Paris
Jany 16 1847
Dear Sir
I have this moment received your letter <1> of Jany 14.
In the first place let me apologize for the hasty note I wrote you before leaving London. I had resolved to do so before receiving your letter, for I felt that it was due both to myself and to you. When I received your note at London I was suffering from bodily illness, which is apt to make the mind irritable. I was vexed exceedingly, to find, after I thought the affair all arranged, that a new issue (as it appeared to me) should have been raised. Under the influence of these feelings, I hastily wrote what I would afterwards have been well satisfied to recall. I have no hesitation in making these apologetic remarks, because I feel that it is no more than is due from one gentleman to another; and when one through over-hasty spirit has committed an error, the most dignified course is at once frankly to acknowledge it.
The clause to which I objected I certainly misunderstood. I had always understood that whether one Patent or two were necessary, <2> the expense was to be borne by yourself; and that after everything had been thus made secure, our firm <3> would become accountable for the immediatement [sic] payment for the purchase money as agreed upon. I do not know what are the specifications of the individual patents but it appears to me that the same degree of protection must be necessary in America as in England; and if such protection cannot be comprised in one, it will undoubtedly be necessary to apply for two patents. As Mr Carpmael <4> however has no doubt of the practicability of combining the patents, a lengthened discussion on this point seems to me at present unnecessary. Should any additional expense arise it will be comparatively a small item, and will be easily arranged to the satisfaction of all parties.
I cannot find anything in the American Patent Law to warrant the idea that the protection will continue for fourteen years. The provisions seem to be very explicitly to the contrary.
I would suggest that you should be very particular in making out the specifications for the American Patent, so as to claim nothing against which any one could quibble. Your extended knowledge in this branch of science will of course enable you to state explicitly the precise extent of your claim to originality. At the same time it is necessary to cover as much as possible. It is very essential to look into this matter closely, as well for your interest, as our own.
The terms of our agreement then are, I believe, as follows. (I copy from your memorandum, merely making one or two points more explicit)
Mr Anthony (in the name of the firm of Messrs Anthony Clark & Co of New York) requests Mr Talbot to take out an American Patent for his photographic invention called the Talbotype.
If the American Government grant the patent, Messrs A. C & Co agree to take on themselves the whole risk of the validity of the patent after it shall been so purchased from Mr Talbot.
If the application is refused by the American Government, Messrs A. C & Co agree to indemnify Mr Talbot for the portion of the patent fee retained by said Government in case of such refusal.
Mr Talbot having two English photographic patents both shall be comprised in one American patent if it can be done; otherwise the first shall be applied for at present, and the second, as soon as the first shall have been granted.
At the request of Mr Anthony, Mr Talbot requested his patent agent to make immediate application for an American Patent as aforesaid.
Thus far, my dear sir, I believe we understand each other precisely, and whatever misunderstandings may be taken place will, I trust, be at once buried in oblivion
I called on M. Chevalier, <5> and spoke to him about the magnifying camera. He has it still under consideration. I endeavored to stimulate him a little by telling him that if it succeeded I should undoubtedly need one and perhaps several.
I have not been able to obtain one of Voigtlander’s <6> quick objectives either in London or Paris, but have ordered one to be sent immediately from Vienna to me at Reading <7>
I expect to be at Reading on the 1st of Feby
I remain, dear sir With sincere respect Your Obt Servt
E. Anthony
H. Fox Talbot Esq
P. S. I shall probably leave Paris on the 27 inst If I can, in the mean time, accomplish anything for you I shall be most happy to do soH. Fox Talbot Esq
Lacock Abbey
Chippenham
England
Notes:
1. Not located.
2. Patent of the talbotype process in the United States. [See Doc. No: 05782].
3. Anthony, Clark & Co, daguerreotypists, at 247 Broadway, New York. Consisting of Anthony, and Isaac R. Clark.
4. William Carpmael (1804–1867), patent agent & engineer, London.
5. Charles Chevalier (1804–1859), optician, Paris.
6. Company producing lenses, started in 1756 by Johann Cristoph Voigtländer in Wenen.
7. Nicolaas Henneman (1813–1898), born in Holland and trained in Paris, was WHFT’s valet who emerged as his assistant in photography. Henneman set up his Calotype works at 8 Russell Terrace, Reading. Commencing operations at the start of 1844, it functioned both as a photographic studio and as a photographic printing works and continued through late 1846, at which time Henneman transferred his operations to London. Although Talbot supported Henneman through custom, such as printing the plates for The Pencil of Nature, and loans, it was always Henneman's operation. His business cards made no mention of "The Reading Establishment," the designation that it is popularly given today; the only contemporary use of that title seemed to be by Benjamin Cowderoy - see Doc. No: 05690.