XD8/2/249
LETTER: W.A. Madocks, Naples to Mr. John Williams, Tremadog. WAM is glad that JW received the important letter in time, so as to notice the tenants by Bardell (the previous stipulation being made to take the money in October from Miss Hughes and conveying the same to Mr. Fisher in trust for her) this will defeat Beaumont. JW can burn the last letter written in a state of agitation for fear WAM had been too late or that his letter had failed to reach JW. What JW says about Mr. Crew’s deed would not be safe to rely on at the trial, as at the time of its being signed, the property was not secured nor productive of any tangible rent, and therefore the reasoning in Mr. Richard’s opinion, as applies to Beaumont will apply to Crew. Looking at JW’s accounts, the first toll taken at the bank was 12 November 1812 and for the rents of the fifths they did not commence till 1822, so that Crew’s deed is in the same situation as Beaumont, and therefore Bardell’s is to be relied on at the trial which WAM trusts Fisher will not neglect, as Miss Hughes will get us out of the scrapes. After WAM executed the deeds to Beaumont and Bardell in 1807, he signed a deed of trust in 1809 which has nothing to do with deeds, prior to 1808, but which effects all subsequent deeds, Crew’s, included and it is one of the instruments which former pact of Lowes suit therefore WAM asks JW not to trust to a defence that will fail, but WAM trusts that Fisher will stick to Bardell for Miss Hughes who has already remitted an order for a considerable part of the money in London and the whole will be settled in October without fail. [Formerly W.A. Madocks Letters BJC/168/231].
Cyngor Gwynedd