|
This page is part of a website based
on the life and achievements of eighteenth-century inventor Henry Cort. Please email site controller Eric
Alexander with any comments or queries. |
WHAT
HAPPENED TO CORT’S PATENTS
It is
generally accepted that all Cort's patents were impounded
by the Navy to cover part of the debt he was held to owe the Crown.
The most
compelling evidence is the statement given to a Naval
Enquiry in 1804 by Joseph White, the lawyer charged with realising the
impounded assets, that he was unable to find a purchaser.
|
There were some patents respecting
the making of iron in a particular way for the purchase of which many offers
had been made, but I never could get any person finally to agree as a
purchase. Testimony of Joseph White |
Three
patents seem to be implied. We may note
that White did not use the usual contemporary, and somewhat ambiguous, term
"letters patent".
There
couldn't have been more than three.
Could there have been fewer?
There must
be doubt whether the Navy obtained all these patents at the same time. Two records are pertinent.
First,
the inventory for the contents of Adam Jellicoe's house, which were also
impounded, included letters patent dated 17 January 1783, and assigned by Henry
Cort to Adam Jellicoe on 24 August the same year. These would cover only the earliest patent.
Second, a
reference in the letter Adam Jellicoe wrote to the Treasurer of the Navy, Henry Dundas, in July 1788, asking for more time to
return the money he had misappropriated.
|
I shall take the earliest opportunity of paying in all my
Balance, for which there appears to be no immediate demand; but in case you think
a security necessary for the responsibility of the Situation which I have the
honour to hold under you, I beg leave to offer the inclosed, amounting to a
larger sum than I can at any time hope to have in my hands unemployed. Letter of Adam Jellicoe to Henry Dundas,
10 July 1788. |
Sundry bonds and assignments of Mr. Cort’s patents were the
securities offered, which were all included in the property found under the Extent. Note added to explain “the inclosed”,
according to Report of Select Committee into
Tenth Report of Commission of Naval Enquiry, May 1805. |
Did
Dundas accept Jellicoe’s offer? Not
according to the Naval Enquiry.
It they are
right, "the inclosed" is probably the same patent found at Adam's
house the following year.
Other
patents are not mentioned in any other inventory of Cort's or Jellicoe's
properties, so one cannot be sure how, or indeed whether, the Navy impounded all
of them.
What is
not in dispute is that they valued the patents they held at a mere £100.
This
valuation, combined with the Navy's failure to claim royalties from
manufacturers for using the puddling process, is reckoned as a missed
opportunity. It has even been suggested
that the Navy was in league with the manufacturers.
But one
must remember that Richard Crawshay and others had difficulty
getting puddling to work with coke-smelted pig iron. By the time they were successful, Cort was
out of the frame and the Navy had lost interest.
henrycort.net
p4