dreadful difficulties and makeshifts. It will take perhaps two hours to pull down the wall and a day to rebuild, and the cost to the builder will be perhaps £7. The foreman will “know all about it,” and he and the builder will be warned to be wary. On the whole, Spinlove’s decision is probably the best one, but he can write polite, and even ingratiating letters to his client, and he should know better than to write crusty and domineering ones to the builder.
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir,12.11.24.
We enclose letter we have received from Messrs. Hoochkoft re facings. Please return with your instructions.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE) HOOCHKOFT TO GRIGBLAY
Sir,8.11.24.
We do not understand the complaint of the architect. The bricks we are sending are same as approved by him. If we are required to pick over we shall have to charge 35s. per thousand extra. There is nothing wrong with the bricks.
Yours faithfully,
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir,14.11.24.
I return Hoochkoft’s letter, of which I have kept copy, and enclose copy of my letter to the firm.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE) SPINLOVE TO HOOCHKOFT
Dear Sirs,14.11.24.
Mr. Grigblay has shown me your letter to him of 8.11.24. My objection to the bricks you have delivered on the site is that they include a quantity of the soft bright red bricks which I expressly said I could not use at the time I ordered the bricks.
Yours faithfully,
BRASH TO SPINLOVE
Dear Mr. Spinlove,14.11.24.
I have been in correspondence with my solicitors, Messrs. Russ, Topper, Mainprice, Cornish and McFee, and have further discussed with them the proposition of obtaining water from the effluent of spring, but they are unable to advise me what interpretation should be given to the covenant limiting my use of the water. They approved the conveyance in my behalf so that I should have expected them to be able to tell me what the words mean, but this they seem unable to do. I am given to understand that only a judge can say what the words mean and that probably different judges would have different views as to their meaning. I am now, at my solicitors’ suggestion, obtaining the opinion of an eminent K.C. as to what opinion a judge would be likely to give on the matter. When I have this information I shall know better how I stand. I inform you of these minutiae in order that you may comprehend that a considerable period must elapse before anything can be definitely determined.
Yours sincerely,
The way Brash sets forth this matter makes it appear ludicrous. The predicament of his solicitors is in fact grotesque—the more so as there are five of them—though Brash does not perceive it. We do not know what the terms of the clause in question are, and should be little the wiser if we did, but it may be that Brash is under covenant not to “interfere” with the flow of the spring, and that the question is what exactly constitutes “interference,” having regard to the terms of the conveyance as a whole and the physical circumstances of the case? We lately saw Spinlove lightheartedly committing Brash in ambiguous words, and now we find skilled lawyers all at sea as to the meaning of their own carefully weighed phrases. A great part of the business of lawyers is to determine the meaning of words used by other lawyers. The law is what is known as “a lucrative profession.”
HOOCHKOFT TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir,15.11.24.
We have respectfully to point out that you accepted our quotation for bricks ex kiln. It is true you said you did not care for the bright-red bricks and we are accordingly extra firing the bricks for your order, but we cannot guarantee that there will not be a small number of bright reds unless we send you picked, for which our price is 182s. per thousand instead of 147s.
Yours faithfully,
Spinlove’s letter accepting quotation for facing bricks was as follows: “I like the samples of the bricks and the price is satisfactory. The very bright-coloured bricks
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir,12.11.24.
We enclose letter we have received from Messrs. Hoochkoft re facings. Please return with your instructions.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE) HOOCHKOFT TO GRIGBLAY
Sir,8.11.24.
We do not understand the complaint of the architect. The bricks we are sending are same as approved by him. If we are required to pick over we shall have to charge 35s. per thousand extra. There is nothing wrong with the bricks.
Yours faithfully,
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir,14.11.24.
I return Hoochkoft’s letter, of which I have kept copy, and enclose copy of my letter to the firm.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE) SPINLOVE TO HOOCHKOFT
Dear Sirs,14.11.24.
Mr. Grigblay has shown me your letter to him of 8.11.24. My objection to the bricks you have delivered on the site is that they include a quantity of the soft bright red bricks which I expressly said I could not use at the time I ordered the bricks.
Yours faithfully,
BRASH TO SPINLOVE
Dear Mr. Spinlove,14.11.24.
I have been in correspondence with my solicitors, Messrs. Russ, Topper, Mainprice, Cornish and McFee, and have further discussed with them the proposition of obtaining water from the effluent of spring, but they are unable to advise me what interpretation should be given to the covenant limiting my use of the water. They approved the conveyance in my behalf so that I should have expected them to be able to tell me what the words mean, but this they seem unable to do. I am given to understand that only a judge can say what the words mean and that probably different judges would have different views as to their meaning. I am now, at my solicitors’ suggestion, obtaining the opinion of an eminent K.C. as to what opinion a judge would be likely to give on the matter. When I have this information I shall know better how I stand. I inform you of these minutiae in order that you may comprehend that a considerable period must elapse before anything can be definitely determined.
Yours sincerely,
The way Brash sets forth this matter makes it appear ludicrous. The predicament of his solicitors is in fact grotesque—the more so as there are five of them—though Brash does not perceive it. We do not know what the terms of the clause in question are, and should be little the wiser if we did, but it may be that Brash is under covenant not to “interfere” with the flow of the spring, and that the question is what exactly constitutes “interference,” having regard to the terms of the conveyance as a whole and the physical circumstances of the case? We lately saw Spinlove lightheartedly committing Brash in ambiguous words, and now we find skilled lawyers all at sea as to the meaning of their own carefully weighed phrases. A great part of the business of lawyers is to determine the meaning of words used by other lawyers. The law is what is known as “a lucrative profession.”
HOOCHKOFT TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir,15.11.24.
We have respectfully to point out that you accepted our quotation for bricks ex kiln. It is true you said you did not care for the bright-red bricks and we are accordingly extra firing the bricks for your order, but we cannot guarantee that there will not be a small number of bright reds unless we send you picked, for which our price is 182s. per thousand instead of 147s.
Yours faithfully,
Spinlove’s letter accepting quotation for facing bricks was as follows: “I like the samples of the bricks and the price is satisfactory. The very bright-coloured bricks
Similar Books
