TALBOT7437

Lincoln’s Inn ¹
13^th Aug 1857

My dear Sir,

I am in receipt of Your’s of Yesterday ² with M^r Pretsch’s ³ letter – by last post I forwarded to You at Lacock M^r Loxley’s ⁴ written proposals in answer to our’s.

M^r Loxley stated in conversation that “he believed he might now say with almost certainty that the Patent was now vested, in entirety, in 3 persons<”> – one of whom was a capitalist at Manchester & a lover of the art (i e for commercial purposes) but no names were mentioned not even M^r Pretsch’s as one of the 3 – but by “almost certainty” I understood him to refer to the position of matters with Dallas ⁵ with whom the disputes were altho’ arranged by agreement were not actually compleated.

I wrote yesterday to Loxley for a copy of M^r Hindmarsh’s opinion ⁶ and a 2^nd time to enquire whether any fur^r Patent has been taken out by the same Parties – if he does not answer – we can without much difficulty ascertain by searching at the Patent office.

As the Limited Liability is applicable only to Social Stock Companies having more than 25 members at its formation or by subsequent admission when the capital is divided into shares – such limited liability cannot be made applicable, we may assume, in its present constitution at least: so that it is & must remain a private partnership subject to the Bankrupt Law like any other trading.

M^r Loxley no doubt threw out the intimation I mentioned in my first letter, ⁷ as a feeler, for the same object as M^r Pretsch’s, but seeing that I did not encourage him in the [illegible deletion] idea of a partnership, he did not enter into details.

In the present posture ⁸ of the business – I want to be furnished with what M^r Hindmarsh has written, for Your consideration, before You make up Your mind on the counter-proposals.

Ever Yours faithfully
J. H Bolton

3½ oClock P.M.
P. S.
Since writing the preceding M^r P. Pretsch has called to explain his proposal which is that You should join the Company ⁹ now consisting of M^r Carlton ¹⁰ M^r Fenton ¹¹ & himself by taking M^r Fenton’s share who is willing to retire (for a consideration) an giving up all his interest & being indemn^d for his share of the liabilities – “such an opportunity M^r Pretsch says” occurs is not likely to offer again! I should think not indeed – for they would only require about £1200 after the liabilities are discharged! [a more unbusiness like proposal was never made.]

M^r P said the Company has taken out another Patent for the application of the Invention to Calico printing but it has been “almost lost” – also one in Paris –

He could give no information (or would not) as to the statistics of the Company – in fact his intervention has not tended to raise the reputation of the partnership but rather to make one doubt whether any benefit will [come?] to You frm a successful litigation with a such a “rope of sand” as they seem to be –

W^m H. Fox Talbot Esq^re