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 >