3. Extension of the contract to 10 years.
4. Improvements to the process introduced by BASF were not to affect his
royalties
8
—which were increased—if the scientific basis was originally
introduced by ‘himself’. And finally,
5. To have some influence on the future direction of the technology.
These improved conditions also favoured Robert because of his private
contract with Haber, but the BASF were not best pleased by Haber’s new
demands. Reluctantly, they agreed to all of them but noted their corporate
displeasure in the new contract, ‘resenting’ Haber’s ‘suspicions’ about the
original royalty arrangement and concluding that ‘in future we would want to
set certain limits to Herr Haber’s somewhat unrestrained ideas’.
9 To Haber,
the ‘industrialisation’ of the Haber-Le Rossignol process was the BASF’s
problem. To Robert, the contractual dealings with the BASF were Haber’s
problem and so here Robert was passive. Whatever improvement(s) Haber
was able to extract from the company would accrue to him through contractual ‘osmosis’, so he was free to concentrate on a new chapter in his life in
Berlin safe in the knowledge that if the monies did come ‘rolling in’, he could
claim his due entitlement. From 1909 onward, Robert pursued a largely
uneventful professional career at the ‘Auer’. However, he retained his contacts
with many Karlsruhe colleagues and with Haber in particular who, ‘back at
the ranch’ in Karlsruhe, was now dealing with a whole range of concerns.
Matters of patents, of technical clarification(s) for Bosch and Mittasch and
the irritation of industrial secrecy preventing him from publishing their work
and achieving the academic kudos he felt should accrue. The next few years
were tumultuous for all concerned. The BASF was to transform the basic
Haber-Le Rossignol process into an industrial giant, Robert’s personal life was
to run the full gamut from deep sadness to unbounded joy and Koppel was to
finally ‘capture’ Haber, bringing him to Berlin where he and Robert were
re-united.
Notes
1. According to Coates, p. 1671, ‘Beauty in nature made no deep impression on
him’. J.E. Coates, ‘The Haber Memorial Lecture’, J. Chem. Soc., 1642–1672,
(1939).
2. One Hundred Years of the Fritz Haber Institute. B. Friedrich, D. Hoffmann and
J. James. This paper can be found at; http://www.fhi-berlin.mpg.de/mp/
friedrich/PDFs/ACh-100-Article.pdf.
3. Candle power (cp) is an obsolete unit which measured luminous intensity.
Today we think of a bulb’s light intensity in terms of Watts, but there is no
9 The Auergesellschaft, Berlin
197
4. Improvements to the process introduced by BASF were not to affect his
royalties
8
—which were increased—if the scientific basis was originally
introduced by ‘himself’. And finally,
5. To have some influence on the future direction of the technology.
These improved conditions also favoured Robert because of his private
contract with Haber, but the BASF were not best pleased by Haber’s new
demands. Reluctantly, they agreed to all of them but noted their corporate
displeasure in the new contract, ‘resenting’ Haber’s ‘suspicions’ about the
original royalty arrangement and concluding that ‘in future we would want to
set certain limits to Herr Haber’s somewhat unrestrained ideas’.
9 To Haber,
the ‘industrialisation’ of the Haber-Le Rossignol process was the BASF’s
problem. To Robert, the contractual dealings with the BASF were Haber’s
problem and so here Robert was passive. Whatever improvement(s) Haber
was able to extract from the company would accrue to him through contractual ‘osmosis’, so he was free to concentrate on a new chapter in his life in
Berlin safe in the knowledge that if the monies did come ‘rolling in’, he could
claim his due entitlement. From 1909 onward, Robert pursued a largely
uneventful professional career at the ‘Auer’. However, he retained his contacts
with many Karlsruhe colleagues and with Haber in particular who, ‘back at
the ranch’ in Karlsruhe, was now dealing with a whole range of concerns.
Matters of patents, of technical clarification(s) for Bosch and Mittasch and
the irritation of industrial secrecy preventing him from publishing their work
and achieving the academic kudos he felt should accrue. The next few years
were tumultuous for all concerned. The BASF was to transform the basic
Haber-Le Rossignol process into an industrial giant, Robert’s personal life was
to run the full gamut from deep sadness to unbounded joy and Koppel was to
finally ‘capture’ Haber, bringing him to Berlin where he and Robert were
re-united.
Notes
1. According to Coates, p. 1671, ‘Beauty in nature made no deep impression on
him’. J.E. Coates, ‘The Haber Memorial Lecture’, J. Chem. Soc., 1642–1672,
(1939).
2. One Hundred Years of the Fritz Haber Institute. B. Friedrich, D. Hoffmann and
J. James. This paper can be found at; http://www.fhi-berlin.mpg.de/mp/
friedrich/PDFs/ACh-100-Article.pdf.
3. Candle power (cp) is an obsolete unit which measured luminous intensity.
Today we think of a bulb’s light intensity in terms of Watts, but there is no
9 The Auergesellschaft, Berlin
197