45. “The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1918”. Nobelprize.org. 03 July 2012 http://
www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1918/press.html.
46. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1918/haberlecture.pdf.
47. Dietrich Stoltzenberg, Fritz Haber. Chemist, Noble Laureate, German, Jew.
Chemical Heritage Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, (2004), pp. 215–216.
48. Daniel Charles, Between Genius and Genocide, Jonathan Cape, London,
(2005), p. 196.
49. The designation Haber-Le Rossignol of course ran completely counter to
Germany’s established reluctance to share her innovations with ‘foreigners’.
50. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/about/amounts/.
51. Diana Kormos Barkan, Walther Nernst and the Transition to Modern Physical
Science. Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 217. Haber’s loyalty to
Germany was clearly not unconditional!
52. But Haber was becoming increasingly concerned about his finances. Just
prior to receiving his award, at the beginning of May 1920, he made two
requests to the BASF, Szöllössi-Janze, op. cit. (note 60), pp. 482–483. The
first of these asked for an eleven-month extension of his payments from the
end of the ‘circulation’ patent on 12 October 1923 until the end of the ‘high
pressure’ patent on 19 September 1924, (Chap. 8), the length of patent
protection at the time being 15 years. This adjustment essentially compensated him for the loss of royalties for years 1918 and 1919 which Meyer had
arranged to protect Haber’s finances from scrutiny by the Allies (Chap. 14).
According to Szöllözi-Janze this adjustment brought Haber’s royalties to
about 1,600,000 Marks for 1918 and 950,000 Marks for 1919, an adjustment to which the BASF agreed (but a little less than the extra 0.7 Pf kg
−1
would have generated). The second request brought him back to the idea of
having a fixed payment from the BASF, making him independent of the
companies profits over the remaining years of the patents (1920–23/4). In
uncertain times Haber was looking for assurance in his finances, justifying his
request by citing his increasing tax burden, his insecurity because of the
Margulies’ legal action, and his financial obligations toward Le Rossignol. In
the event the BASF refused the second request on the basis that none of these
concerns had anything to do with the original contract conditions. The BASF
were also even less obliged to concessions given the foreign currency Haber
was to about receive from the Nobel Prize.
53. They also report that the last member listing for him was in July 1947. Thus,
his ACS membership tenure should be stated as 1921–1947. From ACS,
Office of Society Services help@acs.org by email Thursday, 19 February,
2009.
54. Recorded in the Open University’s Biographical Database of the British
Chemical
Community,
1880–1970,
http://www.open.ac.uk/ou5/
Arts/chemists/ and confirmed for me by the RSC at Burlington House
360
D. Sheppard
www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1918/press.html.
46. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/chemistry/laureates/1918/haberlecture.pdf.
47. Dietrich Stoltzenberg, Fritz Haber. Chemist, Noble Laureate, German, Jew.
Chemical Heritage Press, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, (2004), pp. 215–216.
48. Daniel Charles, Between Genius and Genocide, Jonathan Cape, London,
(2005), p. 196.
49. The designation Haber-Le Rossignol of course ran completely counter to
Germany’s established reluctance to share her innovations with ‘foreigners’.
50. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/about/amounts/.
51. Diana Kormos Barkan, Walther Nernst and the Transition to Modern Physical
Science. Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 217. Haber’s loyalty to
Germany was clearly not unconditional!
52. But Haber was becoming increasingly concerned about his finances. Just
prior to receiving his award, at the beginning of May 1920, he made two
requests to the BASF, Szöllössi-Janze, op. cit. (note 60), pp. 482–483. The
first of these asked for an eleven-month extension of his payments from the
end of the ‘circulation’ patent on 12 October 1923 until the end of the ‘high
pressure’ patent on 19 September 1924, (Chap. 8), the length of patent
protection at the time being 15 years. This adjustment essentially compensated him for the loss of royalties for years 1918 and 1919 which Meyer had
arranged to protect Haber’s finances from scrutiny by the Allies (Chap. 14).
According to Szöllözi-Janze this adjustment brought Haber’s royalties to
about 1,600,000 Marks for 1918 and 950,000 Marks for 1919, an adjustment to which the BASF agreed (but a little less than the extra 0.7 Pf kg
−1
would have generated). The second request brought him back to the idea of
having a fixed payment from the BASF, making him independent of the
companies profits over the remaining years of the patents (1920–23/4). In
uncertain times Haber was looking for assurance in his finances, justifying his
request by citing his increasing tax burden, his insecurity because of the
Margulies’ legal action, and his financial obligations toward Le Rossignol. In
the event the BASF refused the second request on the basis that none of these
concerns had anything to do with the original contract conditions. The BASF
were also even less obliged to concessions given the foreign currency Haber
was to about receive from the Nobel Prize.
53. They also report that the last member listing for him was in July 1947. Thus,
his ACS membership tenure should be stated as 1921–1947. From ACS,
Office of Society Services help@acs.org by email Thursday, 19 February,
2009.
54. Recorded in the Open University’s Biographical Database of the British
Chemical
Community,
1880–1970,
http://www.open.ac.uk/ou5/
Arts/chemists/ and confirmed for me by the RSC at Burlington House
360
D. Sheppard