[Letter to George F. Fitzgerald from Sir Oliver Lodge],
Title
[Letter to George F. Fitzgerald from Sir Oliver Lodge],
Creator
Date
Identifier
GFF 2/66; GFF 2/67
Description
Letter from Sir Oliver Lodge, Victoria University, to George F. Fitzgerald, dated 16 June 1899. Lodge discusses consulting a patent lawyer. 2pp.
Transcription:
"M d Φ
My letter was not explanatory but only a preliminary enquiry. I am glad to find that you would be disposed to contemplate giving an opinion. There ought to be no difficulty about the renumeration; it is work that should be extremely well paid. I think your idea of consulting and of utilising the advice of some independent patent lawyer is a very good one. It will be difficult for the Marconi people to suggest a lawyer other that those who have been already engaged in drawing up or in advising on their patents, and who are therefore not disinterested. The same with me. The things that you will be asked to advise will be the value of our own improvements and the anti-value of our opposition. What I believe they want to do is to buy up the whole thing and get me as a consultant. My position is that though I am willing to sell them the improvements and refrain from opposition and indeed help in scientific matters. I am indisposed to have my name on a prospectus as consultant when they issue their shares to a company. It is a delicate matter and my statement is not evidence; but I find that in the city of London they are regarded as rather a stock-jobbing gang who wish to sell their shares to the public at a high figure. This may or may not be the case, but anyway I should have no control over their financial operations, and that being so I should not wish to have my name on their prospectus so not appear to assume any responsibility for acts which I could not control. So far as their actual work has been concerned it seems to have been very good, but I mistrust the financial part, partly no doubt through ignorance. Their nominal capital is enormous 3/4 million now, and they are very sensitive to any breath of opposition. Muirhead is anxious to proceed with his large-scale experiments, and to make a syndicate among his cable-telegraph friends who indeed are anxious to come in. Also he regards the field as open for him to manufacture and supply apparatus unimpeded by their imaginary first patent claims. With regard to Muirhead he is a most honest and liberal man, (I was introduced to him long ago by Carey Foster) one of the best fellows in himself, but of course accustomed to look at matters a good deal from a business point of view. At the same time he is very careful about any reputation that I may have and is anxious to do the best possible for me. I have considerable confidence in his judgement and absolute confidence in his honour, but his deafness is a great drawback and makes interviews with him very difficult especially for strangers. We all agree I think that if we were to amalgamate, the company would be considerably strengthened, and their foreign patents, especially their American patents, would sell far better. We are opposing them actively in America and have opposed them once in England with success. These oppositions are a nuisance and I should be glad to come to terms. They approached some time ago and wanted to know terms. Muirhead said £30,000. They asked for a denomination: but he didn't have one as Muirhead rather preferred independence. Now they suggest an expert to give an opinion I have mentioned you. If in the course of this matter you have occasion to see Muirhead you may take it that he is a thoroughly good man in every sense, and his wife is a very nice woman whom my wife likes. You would enjoy as stay with them at Shortland's if it happens so, and it is pretty sure to be necessary when you go to see their works as Elmers End in Kent. This is all preliminary, but the whole case will have to be laid before you by both parties; but you probably know more of the Marconi position than ours. I may say that the negotiations are being conducted on a perfectly friendly basis and that all the opposition has been purely legal and formal- never rancorous. I think you will find that the questions ultimately put are such as you can answer in conjunction with a patent lawyer, but all this lies in the future. The only difficulty that I see is in the appraisement of absolute value. The proper appraisement it seems to me is relative value, that is, assuming the value of the position of one side to be so and so, then the position of the other side is so much; or, put otherwise, that the value of the one position is a certain practice of the value of the other. I don't see that I can well sell the so called magnetic system on any time. It is a development and improvement of the part of the plan known as Pruce's and the P.O. are trying it and willing to take it up. Both the P.O. and Lloyd's are anxious to run anything rather that Marconi's, because they fear to land their names and influence to stock jobbing operations. I have this from both the heads of both the P.O. and of Lloyd's.
Yours,
Λ"
Transcription:
"M d Φ
My letter was not explanatory but only a preliminary enquiry. I am glad to find that you would be disposed to contemplate giving an opinion. There ought to be no difficulty about the renumeration; it is work that should be extremely well paid. I think your idea of consulting and of utilising the advice of some independent patent lawyer is a very good one. It will be difficult for the Marconi people to suggest a lawyer other that those who have been already engaged in drawing up or in advising on their patents, and who are therefore not disinterested. The same with me. The things that you will be asked to advise will be the value of our own improvements and the anti-value of our opposition. What I believe they want to do is to buy up the whole thing and get me as a consultant. My position is that though I am willing to sell them the improvements and refrain from opposition and indeed help in scientific matters. I am indisposed to have my name on a prospectus as consultant when they issue their shares to a company. It is a delicate matter and my statement is not evidence; but I find that in the city of London they are regarded as rather a stock-jobbing gang who wish to sell their shares to the public at a high figure. This may or may not be the case, but anyway I should have no control over their financial operations, and that being so I should not wish to have my name on their prospectus so not appear to assume any responsibility for acts which I could not control. So far as their actual work has been concerned it seems to have been very good, but I mistrust the financial part, partly no doubt through ignorance. Their nominal capital is enormous 3/4 million now, and they are very sensitive to any breath of opposition. Muirhead is anxious to proceed with his large-scale experiments, and to make a syndicate among his cable-telegraph friends who indeed are anxious to come in. Also he regards the field as open for him to manufacture and supply apparatus unimpeded by their imaginary first patent claims. With regard to Muirhead he is a most honest and liberal man, (I was introduced to him long ago by Carey Foster) one of the best fellows in himself, but of course accustomed to look at matters a good deal from a business point of view. At the same time he is very careful about any reputation that I may have and is anxious to do the best possible for me. I have considerable confidence in his judgement and absolute confidence in his honour, but his deafness is a great drawback and makes interviews with him very difficult especially for strangers. We all agree I think that if we were to amalgamate, the company would be considerably strengthened, and their foreign patents, especially their American patents, would sell far better. We are opposing them actively in America and have opposed them once in England with success. These oppositions are a nuisance and I should be glad to come to terms. They approached some time ago and wanted to know terms. Muirhead said £30,000. They asked for a denomination: but he didn't have one as Muirhead rather preferred independence. Now they suggest an expert to give an opinion I have mentioned you. If in the course of this matter you have occasion to see Muirhead you may take it that he is a thoroughly good man in every sense, and his wife is a very nice woman whom my wife likes. You would enjoy as stay with them at Shortland's if it happens so, and it is pretty sure to be necessary when you go to see their works as Elmers End in Kent. This is all preliminary, but the whole case will have to be laid before you by both parties; but you probably know more of the Marconi position than ours. I may say that the negotiations are being conducted on a perfectly friendly basis and that all the opposition has been purely legal and formal- never rancorous. I think you will find that the questions ultimately put are such as you can answer in conjunction with a patent lawyer, but all this lies in the future. The only difficulty that I see is in the appraisement of absolute value. The proper appraisement it seems to me is relative value, that is, assuming the value of the position of one side to be so and so, then the position of the other side is so much; or, put otherwise, that the value of the one position is a certain practice of the value of the other. I don't see that I can well sell the so called magnetic system on any time. It is a development and improvement of the part of the plan known as Pruce's and the P.O. are trying it and willing to take it up. Both the P.O. and Lloyd's are anxious to run anything rather that Marconi's, because they fear to land their names and influence to stock jobbing operations. I have this from both the heads of both the P.O. and of Lloyd's.
Yours,
Λ"
Source
RDS Library & Archives GFF collection of letters
Rights
Copyright RDS Library & Archives. Publication, transmission or display is prohibited without formal written approval of the RDS Library & Archives.
Relation
RDS Science Archive
Format
Manuscript
Language
English
Type
Coverage
1870-1901
Collection
Citation
Lodge, Oliver, Sir, 1851-1940, “[Letter to George F. Fitzgerald from Sir Oliver Lodge],,” RDS, accessed November 21, 2024, https://digitalarchive.rds.ie/items/show/1326.