future discoveries or possibly license any future technology to the Margulies
brothers. The idea was summarily dismissed by BASF—Engler reminding
Haber that German inventions were not shared with ‘foreign’ companies.
Haber never raised the point again—although the brothers did when a few
years later they tried to sue him for breach of contract. Secondly, the fact that
Haber insisted on the additional contract with BASF was proof enough of his
regard for Robert’s work, but on 01 May 1908, Haber made a remarkable
private contract with Le Rossignol regarding royalties—an arrangement
which Chirnside
6 described later as ‘generous’ and which finally ‘consummated’ the men’s professional relationship. Only when Margit Szöllözi-Janze
published her magnificent biography of Haber
3 were we made aware of this
contract, which promised Le Rossignol a 40% share of Haber’s BASF royalties
18 from patentable, technically useful inventions if he helped him
achieve a technically feasible ammonia synthesis.
19 Other indicators aside,
there could be no greater recognition of Robert Le Rossignol’s importance to
Haber, for the potential profit from the fixation of nitrogen in Germany and
probably world-wide by license was of ‘stellar’ proportions. The two men also
agreed to share a proportion of their royalties with the Technical Hochschule
to provide a foundation endowment for the benefit of the progression of
physical chemistry at the Institute.
20
7.3 Robert’s Contract. The Corn Fields
or the Killing Fields?
As a result of his negotiations, Haber set up two bank accounts
21 to deal with
monies received into, and payments to be made from, the two main contracts.
The first of these dealt with the arc process and the second with ammonia. It
was transfers from this second fund that payments to Robert Le Rossignol
were eventually made some years later. Robert’s engagement with Haber’s
private contract established him not just as an employee but as a full partner
in any subsequent invention, a move easily rationalised from the perspective
of an ‘impecunious’
6 young student. It was a contract entered into in good
faith and a just recognition of his contribution over the previous two years.
Robert probably realised that a solution to the difficult problem of nitrogen
fixation was within his grasp and if patented its development by BASF would
eventually provide him with significant reward. The consequences of providing BASF with a possible solution to Germany’s nitrogen problem should
also have crossed his mind. Indeed, two years later at a meeting of the
150
D. Sheppard
brothers. The idea was summarily dismissed by BASF—Engler reminding
Haber that German inventions were not shared with ‘foreign’ companies.
Haber never raised the point again—although the brothers did when a few
years later they tried to sue him for breach of contract. Secondly, the fact that
Haber insisted on the additional contract with BASF was proof enough of his
regard for Robert’s work, but on 01 May 1908, Haber made a remarkable
private contract with Le Rossignol regarding royalties—an arrangement
which Chirnside
6 described later as ‘generous’ and which finally ‘consummated’ the men’s professional relationship. Only when Margit Szöllözi-Janze
published her magnificent biography of Haber
3 were we made aware of this
contract, which promised Le Rossignol a 40% share of Haber’s BASF royalties
18 from patentable, technically useful inventions if he helped him
achieve a technically feasible ammonia synthesis.
19 Other indicators aside,
there could be no greater recognition of Robert Le Rossignol’s importance to
Haber, for the potential profit from the fixation of nitrogen in Germany and
probably world-wide by license was of ‘stellar’ proportions. The two men also
agreed to share a proportion of their royalties with the Technical Hochschule
to provide a foundation endowment for the benefit of the progression of
physical chemistry at the Institute.
20
7.3 Robert’s Contract. The Corn Fields
or the Killing Fields?
As a result of his negotiations, Haber set up two bank accounts
21 to deal with
monies received into, and payments to be made from, the two main contracts.
The first of these dealt with the arc process and the second with ammonia. It
was transfers from this second fund that payments to Robert Le Rossignol
were eventually made some years later. Robert’s engagement with Haber’s
private contract established him not just as an employee but as a full partner
in any subsequent invention, a move easily rationalised from the perspective
of an ‘impecunious’
6 young student. It was a contract entered into in good
faith and a just recognition of his contribution over the previous two years.
Robert probably realised that a solution to the difficult problem of nitrogen
fixation was within his grasp and if patented its development by BASF would
eventually provide him with significant reward. The consequences of providing BASF with a possible solution to Germany’s nitrogen problem should
also have crossed his mind. Indeed, two years later at a meeting of the
150
D. Sheppard