link to Talbot Project home page link to De Montfort University home page link to Glasgow University home page
Project Director: Professor Larry J Schaaf
 

Back to the letter search >

Result number 20 of 55:   < Back     Back to results list   Next >  

Document number: 7534
Date: 03 Feb 1858
Recipient: TALBOT William Henry Fox
Author: COTTRELL George Edward
Collection: British Library, London, Manuscripts - Fox Talbot Collection
Collection number: envelope 20800
Collection number historic: LA58-11
Last updated: 14th March 2012

7 Eaton Place South
3rd Feb: 1858

Dear Sir

In your letter of the 23rd Jan: you say that your present Idea of furnaces need not preclude the consideration of any other mode of working the land by which I understand that you would be willing to consider another proposition

If Messrs Sarl <1> make you no proposition which you might be willing to accept I am myself willing to work your Iron stone on my own account provided we can come to terms satisfactory to Each I have considered the question and am willing, provided the matter can be concluded at once, to take a lease of your Iron fields for a term of 21 years at a royalty of one shilling per Ton and a fair agricultural rent for so much of the surface of the land as shall be required for the purpose of working the ore The [illegible deletion] minimum royalty rent to be 1000 per ann: after the first 6 months the royalty for rent for the first 6 months to be at the rate of 1s/ per Ton for all ore sold The first 6 months must be lost in preparation it would not therefore be fair to fix a rent of 500 for those months but at the same time it might equal that sum I feel quite sure that the working the ore as I propose will not injure the rest of your Estate at all. There probably would never be more than six or seven acres disturbed at any one time The land in lease must include all that may be necessary for obtaining free access to the canal

If, as you propose, you would lay down a loop line to the Great Western I would engage to pay so much per Ton for the use of it, with a minimum rent which would should amount to Interest at 5 per Cent: on sum laid out by you in constructing the line of Course you would have the benefit of any excess which the pricing per Ton would give

In naming 1000 a year as the minimum royalty sent I by no means intend to imply that I would consider that likely to be the maximum on the contrary my opinion is that your land must be worked on a large scale to answer and the royalty would probably be double that amount still I may have miscalculated and would not fetter myself with a larger engagement It is quite clear that whoever works it will try to make the royalty rent as high as possible in amount for his own sake

If furnaces are ever put up that must be a matter for future arrangement no company, or person, would ever go to the expense of erecting furnaces upon a lease for a less term than 99 years and if this should answer [2 illegible words], as landlord. [Map?] the full advantage of them

With respect to the carting I cannot think that can ever [illegible] It does vary much in small quantities but when you come to 1000 Tons or so per week neither horses nor roads can stand it

I shall perhaps be able to arrange to take some Tons of your ore but 10 will be of no service to us it is either too much or too little Too much to be got rid of in [illegible] a barge & too little to fill one

I propose running down to Seend the End of the Week unless this Snow lasts in which case I need postpone my visit

I am, dear Sir yours faithfully
George Cottrell

H. F Talbot Esqre

[envelope:]
H. F. Talbot Esqre.
4 Atholl Crescent
Edinburgh


Notes:

1. Sarl & Company, London

Result number 20 of 55:   < Back     Back to results list   Next >