Honeywood Settlement

by Creswell, H. B.

  I should only be too delighted if it were possible for me to accept your and your good Lady’s charming invitation, but, alas! that is quite out of the question, I am sorry to say.

  Yours sincerely,

  A charming letter: the letter of one who knows no virtue that will not pass the test of “Does it pay?” and who has sold the goods (and the buyer) and sees no more profit in the miserable, grovelling Brash.

  (ENCLOSURE 7) BRASH TO SWATMUG

  My dear Mr. Swatmug,5.7.26.

  Permit me to thank you in acknowledgment of your communication anent Riddoppo. I anticipated that, as it was at your urgent personal recommendation I adopted the use of Riddoppo, you would be desirous of assisting me in securing elimination of consequent defects; however, I comprehend that you have now no connection with the Company and that I need have no apprehension that you will interpret any action I take to secure restitution from the Company as in any way involving yourself.

  Lady Brash and myself are extremely disappointed to know we may not immediately anticipate the enjoyment of a visit from you, but we still live in hopes that eventually your divers engagements may permit you to give us that pleasurable gratification.

  Believe me, dear Mr. Swatmug,

  Yours sincerely,

  (ENCLOSURE 8) BRASH TO SECRETARY,

  RIDDOPPO CO., LTD.

  Dear Sir,5.7.26.

  About twelve months ago you supplied me with a quantity of your New Novelty Riddoppo Super-Paint for the interior decoration of Honeywood Grange. I regret to inform you that a very brief period after the painting was completed it commenced to disintegrate and peel away from the surface. I shall be glad if your representative will call at an early date to view the disaster, and to know what proposals you will make for immediate renovation.

  Yours faithfully,

  (ENCLOSURE 9) BRASH TO RIDDOPPO, CO., LTD.

  Dear Sirs, 12.7,26.

  Permit me to call your attention to my communication of 5th July anent failure of your Riddoppo paint, and to politely request the favour of an immediate reply without any further procrastination.

  Yours faithfully,

  (ENCLOSURE 10) RIDDOPPO, LTD. (AND REDUCED)

  TO L. BRASH, ESQ.

  Dear Sir, 19.7.26.

  We do not find that at any time we have supplied any goods to your order.

  Yours faithfully,

  We now may begin to understand why there was an interval of four months between the day Brash referred the question of responsibility to Russ, and that on which he wrote telling Spinlove liability lay at Grigblay’s door.

  It will be noticed that the Riddoppo Company describes itself as “Ltd. (and Reduced).” This means that the Company has, as Swatmug mentioned, written down—or cancelled—part of its share capital. This writing down is equivalent to cutting losses, and will enable the Company to pay that small available dividend on the reduced nominal share value which would have been swamped as a percentage on the original share capital. The fact suggests that the Riddoppo Company is struggling to keep its head above water.

  (ENCLOSURE 11) BRASH TO RIDDOPPO, LTD.

  Dear Sirs, 20.7.26.

  I beg leave to communicate the obvious intimation that your Riddoppo super-paint was not ordered by myself, nor am I aware that it is a customary habit for private gentlemen to order materials for building operations. The paint was appropriately ordered by my builder, Mr. John Grigblay, of Marlford, as—will you permit me to politely remind you?—you could perfectly well have informed yourself had you so desired.

  It is also expedient you should clearly comprehend that attention to this matter brooks no further protracted delay, and that unless I immediately receive a satisfactory proposal for the restoration of the defective paint I shall employ other persons to carry out the necessary undertakings and hold you liable for the cost as well as for the disbursements I have already incurred in augmentation of the domestic staff necessary to the prevention of deleterious effects upon carpets, curtains and furniture.

  I have also to ask your permission to intimate that you are not addressing “Mr. L.” but Sir Leslie Brash Knight Bachelor, which information you could have immediately acquired from the most cursory reference to Dod’s, Who’s Who, the Post Office and Telephone Directories and numerous other publications.

  Yours faithfully,

  (ENCLOSURE 12) RIDDOPPO TO SIR L. B. K.

  BACHELOR

  Dear Sir, 5.8.26.

  We regret error in name, which was new to us, and signature hard to decipher.

  We have now communicated with Mr. Grigblay and enclose copies of correspondence, which kindly note as this closes the matter so far as we are concerned, and oblige,

  Yours faithfully,

  (ENCLOSURE 12A) RIDDOPPO TO GRIGBLAY

  Dear Sir, 26.7.26.

  Sir Leslie Bachelor of Honeywood Grange has written complaining our N.N. Super-Paint ordered by you has gone wrong there, and shall be glad of particulars as this is the first we have heard of same.

  Yours faithfully,

  (ENCLOSURE 12B) GRIGBLAY TO RIDDOPPO

  Gentlemen, 27.7.26.

  We painted out Honeywood with your Riddoppo super because we were so ordered, and if you want to know what it looks like better go and see is we only carried out architects orders and it is no more business of ours and we will have no more to do with it. You may like to know we did not french polish or put fire to it or squirt any acid at it or boiling water or super-heated steam or molten lead, but if that is what is wanted there is still a bit of it left for you to get to work on.

  Yours faithfully,

  The last paragraph is a characteristic comment of Grigblay’s on the advertisements of “Riddoppo New Novelty Super-Paint,” which held out, for the encouragement of house-owners and decorators, that it was “fire and acid proof, not to be damaged by jets of boiling water and super-heated steam and capable of receiving a high polish.”

  (ENCLOSURE 12C) RIDDOPPO TO GRIGBLAY

  Sir, 30.7.26.

  We suppose your cheeky letter is because you do not know better and want to insult us because your painters do not know how to read instructions when they are printed in clear print on the tins for everyone to see and go by. The paint we sent you was in perfect condition as supplied to others, and if you have made a mess of things by not following instructions, well, that is your affair and not ours, which kindly note as this is the last we have to say to you or anyone else on this matter and oblige

  Yours, etc.,

  (This ends correspondence covered to Spinlove by Brash’s letter of 18.9.26.)

  SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY

  Dear Sir, 29.9.26.

  I enclose copy of correspondence on the subject of failure of Riddoppo, which I have to-day received from Sir Leslie Brash who considers it to be demonstrated that the defects are due to the painting not having been properly done, and instructs me formally to call upon you to clean off and repaint forthwith.

  Will you return enclosure by Friday morning at latest, and answer I am to give Sir Leslie, as I am meeting him to discuss the matter on Saturday.

  Yours faithfully,

  Spinlove has no business to send what are, in fact, Brash’s private papers to Grigblay. By doing so he takes Grigblay behind the scenes and puts him in possession of his client’s “case”—as the lawyers call it.

  The detachment Spinlove again displays in his letter can now be expected. The time has gone by when any architect could only hope to adjudicate.

  SPINLOVE TO BRASH

  Dear Sir Leslie Brash, 21.9.26.

  I am in receipt of your letter and enclosures and have written to Grigblay. He will, I fear, without doubt refuse to make good the paint-work, and for the reasons he before gave—namely, that he only painted with Riddoppo when you undertook to accept responsibility for the results. I inspected the painting on several occasions while the work was in progress and could find no fault with the way it was being done; in fact, Grigblay put his foreman d
ecorator in charge so that it should have special attention.

  I will set aside Sunday morning to go into the matter with as you ask; but as Grigblay will certainly refuse to go on his decision to have nothing more to do with the painting at Honeywood, and I have no experience of Riddoppo—the composition of which is, as you know, a trade secret—I am afraid I shall not be of much help to you.

  Yours sincerely,

  We here see Spinlove again writing a letter that is not only unnecessary but the very soul of tactlessness. The mention of his home by Brash‘s solicitors as possibly liable, jointly with Grigblay, has made him eager to exculpate himself and consolidate Grigblay’s position.

  GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE

  Dear Sir, 21.9.26.

  Correspondence re Riddoppo returned herewith. We have nothing to add to what we have already said and shall be glad if your client will note same.

  Yours faithfully,

  And so Sir Leslie Brash is left hanging in the air, which is just what we have been expecting, and no more than he deserves for overriding the advice of his architect and the objections, of the builder. If Spinlove had specified Riddoppo and Grigblay had used it without protest, Grigblay—and possibly Spinlove—would have been responsible to Brash; and as Brash holds a substantial sum as security for Grigblay’s performance of his covenant to make good defects, he could, if Grigblay failed to restore the work, employ someone else to do so and deduct the cost from moneys to become due to Grigblay, so that his position would have been secure. A claim for damages, in that case, might still lie against the paint company for supplying defective paint; but this would be Grigblay’s affair entirely and no concern of Brash’s.

  BRASH TO SPINLOVE

  Dear Mr. Spinlove, 23.9.26.

  With a view to obviating the painful necessity of giving unpleasantly frank indications of my feelings when I receive you, I write to intimate that when I give instructions to my professional adviser I anticipate they will be performed without unnecessary refractory comment.

  The whole of this infernal muddle anent Riddoppo is sufficiently exasperating without the additional vexation of disparaging opinions which—may I be allowed to asseverate?—I have not invited, and do not desire.

  For perfectly logical reasons I require Mr. Grigblay’s final answer to my demands, which I apprehend I shall in due course receive; but I do not desire to be informed what in your opinion that answer is eventually likely to be; I do not ask to be told that Mr. Grigblay has previously obstinately refused restitution; I do not ask to be reminded that the fellow obstreperously desires to put the blame on me; I do not require to be instructed that the composition of Riddoppo is of a secret nature, and I do not ask you to reiterate over again that you know nothing of the paint, and for the very obvious and comprehensive reason that I am already redundantly informed upon the whole of those matters.

  The only intimation that your communication conveys with which I was not previously conversant is that you espouse the contentious representations of Grigblay in opposition to your employer’s interests; and that though you profess to have no acquaintance with the ingredients of which Riddoppo is composed, you asseverate complete confidence in your ability, to the appropriate method of applying it. This—you must permit me to intimate—causes me considerable astonishment.

  Yours sincerely,

  We can imagine Spinlove aghast at this reception of his letter, and asking himself, “What on earth have I done now?” but although Brash’s expression of irritation may not be excusable, his annoyance certainly is so. We have before observed an engaging frankness in old Brash of which this letter seems only another example. Spinlove’s smug letter has exasperated him, and he acts on an impulse to let Spinlove know what he feels about it so that there need be no sour reserves in his greeting of his guest. It may be, of course, that his native pepper got the upper hand and that he let fly as we have often seen him do before; but, even so, there is a simplicity about the old boy which is disarming.

  SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY

  Dear Sir, 27.9.26.

  I saw Sir Leslie Brash on Saturday and gave him your answer to his demand that you should repaint. I understand he is going to review the whole question.

  Yours faithfully,

  THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT

  GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE

  Dear Sir, 29.9.26.

  We have now further considered the items of the Statement of Account which remained in dispute after your interview with Mr. Grigblay, and as we wish the account to be now settled we offer to reduce certain of our charges, but only supposing you meet us by allowing the others to stand; failing which we must withdraw our offer and hold to our full claim, as we consider our charges fair and we have already met your views in a reasonable way, and think we are entitled to a little consideration, as all give and no take is not the treatment we are accustomed to receive from architects, and one way and another this job has not been much profit to us and if we see ourselves clear when all is done it is about as much as we can expect.

  MAKING GOOD DRY ROT

  We must refuse to withdraw this item. If we did we should be agreeing it was a defect under the contract, which we have all along disputed and cannot take responsibility for.

  If Grigblay met the cost of this work he would involve himself in liability for all further dry rot due to the same cause. It should be remembered, also, that the Courts have decided that a builder’s liability for defects is not limited by the date named in the contract as terminating his liability when it can be shown that the defect existed, or was latent, before the expiration of the time fixed by that date. It is therefore of special importance to Grigblay that the architect should, by passing the item as an extra, acknowledge that the cause of the dry rot is not a defect for which the builder is responsible. It is, of course, equally important for Spinlove that he should not exonerate Grigblay by allowing the item to rank as an extra: but Spinlove, who is apparently unconscious of the dreadful disaster the dry rot may portend, is probably also unconscious of the consequences of agreeing that AVA shall pay for restoring the first manifestation of it. The cost of restoring wing is likely to be only ten or fifteen pounds, but if it were only as many shillings Grigblay, who understands well how he stands, would be just as obstinate in claiming payment. The case, in fact, is a good instance of the considerations of policy with which architects, must temper discretion-and sometimes even moral justice—in settling up building accounts. The bearing of each detail upon the interpretation of the contract as a whole is always in the mind of the experienced man.

  RAKING JOINTS AND SPECIAL POINTING AFTER FROST

  We are willing to knock off £17, making the charge £32 6s. 3d., which is, as near as we can measure, 4 1/2 d. a foot for special.

  SPECIAL POINTING IN LIEU OF PLAIN STRUCK JOINT

  This claim we cannot withdraw. We were willing to finish flat point where frost pulled out joint, and to finish new to match in place of striking off as specified; but you ordered a special pointing, and we are entitled to extra cost of special over ordinary flat, as already pointed out.

  Apparently Spinlove specified that the faces should be finished pressing the mortar out of the joints and striking off surplus with the edge of the trowel as the bricks were laid. A sharp frost spoilt some of this work while it was new, and the joints had to be raked and pointed which made it necessary for the whole of Me brick faces, afterwards built, to be pointed to match. Spinlove, it seems, required a method of pointing which Grigblay claims was more costly than what properly could be required of him under the contract. The justice of this claim seems decidedly doubtful, but it is necessary to know the whole of the facts before forming an opinion. The sum involved, as shown in the Interim Statement (see page 69), is £134 3s. 0d.

  ALTERATION TO GROUND-FLOOR WINDOW HEADS

  We regret we cannot accept your view of this matter. Your half-inch joinery detail figured height from ground floor, but this varied from datum level as the floor had been lower
ed 1 1/2 in. by your orders, and we cannot accept responsibility for same.

  As recorded in “The Honeywood File,” Spinlove forgot that the floor had been lowered, and figured the dimensions wrongly; but he always contended that it was Grigblay’s duty to see that the frames were made to fit the building. Grigblay’s refusal is so worded as to support his repudiation of dry rot: he makes clear that he accepts no responsibility for the lowering of the floor.

  RENEWING TWO CATCH PITS

  We are willing to cut this out.

  We have given the whole of these matters close attention and this is the last we have to say and hope you will now accept our offer, and not oblige us to withdraw it, since we understand Mr. Tinge has been waiting for your decision on outstanding points for a long time and has had the whole of account ready several weeks, so that this will now settle everything.

  Yours faithfully,

  SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY

  Dear Sirs, 4.10.26.

  I have considered your offer and decided to accept it and settle the account on your terms. I saw Mr. Tinge to-day and he says he can have the statement of account ready this week.

  Yours faithfully,

  Spinlove seems to have contested every inch of the ground in this long battle of the extras in a way that does justice to his conscientiousness and native tenacity. At the same time he appears to have been a little hard on Grigblay who, like every builder that takes a craftsman’s pride in his work, has given a good deal more than his contract demands of him. However, the figure arrived at is likely to be a fair one, for Grigblay is well able to take care of himself, and Bloggs knows how to take care of him too—in fact, appearances are that no fly of any kind has ever settled on Bloggs.