announcing the ‘go ahead’ for Billingham would not have escaped his
attention for The Times was well read by the Le Rossignols, being the organ
by means of which the family had long recorded ‘milestone’ events.
33 And
even though during the war HMG felt Robert to be ‘a man who may have
considerable knowledge of German processes .…’, (Chap. 14) there is no
biographical evidence available to suggest he had the slightest input to
Billingham or indeed if he ever visited the place. But one ‘snippet’ suggests
that over the next five decades Robert took a close interest in the maturing of
his ‘prodigal’, for as Ralph Chirnside recalled in his 1977 obituary of Le
Rossignol ‘… he derived great satisfaction from the contribution that the
Haber-Le Rossignol process had made to the feeding problems of the world
and particularly those in the third world … only a few weeks before his death
we discussed the energy balances in the ammonia process as now carried out
at Billingham …’ and surely, if Robert still followed events at Billingham at
the age of 92, it can only reflect his lifelong interest. It is also touching that
his friend afforded—the by now elderly gentleman—the dignity of describing
the ultimate foundation of Billingham as the ‘Haber-Le Rossignol’ process, a
lead which surely, we chemists should now follow. But of the immediate
post-war events that briefly mentioned Robert’s contribution to fixation,
what happened in Sweden in late 1919 eclipsed them all.
15.4.3 Sweden, November 1919–21
Robert’s post-war ‘popular’ exposure was both momentary and shallow, but
following the announcement by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences on
13 November 1919 of the award of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 1918 to
Fritz Haber, his contribution to nitrogen ‘fixation’ was recognised at the
highest possible professional and academic levels—but not rewarded.
However, this recognition came at a price, for it was to be acknowledged by a
man whose status as a named war criminal had only just been revoked and by
way of an Academy whose decision was to fall into disrepute, for the same
committee that had considered the Chemistry award the previous year now
reversed its decision, and without dissent, awarded the prize to Haber alone
with scant regard for any of its earlier concerns. According to Robert
Friedman in Neutrality in Twentieth-Century Europe,
34 the facts behind the
Academy’s ‘volte face’ are these.
During 1919 the chemistry committee had regrouped to support Haber.
Klason and Ekstrand sent their own letters of nomination, and with the war
now over, Hammarsten, who by all accounts had nothing but ‘contempt for
15 The Post-war Years 1919–1930
335
attention for The Times was well read by the Le Rossignols, being the organ
by means of which the family had long recorded ‘milestone’ events.
33 And
even though during the war HMG felt Robert to be ‘a man who may have
considerable knowledge of German processes .…’, (Chap. 14) there is no
biographical evidence available to suggest he had the slightest input to
Billingham or indeed if he ever visited the place. But one ‘snippet’ suggests
that over the next five decades Robert took a close interest in the maturing of
his ‘prodigal’, for as Ralph Chirnside recalled in his 1977 obituary of Le
Rossignol ‘… he derived great satisfaction from the contribution that the
Haber-Le Rossignol process had made to the feeding problems of the world
and particularly those in the third world … only a few weeks before his death
we discussed the energy balances in the ammonia process as now carried out
at Billingham …’ and surely, if Robert still followed events at Billingham at
the age of 92, it can only reflect his lifelong interest. It is also touching that
his friend afforded—the by now elderly gentleman—the dignity of describing
the ultimate foundation of Billingham as the ‘Haber-Le Rossignol’ process, a
lead which surely, we chemists should now follow. But of the immediate
post-war events that briefly mentioned Robert’s contribution to fixation,
what happened in Sweden in late 1919 eclipsed them all.
15.4.3 Sweden, November 1919–21
Robert’s post-war ‘popular’ exposure was both momentary and shallow, but
following the announcement by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences on
13 November 1919 of the award of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 1918 to
Fritz Haber, his contribution to nitrogen ‘fixation’ was recognised at the
highest possible professional and academic levels—but not rewarded.
However, this recognition came at a price, for it was to be acknowledged by a
man whose status as a named war criminal had only just been revoked and by
way of an Academy whose decision was to fall into disrepute, for the same
committee that had considered the Chemistry award the previous year now
reversed its decision, and without dissent, awarded the prize to Haber alone
with scant regard for any of its earlier concerns. According to Robert
Friedman in Neutrality in Twentieth-Century Europe,
34 the facts behind the
Academy’s ‘volte face’ are these.
During 1919 the chemistry committee had regrouped to support Haber.
Klason and Ekstrand sent their own letters of nomination, and with the war
now over, Hammarsten, who by all accounts had nothing but ‘contempt for
15 The Post-war Years 1919–1930
335