Lincoln’s Inn <1>
28 Decr 1854
My dear Sir,
I hope & trust that You have shaken off yr cold & cough & that you will be speedily able to take the field again. <2>
Enclosed, I send You copy of our junior Counsels opinion upon the evidence requisite for the Privy Council <3> – the greater part of what is pointed out we command now – I have marked in red ink such as are new and which require Your especial attention – in par. 3 the correspondence with the Earl of Rosse <4> will be wanted – This means the Earl’s origl letter if it cannot be found – it will be necessary [to] prove that it has been searched for, before a copy printed or otrwise can be let in – (The Times with it I have)
Par. No 6 – as the first part can be spoken to by Dr Miller & ors (we had better have Mr Bracock again if possible) the further experiments especially those to falsify Dr Normandy’s <5> Mr Heisch’s and Mr Thornthwaites experiments will require Your own directing hand – and [illegible] wher Sir Dd Brewster <6> may not also befriend us as well as Mr Wheatstone <7> and other eminent philosophers & chemists.
Then on Par 7 – this will necessar<[ily] entail upon You some [illegible], from which I would fain relieve You, but this is the vital point of the whole – every part of this requisition should be complied with – ie if books of account there are – Bankers books will perhaps suffice if all the payments were made thro them that we seek to prove. Henneman must prove those made to him as also the accot of the receipts & payment of his Establishmt during the time You continued to defray it – he must also shew the rects & expenditure of the establt at Reading. <8>
The only estimate I can at present form of the disbursements necessary for me to make for Counsels fees and the attendance of witnesses at the hearing of the Petition by the Privy Council is a minimum sum of £300.
The application for a new Trial agt Laroche <9> which if done at all must take place within the 1st four days of the term is of a double character. The 1st step is to move for what is called a Rule Nisi <10> to shew cause, and is made ex parte <11> – if the Judges grant the application & which is usually done when any serious doubt is entertained of the miscarriage of the 1st trial and which without flattering ourselves we may safely presume will be done, then at a proper interval the Deft is compelled to argue the case upon its merits before the bench of Judges & if the Court thinks fit the Rule for a new trial is made absolute. –
The 1st Stage of the application is attended with comparatively small expence – Sir F Thesiger <12> would alone have a Brief in the ordinary course but here it may be indispensable to have Mr Grove <13> at his elbow – 10 Gs and 5 Gs <14> about the proper fees – ie if long affidavits be dispensed with which I anticipate will be the case –
If we arrive at the 2d Stage the fees will be far more considerable – but it is quite impossible for me at present to anticipate what will be necessary and it[?] must be observed both here and in the former case consultations will be requisite to do justice to the case and I think upon the whole You had better consider a sum of £200 will cover the total charge of this branch of the case –
5.
As there is no time to be lost in getting ready for the hearing – (the Briefs should be delivered about by the 6th Jany) I must rely upon Your furnishing me in good time with the accounts so that they may be modelled or remodelled in case of need.
The Vol of transactions <15> is returned to day to the Roy Socy <16> the other Vol. had been before returned to the Royl Institution <17> –
Mr Bracock writes to say he will not accept any payment for his attendance as a witness but says – he should like to have a veritable Talbotype as a memento – Perhaps You will enable me to arrange this
I believe I have now answered all Yr questions so far as I can at present –
There is still anor Court viz the Q. B. <18> presided over by Lord Campbell <19> – he would be better than Pollock: however there is no [illegible] for a new action at present.
Ever Your’s truly
J. H Bolton
Notes:
1. One of the four Inns of Court, the ‘colleges’ of barristers at the English Bar. Bolton had his chambers (lawyer’s offices and also living-quarters) there.
2. Following the patents trial, Talbot v. Laroche, which had taken place 18–20 December.
3. The British sovereign’s private body of advisors, which had been responsible for the regulation of patents until the Patents office was set up under the Patent Law Amendment Act 1852, and which still dealt with many aspects of patents. As WHFT’s photographic patents were due to expire in 1855, Bolton was preparing to apply for their prolongation. See also Doc. No: 07102.
4. William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse (1800–1867), astronomer & MP. The correspondence referred to related to WHFT’s throwing open of his Calotype patent to the nation as far as amateur photography was concerned, in 1852. Final versions of the letters [ Doc. No: 06653 and Doc. No: 06668] were published in The Times (London), 13 August 1852.
5. Alphonse René le Mire de Normandy (1809–1864).
6. Sir David Brewster (1781–1868), Scottish scientist & journalist.
7. Sir Charles Wheatstone (1802–1875), scientist.
8. 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. Henneman's second venture, the Sun Picture Rooms at 122 Regent Street, London, were opened in the Spring of 1847. Talbot continued to finance the Sun Picture Rooms until June 1848.
9. William Henry Silvester, whose professional name as a portrait photographer was Martin Laroche. WHFT sought to show that his use of the Collodion process infringed his patent rights, which though thrown open in respect of amateur photography, were still in force against professional portrait photographers. WHFT was deeply unhappy about the lack of scientific knowledge in the leading lawyers, which meant that the scientific evidence was not properly evaluated, and he was therefore considering going to court again.
10. A ruling that would show cause why the original judgement should be considered provisional.
11. on behalf of one party to a dispute
12. Sir Frederick Thesiger (1794–1878), later 1st Baron Chelmsford, Lord Chancellor [1858]. He was Leading Counsel for WHFT in the patents lawsuit, Talbot v. Laroche, of 18 to 20 December 1854, but his lack of scientific expertise was a disadvantage to WHFT’s case.
13. Sir William Robert Grove (1811–1896), scientist.
14. A guinea was 21 shillings [20 shillings to the Pound].
15. See Doc. No: 07051.
16. Royal Society of London.
17. Royal Institution, London.
18. The Queen’s Bench, one of the divisions of the High Court. Talbot v. Laroche had been heard in one of the other divisions, Chancery.
19. John Campbell (1779–1861), 1st Baron Campbell, lord chief justice.