale; and, under the ample powers for investment under your settlement, the 5 per cent could easily be made and no question arise. I will observe that, when the £10,000 is received, it is to be invested by the trustees with the consent of you and your wife in one or other of the ways mentioned in your settlement, so that I confess I do not see what risk the trustees can run.
I am yours truly, J. Howell Blood.

***

70
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
Temple, 12 December 1872

Copy answer, 12 December 1872, on back of previous.
Mr Powell is, I believe, writing to you himself as to his views about the second mortgage. He is aware, in a general kind of a way, that there is an agreement between me and my father (though I never actually shewed it to him), but I don't see that that affects the matter one way or the other, because, even supposing the agreement to be legally binding and enforceable by action (which Mr Haldane says it is not), it ceases with my life; and it also ceases should I dissolve partnership with the Writtle Brewery. So I don't see that it is any security at all to my trustees. Of course this question that Mr Powell has raised is not a matter that I have any control over. Therefore I must leave you and Mr Powell to fight it out between you. I believe him to be extremely anxious not to do anything that would be disagreeable to my father, but I think he fancies he has no option.

***

71
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 14 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I hate Chancery and much regret that Mr Powell should think it necessary. I must, however, take an opinion. It is a great pity, as all might be settled in an amicable manner, with perfect safety to the trustees. But if you and they are not willing that it should be settled, I cannot help it. I am, yours truly, J. Howell Blood.
H. Hardcastle, 5 Paper Buildings, Temple

***

72
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 15 December 1872

Original postcard
The difficulties you raise in your letter are all bosh and no such course as you propose is feasible. I see Blood this afternoon and will write you in the evening. A good run again yesterday.
Postcard, To Henry Hardcastle Esq., 4 Chesham Street, London SW. Postmark, Chelmsford, 15 December 1872.

***

73
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 15 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry, I have found Mr Blood really indignant with you in consequence of this last difficulty that you and Powell have hatched between you. I have, however, convinced him that you mean well.

You had better come down here tomorrow, Monday afternoon, by express and I will explain to you the course to be pursued. There is no time to waste, as the agreement with Greene ought to be made binding at once. I have seen a letter from him in which he grumbles at the price; the next step may be objecting to it. I have made myself responsible morally both to your father and Mr Blood for you in this matter, and must therefore insist on everything that is right being done and done promptly.

I need not now repeat that I care far more for your interests than I do for your father's. I have I hope convinced you of that before now, but I think I am justified in insisting upon your acting straightforwardly in a matter in which I have taken such interest. I do not wish to impute to you the intention of doing otherwise because I know you; but, to anyone who did not, the last point raised would have a - to you - very damaging appearance.

I have no objection to you showing this to Maurice Powell; and, if he thinks the matter of sufficient importance, he can come down with you and I will gladly discuss the point with him and put him up for the night.

I wonder that Maria has allowed you to make such a mistake,
Your affectionate brother, Thomas Usborne.

***

74
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Writtle, 15 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry, I am sorry that I did not see you. You would have done better if you had come down tomorrow, as you could not remain tonight. I enclose the letter Blood wrote me on Sunday – not expecting me to call on him.

Mr Powell has no right to make such objections so long as he runs no risk. If you give him a receipt for all interest due up to this date, and arrange to give him a receipt for it each year when he pays you, the dividends (which will amount to nearly £500) on the £10,000 invested, he can run no risk. You can, however, deposit with him your policy of insurance for £5000, in case you should die before your father. He will then be perfectly secure. Should he object to this course, you must ask him to retire from the trust, and both you and I will guarantee him from all liability in connection with it. There is no need for taking any opinion on the matter. Both Blood and myself object to such a course. It would only be a useless expense.

There is no risk in the matter. The very idea of a man objecting to take cash for a post-obit bond proves him an idiot. Yours affectionately, Thomas Usborne.

***

75
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
Undated

Copy
My dear Mr Blood, Thomas Usborne explained to me this day fortnight that it would be absurd for me to attempt to prevent Nether Hall from being sold. I quite understood from him what had been in the late transactions with regard to Nether Hall; and I gathered that it could be waste of time for me to trouble you with an interview on the subject. I have nothing at all to complain of as to my interests having been neglected. In fact (as I think I have said to you before more than once), I consider myself under great obligations to you for all you did five years ago to prevent me from being absolutely ruined.

I spoke to Mr Powell, the trustee of my marriage settlement, and told him that shortly he would be called upon to exchange the mortgage for cash. He suggests that, if the money is going to be invested in Stock Exchange securities, there should be a third trustee, to which I suppose there is no objection. One of my wife's cousins would I dare say undertake the office.

***

76
J. Howell Blood to Thomas Usborne
Witham 15 December 1872

Original
My dear Usborne, I do not know but that my letter may be rather a long one. Never mind. Read it at your leisure. I am writing to you as I consider you strong minded, sensible and, above all, highly honourable in your views. I don't want to flatter you, but if I did not think you what I say, I should not trouble you with this. I know, moreover, that you take a warm interest in Henry Hardcastle's affairs.

My experience in life shows me that people do not always take the best and most straightforward view of matters in which they are interested. They view things from their own judgement of what ought to be the line of conduct of other people. As we all know, if you view an object from one point of the horizon it may assume a different appearance to that which it possesses in reality. There's a flourish.

I am now going into simple facts as to which I ask your consideration. Do not mind my recapitulating things you know all about. I want you to have the whole object before you. On the 11 October 1865, Mr Hardcastle entered into a post-obit bond with Henry Hardcastle's trustees for £10,000, to be paid within six months of his death and interest in the meantime at 5 per cent. At that time we all, or in all events I, had every reason to believe that it was safe that Mr Hardcastle would easily pay the £500 a year or that the £10,000 would be forthcoming. I need not go into subsequent transactions, such as the purchase of Nether Hall, the retirement of Mr Hardcastle from the brewery etc, beyond such part of them as is necessary to explain my report.

After much consideration, correspondence and many interviews, an agreement dated 27 April 1869 was entered into, between Henry and his father, by which Henry covenanted, out of the profits of the business, to pay himself 10 per cent on the capital he had embarked, and then to pay to the trustees of his settlement £500, being the interest under the bond. These stipulations were to be adhered to so long as Henry remained in the business; but, if he died or retired, he agreed to allow his father the interest on £5000 for which his life is insured.

I did not at this time take the same view of Mr Hardcastle's affairs as I had previously done and I own I thought the £10,000 in jeopardy. I therefore proposed, and a clause was in the agreement, that Mr Hardcastle should give to Henry's trustees a second mortgage on Nether Hall for £10,000 in lieu of, but not in addition to, the bond; but, as interest should be taken or claimed under the mortgage till the death of Mr Hardcastle, in January 1870 a mortgage was accordingly executed.

Mr Hardcastle has agreed to sell Nether Hall at £41,000. It stands about clear: mortgage £24,600 but, having a fund security, he has to replace certain money in consols. It may be put thus:

Mortgage, say	£26,600
Henry Hardcastle's trustees	£10,000
	£36,600
Surplus	£4400
	£41,000

Now Henry's trustee, Mr Powell, raises a point, as they call it (I don't want to trouble you with it all), but it is this. Should there be any arrear of interest due at Mr Hardcastle's death, he as the trustee may be liable for it and therefore claims to hold the whole of the purchase money, and not only to hold it but to hold it under the direction of the court of Chancery, which means paying it into the Accountant General's hand's and receiving the fund's dividends.

Looking at the thing, in any point of view, can anything be more miserable? No question can arise if Henry outlives his father and abides by his agreement; and, if he dies in the lifetime of his father, I can at once shew the trustees how they may be protected by a larger sum than the surplus money from this supposed idea of interest.

But now comes the question to which all this rigmarole is introductory. Does Henry mean to adhere to the agreement and to do all in his power to carry it out in its integrity? I tell you candidly, I have on several occasions been sorry to hear Henry make observations as to that document, implying that it was useless – and that he was not bound by it and he should take no notice of it. But now the affair takes a more serious aspect. I quote a passage in a letter just received, 'even supposing the agreement to be legally binding and enforceable by action (which Mr Haldane says it is not), it ceases with my life etc'. The agreement is binding or it is not. If it is binding in one part, it is binding in all. If it is invalid, it is invalid altogether; and I confess it seems to me rather short-sighted in Henry to hint at a question, because, if the agreement is good for nothing, what becomes of the clause covenanting to execute a mortgage? And if, as Mr Powell says, we are to go to Chancery, the agreement being expired, what becomes of the mortgage etc, which I take it to refer to the £10,000 assured, not on the personal covenant?

The proposal I have lately made is, as I am sure you must see, by far the most advantageous for Henry; but, without his assistance so far as the trustees are concerned, I fancy we may have some difficulty with them. I do not quite like speaking to Henry directly upon the subject and I have not said one word to his father. What view he would take of all the money going into the Accountant General's hands (a most unnecessary proceeding), I cannot imagine. It may be, as he takes no benefit in the sale, he will throw it up altogether. If so, it is fairly clear the estate will go to ruin – and Mr Greene has written to me as he finds he has given a great deal too much for it and cannot make his figures come up to the price. Can you see Henry at once or can we meet on what I am wonderfully vexed, and I do not want to see Henry lose money or anything else.

I am preparing the papers for council, as Mr Maurice Powell is so very prompt. You can of course use this letter in any way. Yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

***

77
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 17 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I did not think you had raised a question as to your marriage settlement, I only feared you were raising one as to your agreement with father. I have written to Mr Powell and also to Usborne proposing a meeting. I shall be in town on Monday. Will it do?
Yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

***

78
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
16 December 1872

Copy or draft
My dear Mr Blood, Mr Maurice Powell, my trustee, has raised the following point about my second mortgage on Nether Hall. By the mortgage deed there is a power of sale in default of payment of the £10,000 at his death,(131) and in the event of such sale the trustees are to retain and satisfy the said sum of £10,000 together with all arrears (if any) of the said annual sum of £500 and the surplus (if any) of the money so to arise as aforesaid shall be paid to the heirs etc of JAH.

Now Mr Powell says that, as the second mortgage is a security not only for the £10,000 but also for the £500 a year, he will on the sale of Nether Hall be bound to retain the whole of the surplus of the proceeds on and above the first mortgage, because, until my father does actually die, it is impossible to know what 'arrears if any' of the £500 annuity there will be at his death.

On looking at the notice you sent of the first mortgage, he finds that you did not mention that the second mortgage was to secure the annuity as well as the £10,000. Therefore he and I went to see Daniells today and at his (Daniells') request Mr Powell has sent him today a fresh notice mentioning the additional fact.

You will observe that the mortgage deed charges the £500 annuity as well as the £10,000 on the Nether Hall estate.

(131) Crossed out section. By the mortgage deed, 'if my father pays the annual sum of £500 … and also … if his heirs … within six months after his death … pay … £10,000, the interest thereon is to be computed from his death, these presents should be void, provided always then' there is a power of sale. Etc.

***

79
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
18 December 1872

Copy or draft
My dear Mr Blood, Next Monday will suit me very well at whatever hour you like to name. Mr Powell would prefer to see you alone (that is to say he does not appear to wish to see Thomas). I think it would be well to let my father know about this question. I believe he came up to town yesterday, but I shall not say anything to him, if I meet him, unless you approve. If you would write him a line and suggest to him to see me, I could explain to him what the point is.

I should like to say a word about the agreement in order to prevent you from thinking that I wished to do anything dishonourable in the matter. I most unhesitatingly say that I signed that agreement with the belief that the right which I conceived that I had, of using Nether Hall as a residence when I liked, was distinctly recognised; but that nothing was inserted in the agreement about it because it was the kind of right which would not legally be conveyed except by a deed; and also which could never be enforced while there was a natural good feeling between the parties. (I also signed it under the belief that the one important thing was to make such an arrangement as would prevent Nether Hall from being sold.)

Consequently, when in March 1870 my father disputed my right to go to Nether Hall, I consulted Mr Haldane and he told me that he was of opinion that, although I might not be able to enforce my right to go to Nether Hall, I might drive my father to admit the right by filing a bill to set aside the agreement. I never for one moment desired to dispute the fact that it was understood when my father retired from business that I was, if I went into it, 'to find him an income'. (I think this was the expression used). But he left the business unconditionally; the exact amount I was to allow him not being settled until afterwards. Therefore, if the particular agreement was put aside tomorrow by the court, I shall not consider myself thereby freed from the promise I gave him five years ago 'to find him an income' if I could. 

Of course now I consider the thing finally settled by the letter Thomas wrote to father the other day pledging me individually (of course he could not pledge my trustees) to accept £10,000 down in full discharge of my mortgage right and to go on paying him £500 a year out of the profit of the business for his life; but I have just given you this explanation of my views in my own vindication and I hope you will consider it satisfactory.

***

80
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham 20 December 1872

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I hope to be at Mr Powell's at the time named, 11.30 on Monday. I will stop Usborne. I think I would not say anything to your father till after I have seen Mr Powell. If we have to go to Chancery about the matter, which even now I can hardly conceive to be probable, of course he must see us all about it; but, if Mr Powell concedes, there need be nothing said, or at the worst only to be mentioned as a past trouble. I never for a moment thought you meant in any way to act dishonourably. I think you incapable of doing so. I knew your motive was as to what you considered your rights in Nether Hall. I recollect a long time ago writing you a long letter as to rights, but it is not worth while turning to it now. I some time since sent at her request Mrs Hardcastle a copy of the letter and I fancy she and your wife had some conversation about it.

The impression I had of your claims induced your father to resolve by all means to see you before speaking to anybody else as to Nether Hall. I hope to see you on Sunday.
Yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood
H. Hardcastle, 5 Paper Buildings 

***

81
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
17 December 1872

Copy
My dear Mr Blood, I have had a long talk with Mr Powell this morning and explained to him Usborne's proposition that my £5000 life insurance should be deposited with him as additional security to my trustees. I hope he will ultimately accede to this arrangement, though he still clings to his favourite idea of applying to the court for direction. He would like to see you when you are next in town; and, if you will send him a line, to 50 Palace Gardens Terrace W, he will meet you at his chambers whenever it is convenient to you. I shall be here and could go with you to see him if you liked, but I think you would be more likely to talk him over if you saw him alone, at any rate at first.

***

82
Henry Hardcastle, note undated

Draft
I am glad to hear the Nether Hall question is settled. As to the price, Blood writes today, 'much to my annoyance your father has offered the estate at £42,000. I should certainly not have asked less than £45,000, but that is no use now. I understand that Greene has been talking about buying it for the last three years, and therefore might have further squeezed'.

At any rate you might have done a great worse; and the money in the mortgage will I suppose enable you to get quite clear of debt.

It will be convenient for you if Greene takes over the furniture. I suppose you will take the books and pictures to London.

I should be glad if you would send up to me here what wine there is of mine, i.e. the marsala, as soon as you like; for I am rather short (less what is yours), two lots of claret and a little lot of John Corsbie's port, also a little spirits. I think that is all, but I think Nunn knows.

***

83
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
5 Paper Buildings, Temple, 10 January 1873

Draft of letter was not sent
My dear Mr Blood, Would you kindly let me see the case you laid before Mr Vaughan Johnson. Mr Powell has shewn me Mr Johnson's opinion. I don't understand how he can say that 'there will no longer be any pretext for his relieving Mr Henry Hardcastle as proposed in the pre-going case'; and also 'There is obviously no consideration for Mr Joseph Alfred Hardcastle foregoing any of his right under the agreement'. There seems to me to be every possible pretext, considering that I made that agreement on the understanding that the important family consideration was that Nether Hall should not be sold, and also on the understanding that I was to be at liberty to go there whenever I liked. This arrangement has, as you know, been acted upon up to this last autumn, and the benefit of the arrangement I shall for the future lose by the sale of Nether Hall. I don't know whether the facts have been explained or even mentioned to Mr Johnson. If not, I think in justice to me they ought to be.

Mr Johnson also says that 'upon the faith of the agreement of 27/29 April he contracted his second marriage'. I don't know whether Mr Johnson knows that my father, after having retired from the Writtle business quite unconditionally (except with a general sort of understanding that I should find him an income, if the business enabled me to do so), made his proposal for his second marriage without consulting me in any way; and then put me in the very unpleasant position of having to decide after he had made his proposal what I would do for him.

If you had laid this matter before a stranger like Montague Cookson or Chitty, as I proposed, of course I should not have so much cared about going into the questions, which are more matters of feeling than of strict law; but, considering Mr Johnson's connection with the family, I do feel that I have a right to have my side of the case fully stated, if this has not already been done.

***

84
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Writtle, 19 January 1873

Original
My dear Henry, I am back from Witham, and Blood and I have agreed that the proposed arrangement by Greene, owing you £10,000 as a second mortgage on the estate, is a most unsatisfactory one. There are two facts which are beyond dispute: (1) that Greene is not the rich man I certainly took him for; (2) that the estate is not worth sufficient to cover the second mortgage.

I adhere more firmly than ever to my original estimate of the value of the property, viz not £30,000; and in order to pay you on your father's death it must sell for £36,500, supposing Greene to be capable to pay the £10,000. Most certainly no one would advance him the money on the estate as a second mortgage.

I would be glad to see you and Maria from Friday evening next to Monday. I could give you a mount on Saturday and Sunday and discuss the matter; but, somehow or another, Mr Powell must be got out of your settlement.

The first point, however, is to bind Greene to his bargain and nothing must be done to give him a chance of retiring from the purchase.

Love to Maria, who will I hope visit us on Friday. Your affectionate brother, Thomas Usborne.

***

85
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Writtle, 20 January 1873

Original
My dear Henry, I will consult Blood tomorrow as to the desirability of going to the court, your father not being willing. His plan would be not to object to your doing what you liked, but he would decline to assist you. I never was in favour of going to the court, as you know. The proper course, and the one that would have been taken under similar circumstances in my family, would have been for Mr Powell and your father to have taken the small risk and your indemnity from same, when I offered to add my indemnity to yours. I thought that no one could or ought to have asked more, and ought to have acted at once in any way you desired. I will, however, again discuss the matter with Blood.

As to the question of yourself, my remark that you were not sufficiently alive to your own interest applied to your conduct generally and particularly at our meeting at Witham on Sunday. I had then, as on former occasions, to fight your battle for you against Blood and yourself (not that I think for one moment that Blood is inimical to you; quite the contrary), the result being no doubt an impression on Blood's mind that you would be satisfied with the mortgage; and consequently he probably did not fight the point so keenly with your father as he might have done, had he thought that you would not be satisfied.

My remark, however, applied more generally than particularly and no doubt you might justly reply to me that I am generally and particularly too much alive to my own interests.

As to house and garden, there will be nothing much for Blood to decide tomorrow. He has not got to fix a price. I have done that and think it quite adequate; and have no doubt but that you and he will think so too. Practically, I offer you £1000 to be able to legally call my own what is practically so without the payment. If no dispute ever arises between us or our representatives, you are clearly £50 a year for ever richer. Should any dispute hereafter arise, you will have received on the day of that dispute not £1000 but £1000 and compound interest on the same from 1 October prior to the date of dispute.

The dispute also would have to be of a very peculiar nature to enable you to worst me, I having half legal interest and certain reasonable interest, in consequence of heavy amounts laid out over the place; and, what is more than all the above, possession.

If I were really wise, I would not wish to buy the property at all, as I can have all the enjoyment of it, except absolute legal possession without; but I think it pleasanter for myself and better for you that I should do so. However, on the first point I will write you again.

Love to Maria. Your affectionate brother Thomas Usborne.

***

86
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Writtle, 28 January 1873

Original
My dear Henry, I saw your father with difficulty yesterday and spent an hour at midnight with Blood at the Green Lyon. I agree with Blood, who said that he did not find your father amiable. He objected (to me) to going to the court and he objected quite as strongly as Mr Powell can have done to the money being paid, on the principle that it would be no benefit to him, and that he did not see why he should run any risk in the matter for your sake. He appears to me to be annoyed that you should be so well secured as you are, and would no doubt have far preferred Blood not having secured the mortgage for you, in which case he would have had the £10,000 to spend. For, although I do not think the security good, still I believe you will be paid, and more particularly should Blood succeed in making the first mortgage a cash one for £24,600.

I can do no more for you in this matter. You are unfortunate in your father and Mr Powell in money matters, and you also seem to me not sufficiently alive to your own interest.
Love to Maria, your affectionate brother T. Usborne.

***

87
Henry Hardcastle to Thomas Usborne
29 January 1873

Copy
My dear Thomas, I still think that my father ought to be compelled to assent to an application to the court; and, if he continues to object to indemnifying Greene against the arrears of the annuity, the result of which would I suppose be that Greene would require that the balance (or part of the balance) of the purchase money should be deposited to secure him against liability at my father's death. I don't of course wish to endanger the completion of the purchase by Greene, but I don't think there is any fear of that.

I am rather puzzled, and so is Maria, at your observation that I am not 'sufficiently alive to my own interest'. Do you mean by that I had better take the line of being as agreeable as possible to my father on the chance of anything he may be able to do for me? Or do you mean that I am not disagreeable enough to him?

Please let me hear what Blood and you settle on Friday about the house and garden. Whatever Blood and you think right, I shall be perfectly satisfied with. I suppose you wish to have a deed of conveyance. In the meantime, I should think it would be as well to reduce into writing the terms of the purchase.

***

88
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 2 February 1873

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I did not understand your father's objection to going into court to be exactly as you put it, and in fact I do not see how such a question as his liability, in case the investment of the £10,000 was a loss, would affect him or his estate, provided the court gave the trustees power to invest during his life; any more than if the £10,000 was lost after his death. As the court would probably direct that the trusts came into operation at once (under your settlement), Mr Vaughan Johnson did not advise going into court and I rather think that the real ground is that the court might order the whole or a great part of the purchase money to be paid in to the Accountant General's hands. I am rather of opinion in consequence of a conversation I had with Mr Greene yesterday that it will be necessary to go to the court and I should like to meet you and your father at Mr Vaughan Johnson's in consultation. What say you to Wednesday next? I have written to your father and, as you and he are on the spot, you can see if it will suit him – and my agents can let you know about Mr Vaughan Johnson. We should thus be altogether and could come to an understanding. What say you to this?
Yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood

***

89
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 2 February 1873

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, As you imagine, I went to Writtle on Friday and had a look over the premises with a view to see what equitable arrangement could be made so as to enable Thomas Usborne to have the certainty of what I may term the ornamental part of the Writtle property, as distinguished from the brewery, maltings etc, etc, or really the business part. I need not say that it is a difficult task to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion in my own mind, as there are so many complications in it. I confess my figures are more guesswork than founded on trustworthy calculation, except as I give them below. In my early knowledge of the place, that which is now a most elaborate house consisted of two small houses, and very fair ones, in one of which your grandfather lived and in the other his clerk, Phillips.(132)

(132) Not Henry Hardcastle's grandfather, Henry William Lambirth (1791-1824), but his great grandfather, Henry Lambirth (1765-1834). William Henry Phillips (1765-1846) was Henry Lambirth senior's brother-in-law, the great uncle of Frances Lambirth, and the great great uncle of Henry Hardcastle.

Now I think, taking the property as a business, it was as valuable, or at all events would have sold for as much now, with those two houses as it would now with the mansion. I looked very particularly at the property with a view in the first instance to see if the sale of the house, land and garden would injure the rest of the property, and I came to the conclusion that it would not do so. But this is mere conjecture, founded on an idea that you cannot make a calculation on the house and grounds. The house and grounds suit the ideas of Thomas Usborne. He likes the luxury of them and he likes them as close to his business. Tho' they suit him and his wife, it is very questionable if they would suit many other people and their wives. On the whole, I cannot see that the remaining property is injured by the sale of the particular part I have referred to, more especially when I find that such part would be sold to one who had a moiety of the remaining property.

Well, assuming that you do sell, the very different question of the sum to be paid to you arises and here there are complications. In the first place I must divide the property (like a sermon) into parts:

1. There is the part of Lambirth property which you inherited.
2. There is the part you and Usborne purchased of your two sisters.
3. There is what Mrs Usborne inherited.
4. The interest you and Usborne are to purchase of Emily.

For all of these no specific sum has been paid, nor so far as I know any separate valuation made, so that we must guess at what it might have been.

Emily

There comes another part which is less difficult to deal with, as we have some data. I mean the part purchased by you and Usborne of your father, which included some of the garden, I think, and part of the house. And lastly there is what Thomas Usborne purchased of Pryor, as to which I do not see any difficulty. For the two said items, say your father's and Mr Pryor's, I understand that Thomas gave £1800. Having therefore got all the property together, the question is what it is worth as a property. Would it let (if a tenant could be found) at £150 a year? Would it, if sold, find a purchaser at twenty-five years' purchase or £3750? Assuming this to be the selling value, there arises this question. As I understand, Thomas Usborne has paid out a great deal of money himself (and money of the firm). Now no doubt, however the money has been laid out, it is so expended on the firm's property and is therefore their property, but I have some idea that you did not think of claiming from Thomas Usborne for what he had expended under the circumstances, and suppose (but this is the merest guess) that sum is £750. It would bring the value in the house to £3000. I adopt this £750 more as a matter of convenience than anything; also as I do not know at all what the sum really is.

The above calculation, if correct, brings the sum to £1500 for each share, and here starts up another complication. Under the partnership arrangement, Thomas Usborne was to have the use of all the property I have mentioned, free from any rent, and also perceiving, which I believe to be correct, that this was an equitable arrangement. It would follow that yours is in the nature of a reversionary interest, and that you take no benefit so long as your partnership continues, i.e. provided Thomas Usborne undertakes to go on as he has done, without any charge to the partnership for the loss he sustains or rather that percentage he gives up of living rent free.

I confess, when I first heard the sum Thomas Usborne proposed to give you, £1000 I think, I thought it small; but when I look at the matter from all points, as I have endeavoured to do in this letter, I am not of that opinion, as it comes practically to this. That you take the £1000 and the interest for the time of your partnership, I hope for life, and for which, if my calculations are correct, you give up £500. I mean that, supposing your share is worth £1500, you do not during your partnership receive any interest for that sum, but by this proposal and arrangement you come into £1000 at once and £97, if that is not better than a reversionary interest in £1500.

In any new arrangements for a partnership of course, the terms must be made to meet the circumstances now suggested, and Thomas Usborne will, as I understand, waive his right to occupation and will not claim any compensation out of the partnership funds.

I do not for a moment think that Thomas Usborne makes the offer and expresses the wish to have the property his own from any other than the natural wish to be able to lay out money on what is really his own; and, if the plan is carried out, I only hope he may live long to enjoy it and that he and you may continue on the excellent terms at present existing between you; and that the brewery will be prosperous, as I am sure the house will be hospitable.
Believe me, yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

***

91
Joseph Alfred Hardcastle to Henry Hardcastle
54 Queens Gate Terrace, 7 February 1873

Original
Friday
My dear Boy, Greene has agreed with me that an investment of about £2000 in our joint names shall suffice as a guarantee of the £100 a year. John Greene has himself proposed £2500.(133) I don't believe Blood has read the letter. I saw it myself or I could hardly have believed it. There is a letter for you to sign at Goslings, if you have no objection, Hallyburton and Dudley Campbell having signed it, and giving them the custody of about £2000 colonial bonds of Mary's with the coupon and authorizing them to pay the coupons with her assent as they become due. I took the bonds out of her box and gave them to Goslings provisionally, as I think you will not mind letting them have them in order to save the half yearly trouble of going to her box for the coupons.
Yours affectionately, JAH.
I think Greene has acted in a very friendly and gentlemanly way.

(133) Not Edward Greene the buyer; possibly his brother. 

***

92
Thomas Usborne to Henry Hardcastle
Writtle, 9 February 1873

Original
My dear Henry, If you can get the first mortgage made a cash one at £24,600, and arrange that the £2000 shall not only guarantee Greene against claims for interest but also guarantee your £10,000 to you, I shall consider your security good and shall be perfectly satisfied. In case you cannot get the matter so arranged, you had better not agree to anything or sign anything, because there is no reason why your father should not do so much.

I will expect you on Monday 17th after dinner and can give you a mount on Gill on the following Wednesday. I can now only offer Gill, as I am short of sound horses. I had a good run with the stag yesterday, but it was bitterly cold.
Love to Maria, your affectionate brother, Thomas Usborne.
Hitch being in bed with rheumatic fever, I am brewer. It is rather chilly by the mash tun at 6 a.m.

***

93
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 19 February 1873

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, With reference to your letter as to your father's giving you a charge on the £2000 1s. 6d. deposited, I think something depends on whether the mortgage is to remain a stock or be converted into a cash mortgage; and, before this is settled I should like an opportunity of talking the matter over. Of course I cannot fail to see that your father and Mr Vaughan Johnson will think that in the agreement and mortgage I looked to your interest more than your father's. I can only say that the document, as I understood my instruction, was to secure to you £10,000 eventually and £500 a year for your life; and it seems that it effects its object rather too firmly. If I mentioned that subject or this insurance, your father would no doubt consult Mr Vaughan Johnson. As there is plenty of time, let it rest a little longer. I am yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

***

94
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
5 Paper Buildings, Temple, 20 February 1873

Copy
My dear Mr Blood, There is, of course, no especial hurry with regard to this matter, but at the same time I should personally be glad to have it settled as soon as possible and I submit that in any event, i.e. whether the first mortgage is made a cash mortgage or not, my father ought to give me a first charge on the £2000 as an additional security.

Vaughan Johnson's opinion, that in drawing the agreement and mortgage you looked more to my interests than to my father's, arises mainly, I think, from the fact that he knows nothing at all of the various very peculiar business transactions that have taken place between my father and myself during (I may say) the last eleven years. In fact he has, I believe, been carefully misinformed about them. All the persons who do know about these transactions (such as Woodhouse, Thomas Usborne, Mr Haldane) are of opinion that, if you strained a point with regard to the agreement and mortgage, you strained it in favour of my father; and that you would have been acting very unfairly to me and my children if you had advised me to consent to less favourable terms.

Very likely my father will, as you say, consult Vaughan Johnson about this matter, but it seems to me quite immaterial both to you and to me what Vaughan Johnson's opinion may be on the subject: first because, as I have said, he knows nothing of the previous family circumstances; and, secondly, because this is not a matter of law but merely a question of what under the circumstances my father ought to do in justice to me and my wife.

I cannot myself see on what grounds my father could refuse this request of mine, because it will in no way affect his having the interest of this £2000 for his life; and at his death the £2000 ought (subject, of course, to his debts) to come to me, unless he is prepared to repudiate what he has always stated to me, and what he wrote (I have a copy of the letter) to Sir John Herschel in contemplation of my marriage: namely that he should leave me all he had to leave, whether little or much. It seems to me that it rests entirely with you to get this request of mine complied with. I am (as I have often said to you) very indebted to you for protecting my interests on previous occasions, and I hope you will not object to add to my obligations by saying a word for me in this, which I hope and fully intend shall be the very last business transaction I ever have with my father.

***

95
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 9 April 1873

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, You were so much engaged today, and I was obliged to leave Chelmsford by the 12.50 train, that I could not manage to see you. I send you a paper sent to me by Partridge and Greene, which you can do no harm by signing, as Greene wants to enfranchise your life rather than his own. I need hardly tell you that making the estate freehold improves your security for the £10,000; so, if you will sign it and return it to me, I will see Partridge and Greene have it. I dare say I shall see you soon. Your document came at eight. Yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

***

96
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood

On the back of previous, Copy, 11 April 1873
It will be more satisfactory to me if, before I sign anything, you will send me an answer to the letter I wrote you almost six weeks ago as to my father's giving me a first charge on the £2000 to be deposited. My father tells me that the contract is now signed, so that my letter may as well be answered. I suppose the letter can be answered as well now as any future time. I shall be here till Monday, at Colchester Assizes on Tuesday, and from there I shall come back to town.

***

97
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 15 April 1873

Original
My dear Henry Hardcastle, I should not have sent any document to you for signature which could in any way affect a question between you and your father. The paper I sent could in no way affect your interest for the worse, but just the contrary. I think, however, that you should now tell me if you have made up your mind not to sign anything unless your father yields to your terms as to the £2000.

I did not tell you as to my interview with your father on the subject, as I hoped to have seen you and I could more easily explain personally than by letter. I never saw your father more taken aback than by your proposal. He seemed to be really distressed. I told him what you said relating to his statements to your wife's family. He admitted all, but said he then thought himself a rich man and meant what he said. He now finds himself the reverse and takes what he considers any attempt to get every shilling out of his command as very hard. He expressed himself strongly on the point and said he would not consent.

I must now leave you to deal with him as you think best and leave the signing the paper to your own judgement. Only I must impress upon you that, as your signature will be wanted as to the copyholds, if your determination is to hold out, we had better know at once. Under any circumstances, I should think you would hardly wait on security to your trustees. I am sincerely yours, J. Howell Blood.

***

98
Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood
7 Cliff Town Parade, Southend, 19 April 1873

Copy
My dear Mr Blood, I have been unwell all the week and not able to go to chambers, so I did not get your letter till this morning.

As to your question about signing the copyhold, I cannot give you a definite answer until I see Usborne, who will not be back for about a fortnight; until I have seen him, I certainly shall sign nothing.

I don't know what my father means by 'attempts to get every shilling out of his command'. When he considered himself to be a rich man, he undertook (and in the faith of that undertaking I married) to leave me all he had. By consenting to my request that he should give me a first charge on the £2000, he would, as it appeared to me, be merely carrying out the intentions which he expressed at the time of our marriage, and which I had no reason to suppose he had altered. If he refuses this request, he apparently has for some reason or other altered the  arrangement to which he pledged himself in his letter to Sir John Herschel.(134) With this letter before me, I am greatly surprised to hear that he was astonished at my request.

(134) Crossed out passage: 'whatever that these reasons may be of which I am unaware, I should be glad to know them, if he has no objection to inform me, as I am greatly surprised and pained to hear from you that he was astonished at such a request'.

***

99
J. Howell Blood to Henry Hardcastle
Witham, 21 April 1873

Original
My dear Hardcastle, Of course it is quite immaterial to me whether you sign the document I sent or not; but, as Mr Greene's solicitors could not understand the delay, they have written to me again and I have answered their letter that they could not expect your decision for a fortnight at least. My object in writing is to say that Messrs Partridge and Greene will probably want to examine the £10,000 mortgage deed which is in Mr Powell's hands. Will he produce it? Perhaps you will ascertain this from him and be so good as to let me know. I think they will be in town for the purpose of examination towards the end of the week.

I cannot hold myself responsible for what your father means or says. I merely gave you his words and perhaps the best thing will be for you and your father to arrange what is so purely a personal matter between you, as I do not feel that my interference is either necessary or, under the circumstances, proper. I am, yours sincerely, J. Howell Blood.

Note on back. Copy, Henry Hardcastle to J. Howell Blood, 22 April 1873. 'The question between my father and me must stand over till Thomas comes back. I shall then do whatever he advises.'

***

100
J. Howell Blood to Thomas Usborne
Witham, 28 April 1873

Original
My dear Usborne, I am glad that you are safe home. I hope I shall be so soon, but I am off by express en route tonight to Jersey.

Henry Hardcastle is fortunate in having you as an adviser. You know I always have thought so. I have never for one moment said that Henry ought not to ask for the £2000 in reversion. I have only told him what his father said when I mentioned the subject. I have not heard one word.
I am yours truly, J. Howell Blood.

Note on the back of the letter by Henry Hardcastle, 29 April 1873

I enclose herewith document as to copyright at Nether Hall, signed at your request. I have seen Thomas Usborne today and talked over the matter with him. I still hope that my father may reconsider his decision not giving me first charge I ask for. But if he persists in his refusal to do so, I can only say that I shall look upon the refusal as one more mean act of unfairness and injustice done by him to my wife and children (as it is in their behalf more than in my own that I made this request), and in the future (as may not be impossible) I have the opportunity, I shall most certainly remember it against him. 

***

101
Will
Copy will of J.A. Hardcastle Esq., 29 June 1877
Kitson and Trotman, Beaminster

This is the last will and testament of me Joseph Alfred Hardcastle of No. 54 Queens Gate Terrace in the county of Middlesex. I devise and bequeath all my real and personal effects, whatsoever and wheresover, to my dear wife, Mary Scarlett Hardcastle, and I appoint her sole executrix of this my will. In witness whereof I have hereto set my hand this 29th day of June 1877.(135)

Signed by the above named J.A. Hardcastle as and for his last will and testament in the presence of us both being present at the same time who, in his presence at his requhgest and in the presence of each other, have hereto set our names as witnesses.

J.A. Hardcastle

Sidney Lidderdale Smith, Rector of Brampton Ash, Co. Northampton, and Canon of Hereford Cathedral
Frances M. Smith, wife of the above.

(135) A fair copy, all in the same hand, rather than the original.

The Revd Sidney Smith

***//***

102
Henry Hardcastle to Joseph Alfred Hardcastle II
The Moor House, Oxted, 14 January 1916

Original
My dear Alfred, I return the 'Financial History'. I am very glad it has been put into writing, as it will enable you at any time to refer people to it, if necessary. Probably the future generation will not trouble themselves much over the questions involved. You will of course keep all the correspondence connected with the matters mentioned, as it vouches for the accuracy of the statements.
Yours affectionately, Henry Hardcastle.

Sorry not to see you today. Hope you will be able to come next week. The tea party yesterday was, I think, a great success.

***

103
Maria Hardcastle to Joseph Alfred Hardcastle II
The Moor House, Oxted, Surrey, 12 April 1916

Original
Dearest Alfred, I return this 'statement' with the single word, Yes. It corroborates all my memories of those early years (and more) - the 'unpleasantness' of my own position. Fortunately, that could not damage the happiness and my married life, nor of my enjoyment in possessing such a family of dear sons and daughters, of whom no mother can be more proud or could love more.
Yours always loving mother, M.S. Hardcastle.

I am only grieved to think it was necessary to put all this down. My great wish the years your father and his wife lived at 54 was that I should keep the peace – for the sake of the children's memory of their grandfather. He had so much to make him loveable, if only -
Your father's conduct all through requires no words of admiration from me. It stands by itself.

***//***