|
Correspondence from Louis Wilkinson to Karl Germer
c/o Mrs. de Selincourt, Grove Heath, Ripley, Surrey. England.
8th February, 1950.
Dear Mr. Germer,
Thank you for your letter of 24th January with the enclosed Account which I return after having made certain additions. You will see that, after the addition of the sum that, according to my reckoning, I have in hand, there stand totals of £836.3.10 in the asset column and £838.18.5 in the Disbursement column, after the addition of the £25.9.10 "cash in hand." This discrepancy is, I think accounted for by the sixth item under Disbursements—i.e. that of the balance due to me of £2.14.7—having already been included under payments that I had made from my personal account. The case of the repayment to Lady Harris [Frieda Harris] of £20.9.0 is on a similar footing as she had advanced this sum by paying it to Watson [Herbert Watson] and the nurse; but in her case these items were not and rightly were not entered under disbursements in addition to the repayment made to her. I suggest, therefore that the sum of £2.14.7 should be deducted from Disbursements, and then the two columns will exactly tally. Otherwise, they would tally only by the entry of the sum of £25.15.3 as "Cash in hand", whereas, unless I have made some mistake, I have in hand £28.9.10. The fact that the striking out of the item of £2.14.7 makes the columns tally exactly and allies also with my reckoning of the sum in hand leads me to feel that this is probably the correct procedure, but I am leaving it to you to fill in that item in the enclosed Account. You will find that the additional disbursements written in ink have all been submitted to you—but at such varying intervals that I can well understand the difficulty in keeping track of them.
Yes, I sympathize fully with what you say about the paramount importance of payments for A.A.'s [Aleister Ataturk] education. And I am sure that Lady Harris also feels that this is a matter of the first importance. As to her claim as executrix I expect she has now forgotten about it. She mentioned the possibility when I told her that we might receive the larger sum in Post-War Credit, but she has not referred to it since and I doubt if she will do so again. In any case she would certainly accept the reason against such payment—that funds are short. The balance can well be left standing—I mean the "cash in hand"—until it is clearer as regards the financial situation. One reason why I mentioned the possibility of my receiving a ten guinea payment as executor was that I found an old bill that I had paid for typing some of the Abridged Commentary—£8.7.4.—I was not, I know reimbursed for this by A.C., but I don't want to claim for it after this long interval. It was only that finding this bill just at the time when the extra War Credit was in prospect made me feel that I might reasonably claim something as executor—that, in a way, this would cover that previous expense too. A . . .
[the remainder of the letter missing]
|