I must decline an intervw wth Mr Pretsch, on the subjt of his invn
With respect to yrself I am sorry to say that I am so much engaged
for the near during this week & next, that I could not convently be remain at home to receive you I think that any communicn wch y. may wish to make had better be made by letter
In ansr to your questn I do not wish at prest to give a licse to any person to use the whole of my patt. You spoke of formg a compy of limited liability AlthoĦ I must decline to take a share in it, I wd be willg to give licse to the Compy to use so much of my patt as is
requisite required to carry out Mr Pretsch's electrotype process. This wd free you fm all risk of litigatn.
With respect to the terms I have
consulted bn advised by a legal friend who has considbl legal knowledge not to accept any share in the net profits of any Compy as that might be held in law to constitute a partnership altho' not so intended: A share in the gross receipts is a safe arrangt & freqly made I would give you the necessy licse to use that portn of my patt wch I have specified, in considern of 3 pr cent upon the gross receipts of the Compy It wd be necessy
But Whether or not we make this arrgt I shall have gt pleasure in showing you
the further fm time to time the further progress & results of my inventn Some engrgs that have bn procd since I saw you are I think worth your seeing, & I will forward them to copies of them to you shortly.
March 7, 1861
I must decline an interview with Mr Pretsch, <1> on the subject of his invention.
With respect to yourself I am sorry to say that I am so much engaged
for the near during this week & next, that I could not conveniently be remain at home to receive you I think therefore that any communication which you may wish to make had better be made by letter
In answer to your question I do not wish at present to give a license to any person to use the whole of my patent. You spoke of forming a company <2> of limited liability Although I must decline to take a share in it, I would be willing to give license to the Company to use so much of my patent as is
requisite required to carry out Mr Pretsch's electrotype process. <3> This would free you from all risk of litigation.
With respect to the terms I have
consulted been advised by a legal friend who has considerable legal knowledge not to accept any share in the net profits of any Company as that might be held in law to constitute a partnership although not so intended: A share in the gross receipts is a safe arrangement & frequently made I would give you the necessary license to use that portion of my patent which I have specified, in consideration of 3 per cent upon the gross receipts of the Company It would be necessary
But Whether or not we make this arrangement I shall have great pleasure in showing you
the further from time to time the further progress and results of my invention Some engravings that have been produced since I saw you are I think worth your seeing, & I will forward them to copies of them to you shortly.
1. Paul Pretsch (1808-1873), Austrian photographer & inventor; founder of the Photogalvanographic Company. His invention was a process of photographic engraving, for which he had taken out two patents: Producing Copper and Other Plates for Printing, No. 2373, 9 November 1854, and Application of Certain Designs Obtained on Metallic Surfaces by Photographic and Other Agencies, No. 1824, August 1855. Talbot claimed that the first part of Pretsch's process infringed his first patent [WHFT, Improvements in Photographic Engraving, No. 565, November 1852]. For the proposed meeting with Pretsch, see Doc. No: 08327. The Patent Photo-Galvanographic Company (commonly, The Photogalvanographic Company), based on the work of Pretsch, was located in Holloway Road, Islington, London, from 1856-1857. Pretsch took over as manager and Roger Fenton (1819-1869), photographer & lawyer, was a partner and their chief photographer. Starting in late 1856, they published a serial portfolio, Photographic Art Treasures, or Nature and Art Illustrated by Art and Nature, illustratated with photogalvanographs derived from several photographer's works. Photogalvanography was uncomfortably closely based on elements of WHFT's patented 1852 Photographic Engraving but, unlike Talbot, the plates were heavily retouched by hand. Compounding the legal objections of Talbot, their former manager, Duncan Campbell Dallas, set up a competing company to produce the Dallastype. The company collapsed and near the end of 1860 Pretsch, out of money, allowed his patent to lapse. A public appeal was launched in 1861 to assist him but he returned to Vienna in 1863 in ill health, going back to the Imperial Printing Establishment, but finally succumbing to cholera.
2. There was a proposal to set up a photographic-engraving company with Pretsch and others, and Talbot had been invited to join them.
3. The second part of Pretsch's photographic-engraving process involved electrotyping.