Ledger # 2 of Walter B. Gwyn

pages 800 - 899

Geo. W. Pack, Esq.
Asheville, N.C, Aug. 4^th, 1897

Seabright, N.J.

My Dear Sir;

Your favor of the 2^nd. Inst is to hand, and I am glad to hear you are all well. Replying to your kind inquiries as to our health, our baby has a cold that has given her a fever and put her in bed, but we hope she will be out in a day or two. For myself, I have “puny” for ten days, not able to eat any vegetables and but little else except toast and milk, but the renewed hot weather is bringing me round gradually.
As to your writing Mr. Pearson as suggested, I don’t think I related to you what Charley told me about the circumstances of his other purchase, in regard to Mr. Pearson’s not knowing of the matter until it was all over. He said Mr. Pearson one day saw his deed to Mrs. Curry, and the deed from you to Charley, and came to ask Charley about the matter. When Charley explained it to him, “he jess laffed a little and never said nothing”.
It does not necessarily follow that Pearson knows nothing of the present negotiations, (if they may be called such), but I think Charley is of that impression. Assuming that he does not, it might still be a question whether your proposed letter would bring any desirable result. Of course you are a great deal better trader than I am; but of course you wish me to be plain when you ask me what I think, and, so being, I must say that the tone of the proposed letter would, from my understanding of his disposition, have no influence towards a trade. This is my extreme way of speaking

And is not entitled to any more weight on that account, rather the opposite. What a funny thing it is that we can step off and take a look at ourselves most any time we take the trouble, and see ourselves all “barnacled over with the excrescent faults”, and yet go on the same and not scrape them off. But I digress, as they say in books.
It seems to me, that we had better let that matter stand a while as it is. You see I have told Charley that I want a poor man’s offer for land, and that he need not be afraid to make an offer because it is too low; that I will submit it right off; and that being as he is a poor man, he can get easy terms. It is my opinion, from what Charley says, that it is Mrs. P. and not Mr. P. that is wanting to buy; I have already frightened Charley with a livery man who wants a pasture for his horse in dullseasons.

At this point I recall that once Charley remarked that Mrs. Pearson want gwine to do nothing no how till Mr. Perason come home, but he might not have known that, and if he did, it does not follow that Mr. Pearson has been consulted even yet, or will be until the last moment.
This is about the case as I understand it to date. I expected to hear from Charley on Saturday the 31^st, but I did not.
Mr. Sam Ray offers $250 per annum for the Gudger place, house Featherson is in, and the cleared land on the Gudger (96) acre tract. We are getting $120.00 for the house alone, and this year $4.00 a mo for your horse pasture., I suppose Ray would except that in your favor and still give $250.00. Reference to my book shows $64.20 for 1895 and $54.16 for 1896, received for grain rent, hay &c. The fruit was a failure both years, I believe, but is good this year. Ray says he wants lots of grass, and that is our favor, as place look better that way.

Chas. N. Hartshorne Esq.
Aug. 4
Jersey City
Dear Sir;
Enclosed please find my check for $37.40, July rent less 5% cost and 60 cents paid for repair of leak. The kitchen boiler is leaking. It is said by plumbers that those boiler leaks cannot be repaired- I remember having to get a new one myself some 2 years ago that was put in a year or two before yours was. It looked as good as new, but every plumber consulted declared that it could not be repaired so as to stand. I think one fellow said he could mend it so it might stand, but it was liable to give away under the pressure and have, at any moment and leak…They cost some ten or eleven dollars new, and the tenants object to paying a thing so permanent in nature.
I did swear I would not pay for another thing, but maybe it is just getting time for things to need repair- the bills seem so much greater than before, which worried me- much of it was for painting which ought to last several years. Write me about boiler.
Yours hastily,
W. B. Gwyn

Chas. H. Hartshorne Esq.,
Asheville, N.C., Aug. 5, 1897
Jersey City.
My Dear Sir;
Mr. Baker’s son, who is the cause of the sojourn of the family at Asheville, spoke to me about his father’s house in Brooklyn, saying they would exchange it for your property here provided both parties could agree on price &c.
He says the place is No. 570 Washington Ave., between Fulton St. and Atlantic Ave., lot 20 X 150, 4 story and basement, with brown stone front, and is rented for three years at $800.00 a year. He says there is a little furniture, but of small value, and that it would rent for as much without the furniture. He says his father gave $13,000 for the property, and spent fifteen hundred to two thousand dollars on after buying it, but would take ten thousand cash for it now.
I don’t know at what price he would rate it in a trade for yours at the price we ask, or, in other words, I don’t know what is the least “boot” he would take. If you will consider it atall, I will ask him what difference he would expect, and in what shape.
Suppose you take a look at the property, which I presume you can do without much expense or loss of time.
Yours Truly

August 4^th, 1897
E. B. Cline Esq.
Hickory, N.C.
Dear Sir;

Please send me the two copies of original answers we prepared in the Tate-Cochran of Lenoir & c. care, and much oblige.
Yours Truly,
W. B. Gwyn

Geo. W. Pack Esq.,
Aug. 5^th, 1897
Seabright, N.J.
My Dear Sir;
Dr. Millender still wants to borrow some money. He has about finished his new house, which he says cost $2,400, and the barn $100- he gave West $900 for the lot, and so his property stands him $3,400. He is spending some fifty dollars on the front yard in addition, he says. I do not doubt any of his statements. If he gest $2,000 say for two to four years, he will include the lot he bought of you subject to the unpaid purchase money. If he borrows only $1,500 he will not include that lot. As to the latter, he was on the point of selling it to a Charleston lady at $900, but she suddenly bought Locke Craig’s house, adjoining at $3,500.00.
Millender says his house is several hundred dollars better and more costly than Craig’s. His lot is also better. I think 3,500 is fair value for it.
Hoping you have a little money by this time to loan a man who will pay it back, or I am badly mistaken, I remain, Yours Truly

August 6, 1897
James Howard Esq.
Newberne, N.C.
Dear Sir;
I have been expecting to hear from you about Mr. DuFour’s matters. Have you seen Mr. Clarke? Mr. DuFour wrote me July 13^th and said he had written you and asked you to see Clarke, and then write me.
Yours Truly,

W. B. Gwyn

Geo. W. Pack Esq.
Asheville, N.C. Aug. 1897
Seabright, N.J.
My Dear Sir;
The idea occurred to me last Saturday to telegraph you that the First National Bank had suspended; I discarded it as a useless waste of money. I hope you have not much stock in the concern, and that your deposit was small there. We were lucky in getting in the David check in time. Summers says Mr. David had some more in the bank when it failed. He will have further cause to animadvert on Asheville and her citizens.
It is said on all sides that Breeze and Penland have lose everything, but I do not know anything about that. They are said to have brought up about all of the stock, and mortgaged heavily to do it. It is also said that Penland’s mother and sister have become involved with him.
Mr. Bostic is carrying around a petition to get Geo. S. Powell appointed receiver of the bank. I understand J.M. Moody, the republican political lawyer of Waynesville is also applying, and that W. W. Barnard and L.P. McLoud are after the position.

They say Mr. C. A. Webb pounded C. E. Lyman for a minute or two in Lyman’s office, next to Webb’s in Legal Block. A snit has been begun, they say, to se aside a deed obtained by Lyman’s agents and attorneys from some heirs to the 133 acres Wolte[?] once bought, just this side of Lyman’s house. It seems they get hold of the fact that some question had been raised by Webb (who was examining the title to a part of the tract for the Indian man who bought it of Bostic, as I wrote you some days ago) as to whether the interests of these heirs had passed by some old deed, and they forthwith sent a man out to the country and got a quitclaim deed under raise representations. There is enough gossip for once.

Messrs. J. K. Gilliatt & Co.
Aug, 7, 1897

London
Gentlemen;

Your inclined favor of July 27^th inclosing letter of J. R. Graham of July 6^th inquiring price of factory lot, is just to hand-
First, as to Graham- He has been lacking of buying property for several years, but it seems to be impossible for him to find anything to suit him, purchasable at Graham rates. His letter is entirely characteristic, and it is not atall surprising that a man of his tortuous, sneaking methods should suspect Real Estate agent of putting on a bonus for themselves on owner’s prices.
It is barely possible, but not atall probable, that Graham may work himself up to the point of paying such a price as you may accept- for the factory lot- as looking to that [?]. I think it would be better if he is kept in ignorance of the fact that you have sent me his letter. I have frequently spoken to him about the lot and urged him to buy it, and can go at him again, particularly if he is not aware that I have been informed of his attempt to undermine use. Kindly write me what the state of affairs is in this respect. I note your complaint that I have not before informed of the sale and removal of the factory building. I sold the building to D. A. Crawford, who lives on the lot next North of it, for seventy five ($75.00) cash, on the 28^th of June, as appears from my books which show credit to account on that date. He was to have 50 days to remove it, and I hope he will get it away by that time. There is quite a lot of debris lying on the lot yet, and a good deal of lumber. My intention has been to have the lot surveyed and subdivided as soon as it should be clean…rubbish have an accurate flat made, and send it-

To you with a statement of my ideas of value, with a request that you fix definite prices on the three (proposed) lots.
I had expected to have done this ere now, for I thought Dr. Crawford would have completed the removal before this time. If I had known he would be so long about it, I would have written you, simply informing you of the sale of the building. I think I can have the survey made within two weeks from this date, and I will then write you immediately. It has always been my purpose and endeavor to keep you fully posted upon all matters.
Yours Very Truly,
W. B. Gwyn

Messrs. Doubleday & Lanier-
Tryon, N.C.
Dear Sirs;
The case of the Asheville Ice & Coal Co. and Harold Doubleday and the three cases of Doubleday & Lanier, E. B. Thomas and R. M. Allston the said Company. I have been set for trial on Monday 23^rd just. Superior Court Convenes Aug. 16 and sits 3 weeks, and as there cases are set for Monday of second week, there is a fair probability that they may be reached- at least during the term. I think would be well for Mr. Doubleday to run up this week and let us have a consultation- determine what witnesses to summon &c. Hudson appeared before the Commission and testified on the 31^st, so the commission wrote me. We have not opened the depositions yet.
Yours Truly, W. B. Gwyn

O.E. Edwards Esq.
Blowing Rock, N.C.

August 9, 1897

My Dear Mr. Edwards;

I wrote you at considerable length some days ago. At a meeting of the Bar on Saturday the 7^th to fix a calendar of causes for trial in the ensuing Term of Superior Court, which convenes the 16^th Inst., and holds for three weeks, the case of Edwards v. Lyman was placed on for trial Wednesday the 25^th Inst. That day is just about the middle of the term, and it is more than likely that other cases coming before it will consume the entire Term, and that the case will not be reached.
It is better, however, that we be ready for trial. I can, of course, as the term progresses, better tell whether the case will be reached, and on what day; and I can write or telegraph. Can you come and swear that you never received any notice from the tax collector before this date? Hoping you and Mrs. Edwards are very well,
Yours, W. B. Gwyn

O. E. Edwards Jr. Esq.
Aug. 9, 1897
Washington, D.C.

My Dear Sir;

The case of Edwards & Lyman is set for trial Wednesday the 25^th Inst. Court conceives Aug. 16, and sits 3 weeks, so that “ “ is about the middle of Tenn. There are so many cases set before this that the chances are against its being reached that day or ever during the term; but it is best to be ready for trial. I can, of course, tell more about the probabilities as time (after the 16^th), passes, and I can advise you by wire so that you need not lose much time if you wish to be present. I have not heard from you in quite a long time. I hope you are very well.

Yours Very Truly

Asheville, N.C. Aug. 11^th, 1897.
Dr. Carl V. Reynolds-
City.
Dear Sir;
I was so very much surprised this morning when you told me of the sale of the other land to Brown and Fitzpatrick that I did not think of some things in connection with the matter, and it is fair that I should remind you of them and tell you of them before you decide as to what you intend to do as to my claim for commissions.
I first tried to sell Brown the entire tract, as you remember at $3,500.00. He declined to consider the purchase of all of it, and refuse to pay your price for what he did buy. At last, after a great deal of dickering you came together on fifteen hundred dollars for the two lots on Beaverdam road and the block “B”.
Brown then offered fifty dollars an acre for block “C”., and I told you of his offer, and you declined it. I am not positive, but I think that he repeated the offer in my office, and you declined it.
I know that I calculated the contents of that block very carefully according to Hume’s plat, and that Brown and I frequently talked about it, and that I repeatedly urged Brown to buy it, telling him to make an offer; that I did not know what was the least you would take’ only that you authorized me to price it at $1,600.00.

You seemed so positive about not accepting his offer, and he seemed so determined not to give more, that I left off speaking to him about it and tried to sell the land to others. I took Mr. Greer out to see the land, spoke of it to two or three others, and was trying to sell it to Oliver Gideon the last man. To all I priced it at sixteen hundred dollars, but asked for an offer, saying that you might accept an offer of less. It seems strange that you would have gone on and sold the land without notifying me of the fact, especially as you made me the trustee in the deed of trust securing the purchase money, as you tell me.
With these facts I think you will agree with me that I should have the usual commission of five per cent on what Brown paid you for block “C”, which you say was seven hundred and fifty dollars. Please write me what you intend to do about it and oblige,
Yours Truly.

Oliver Gideon Esq.
Aug. 11, 1897
City.
Dear Sir;

 [?] Brown took the rest of the Reynolds land, so you need not bother to go and look at it. I saw Judge Merrimon as to exchanging for town property, and he said it would not suit him. You ought to buy that 39 acres or a part of it- the judge bought because he had to, and he will sell it cheap because he has no use for it.

Yours Truly
W. B. Gwyn

E. Steruberger Esq.
Clio, S. C.
Aug. 12, 1897
Dear Sir;
The case of Merrimon and Sterberger & A. H. & C E. Seymour is set for trial on Thursday the 26^th of this month. It is by no means sure that it will be called on that day, but there would seem to be a fair probability of it having reached during the [?] which lasts three weeks. [?] next Monday the 16^th.
I wish you would write to Graham and ask him to come up, as his evidence is very important. Would like to have you come also.
Yours Truly

Chas. H. Hartshorne Esq.
Aug. 12, 1897
Jersey City, N.J.
Dear Sir;

Dr. M.C. Millender
Aug. 12, 1897.
City.
Dear Sir;
I have been disappointed in getting that money from the source that I hoped for, but have another party who is expecting some money in about a week, and may loan it to you. Still another party offered to loan the money two days ago on certain terms which I doubted whether you would accept, especially before I had heard from the first named party. Having now heard adversely from him, and the second party not yet knowing whether he will even get his money, I wish you would come in and see me tomorrow morning and I will explain party No. three’s proposition.

Aug. 14, 1897
W. A. James Esq.
City.
Dear Sir;
I find by reference to letter of Mr. Pack that the price of the lot he sold Rives and bought back from him not long ago, is five hundred ($500.00) Dollars.
Yours Truly,
W. B. Gwyn

Maj. Geo. S…Please deliver at next [?] in French Broad Ave the following-
50 pieces 12’ X 1” X 10”- dressed both sides, all heart- 500
100 “ 12’ X 2” X 3”- 600
700 “ 12’ X 2” X 1”

600 linear feet mould for water table-

Aug. 17, 1897
[?] Geo. W. Pack
W. B. Gwyn for Geo. W. Pack
M. Brown [?] & Co Please let Mrs. B. H[?] have 10 pounds 8d finish cut nails- This Aug. 17, 1897.

Geo. W. Pack Esq.
Asheville, N.C., Aug. 16, 1897.
Seabright, N.J.
My Dear Sir;
I dreamed about you last night, and got a letter from you this morning; and yet there are people who say there is nothing in dreams! I re-inclose Miss Lee’s rushing letter. A complete answer to the same lies in the fact that her attorney is not a judge sitting to decide whether your title to the lot is good, or was good, when you sold it to her. Your attorney said, and says, that  the title was good; her attorney never said it was not good, but insisted that the doing of some things, an the correcting of some other, would be of advantage—your attorney readily agreed to assist in procuring the corrections, and did so, in a number of case, in fact, in all where it was feasible, as will be granted by her attorney. As for Mr. Barnard’s quitclaim, an unnecessary paper in the judgment of your attorney, (a not indisposable paper in the judgment of her own attorney, if I understand him rightly), I have asked Barnard at least half a dozen times to execute it, and he always promised to attend to it. It was a paper that required considerable care in the drafting, and I have now forgotten its terms, a matter which would not matter materially, (for that matter), except for the fact that Mr. Barnard now says that he has lost it, never having seen it since he left it with Mr. Jos. S. Adams, his attorney for examination.
I have read a case in our N.C. Reports which, so far as I know, has never been over-ruled, deciding that where a purchaser takes a deed and gives a mortgage to secure the remainder of the purchase

Money, he is estopped from denying that the title derived from his grantor is good, and cannot be heard to enjoin a sale of the property under the mortgage for his failure to pay the debt secured by it.
If Mr. Sondley, in the light of his luminous and perspicuous knowledge of law, ahs advised his client to withhold money due you under the deed of trust to secure the purchase money, it is he, and not you, who is bound in “justice” (I understand her to ask nothing of your generosity), to re-imburse her for loss of interest. It is surely a small value they place upon your warranty, when only a part of the lot can be affected by Barnard’s deed, and only an interest in that.

Mr. Sondley knows that your deed contains not only a warranty which secures his clients against loss of the money paid you, but also a covenant of seizing which protects her for improvements part on the land.
I intend to prepare another quitclaim deed for Mr. Barnard to sign, but, unless you prefer, I shall not go at it with frantic and trembling haste, but take my dignified time, as Mr. Sondley is accustomed to do, especially as I have more cases set for trial during this term of Court (commencing this day and lasting three weeks,) than Mr. Sondley has.
Brown spoke to me the other day and wanted to know, not for the first time what you were going to do about the road trouble- I did not know and could not tell, and he said he would not pay another dollar until the trouble is settled, Lot 13 and 14, block X. Brown is something of a bully in manner.
We have had some more pleasant, warm weather; but it is threatening to rain again. Some trades, but none lately by,
Yours Truly

To any suggestions that the attitude of your attorney, or yourself, is insincere, you can point to the fact that, subsequent to the sale to Miss Lee, and with knowledge of the objections raised to the title by her attorney, particularly this trouble which the Barnard deed is wanted to remove, you went deliberately and purchase, with the advice of your said attorney, the Joe Sluder lot, which is included in the land Barnard is asked to quitclaim.

Asheville, N.C.
Capt. J. K. Hoyt
Aug. 17, 1897
N.C.

My Dear Sir;
I thank you for your prompt reply to my note inquiring when you expect to be in Asheville, and I note that you have no present intentions of…

I wanted to see you in regards to a claim of Doubleday and Lanier of Tryon, N.C. against The Asheville Ice & Coal Co. for failure to provide dry cold storage of grapes in the fall of 1895- I brought suit for them and for Capt. E. B. Thomas and a [?] man by name of Allston- Collins devises all property whatever, and says, in effect “I simply said to you that I bid around. I called a refrigerator – which I agreed to “ice,” and you could take it and put in grapes, or consider, as your whim might dictate, but I never promised that either would keep!”
In addition to this plausible

E. B. Cline Esq.
Asheville, N.C., Aug. 18, 1897.
Hickory, N.C.
Dear Sir;
Your favor of the 16th was duly received. I have not time to look into the subject of removal of causes now, being very busy with our present term of Superior Court. Without examination it seems strange to me how this suit could have brought to Mitchell when the land of our clients lies in Watauga and Caldwell. It would seem a matter of strict right to have the case, as to our clients moved to the county, where our land lies; there might be difficulty in asserting such right in view of the fact that, by the changed answer, we do not describe our land further than to say it lies in Watauga and Mitchell Counties. Please look it up and do what is right to do.
Regarding the answers to be filed in the case, I am today mailing them, together with the defense bond, to the Clk SuP Ct. of Mitchell Co.
I failed to see Mr. Justice any more. I adopted your answer with some corrections and additions made by Mr. Justice in pencil. I copied it off last night.
When I get time I will make a copy of it for myself and return your copy with the corrections of Mr. Justice.
Yours Hastily

Clerk Superior Court of Mitchell Co.
Aug. 18, 1897
Bakersville, N.C.
Dear Sir;
Inclosed please find separate answers of T.B. Lenoir individually, and T.B. Lenoir executor of the estate of W.W. Lenoir Dcd, in the case of Cochran, Tate and others Vs. Lenoir and others, to be filed in the case--also defense bond of T.B. Lenoir individually and as exeutor, with J. H. Beall as surety, duly justified by Beall.
I inclose self-addressed envelope, and will thank you to acknowledge receipt of these papers by return mail.
Yours Very Truly

 

Geo. W. Pack Esq.
Seabright, N.J.
Aug, 24, 1897
Dear Sir;
I have found that the bank examiner has the insurance policies- that he paid recently something over $100.00 premium on a policy that had to be renewed, or had been renewed. He said he paid it because the Bank has a second mortgage of $20,000- He declines to give or lend me the policies for the purpose of having permission endorsed on them to foreclose your Deed of Trust- or to let the agents come there and make the endorsement- Col. Lusk will not say what he will do until he gets in possession as receiver- I have thought of getting the agents to enter permission on their registers and make report of it to their compromises. I had no time to look up sufficiency (legality) of that course, but I will do so. Bank Examiner says nobody has paid him any rent yet- says they refuse. Very Hastily,
W. B. Gwyn

Messrs. Doubleday & Lanier
Tryon, N.C.
Aug. 29, 1897
Gentlemen;
I am informed that the jury rendered a verdict late last night- in favor of yourselves against the [Asheville Ice and Coal Co.], but I have been unable to find anybody who knows the amount of damages found due. As to this letter, we can only guess. The judge has set a homestead care for the first thing tomorrow. I wish I could give more definite information as to when Allston's case will be called, but I simply cannot. If it is called tomorrow, I think there will have to be a big fight- on the law, the first thing, as defendants claim that their relation with Allston are quite different from those they sustain to your firm.
Yours Truly,
W. B. Gwyn

Aug. 30, 1897
Dear Joyce,
I suppose you will be going East before cold weather. I hope you will let me know when you pass through so I can at least have a chance to say "howdy" to you.
Your affectionate brother,
W. B. Gwyn