Pages
- Homepage
- Life of Henry Cort
- Cort's processes in iron manufacture
- Cort's patents
- Refutation of allegations of conspiracies against Cort
- Adam Jellicoe's death
- Henry Cort's birth
- A navy agent's business
- Early life of John Becher
- Attwick & Burges families
- "Cortship" of second wife
- Thomas Morgan
- Henry Cort's hoops contract
- 1856 Accolade
- Generosity of friends 1789-94
- James Watson
- Illness of Cort's son
- Main sources of information
- Contemporary sources
- Navy sources
- Chancery files
- Publications about Cort
- Assessment of Cort's character
- Images of Henry Cort
Impeach-tranferred to 05
- Parliamentary inquiry 1811-2
- The furore of the 1850s
- Society of Arts
- Cort's first marriage
- Henry Cort's children
- Cort family pensions
- Henry Cort's Hertfordshire property
- 1791 signatories
- Guiana and the Cort-Gladstone connection
- Cort's twilight years
- Memorials to Henry Cort
- Smelting of iron
- Fining before Cort
- Shropshire & Staffordshire ironmasters
- Cumbrians: Wilkinson etc
- Early works at Merthyr Tydfil
- The Crowley business
- London ironmongers
- Scottish iron
- Cort's promotion efforts 1783-6
- Later Merthyr connections
- Puddling after Henry Cort
- Gosport in Cort's day
- Gosport administration
- Gosport worthies
- The Amherst-Porter network
- James Hackman, murderer
- Samuel Marshall
- Samuel Jellicoe's legacy
- Links with Titchfield
- Links with Fareham
- Fact, error and conjecture
- 18th century politics
- Law in the 18th century
- 18th century finance
- Religion and sexual mores
- Calendar change of 1752
- Shelburne, Parry and associates
- John Becher's family
- The Becher-Thackeray lineage
- Thomas Lyttelton: a fantastic narrative
- Eighteenth-century London
- Abolition and the Corts
- The Burges will tangle
- Navy connections
- Navy agent's business
- Cort's clients
- Ships' pursers
- History of Adam Jellicoe
- Dundas & Trotter
- Cort's navy office associates
- Toulmin & other agents
- Sandwich & Middleton
- The Arethusa
- John Becher's war
- Thomas Morgan's war
- The 1782 Jamaica convoy
- Sinking of the Royal George
Rickman & Scott: two contrasting naval careers-Missing
- Visitors 2006-2009
- Developement of the site 2006-2009
****************
- Daniel Guion and family
****************
- Other publications
|
|
THE FURORE OF THE 1850s
That the whole blaze of the prosperity of the world, wealth to the amount of thousands of millions sterling, has been created, within little more than half a century, by the inventions of one single man; that he was deliberately and perseveredly hindered from reaping any other reward but loss from his labours by the acts of official authority, in no barbarous times, but within the memory of living men; and that these injuries, so artfully aided by designing men, hoodwinked or bewildered a committee of the House of Commons, presided over by a future President of the Royal Society, into a report upon the circumstances so utterly absurd and false... these are the facts now brought before the country by the papers of Mr. Richard Cort, that deeply-injured man's surviving son.
From letter of David Mushet jnr published in Journal of the Society of Arts, 24 August 1855.
|
By 1855 all but one of Henry Cort's sons is dead.
But Richard, the youngest, is very much alive at 69.
And the conclusions of the 1812 inquiry still rankle.
He gets his chance to refute them, in a series of articles in the Journal of the Society of Arts in July and August.
He reviews the evidence presented, and points out what he thinks are its flaws. Who is there to contradict him?
Indeed, if we read his assertions now, we can see a few which are demonstrably wrong.
You have a right to call for national acknowledgment and I should be glad to learn how I could assist you to obtain it.
From letter of Charles Sanderson, quoted by Richard Cort in article in Journal of Society of Arts, 3 August 1855.
|
But he impresses many of his readers, particularly David Mushet, whose father had been a great contributor to the iron industry, both as practitioner and chronicler.
One of Henry Cort's sons and three daughters, each over seventy, are now living in indigent circumstances in England, while the nation has grown rich on their father's discoveries.
From letter of David Mushet jnr in Journal of Society of Arts, 4 January 1856.
|
Subsequent issues of the Journal reverberate with Mushet's tirades on the injustice meted out to Henry Cort and his family.
Other sympathisers are less vocal, but they are busy working on Richard's behalf. They feel the matter is of national importance, and should be brought to Parliament's attention.
Mr. Roebuck's overwhelming engagements have hitherto delayed the presentation of this petition, and of another from Mr. R. Cort, declaring the enormous benefits derived from his father's inventions. The honourable member, however, will present both petitions immediately, and no doubt will do all he can to get them printed and distributed, that both Houses of Parliament may be made acqainted with important facts, which appear at present to be known to only a very few of them.
From letter of David Mushet jnr in Journal of Society of Arts, 4 July 1856.
|
The Petition of the undersigned Manufacturers, Consumers, and others, who feel that the nation has greatly benefited by the use of British puddled, rolled, and wrought-iron, first invented and successfully established in all the royal dockyards by the late Mr. Henry Cort of Gosport, in the county of Southampton, iron manufacturer, for the safety of our fleets and seamen, for our naval and military defence at home and abroad, for railways, steam navigation, ship-building, agriculture, mining, domestic, and other purposes, and lastly, for securing the independence of the British nation over foreign powers for an adequate supply of bar-iron...
Preamble to Society of Arts petition presented to Parliament, 4 July 1856.
|
Yes, another petition! Two, if you count one submitted by Richard himself - a copy of which goes to The Times, prompting their 1856 editorial.
The petitioner Richard Cort states that his father Henry Cort was the Inventor of two processes secured by Letters Patent in 1783 and 1784, the first process effected the cheap manufacture of wrought-iron by the flame of pit-coal in the puddling furnace; the second process, which was the rolling this cheap wrought-iron through grooved rollers, enabled the manufacturer to produce twenty tons of bar-iron in the same time and with the same labour previously required to manipulate one ton of inferior quality by the tedious operation of forging under the hammer; he states that this process of rolling imparted a peculiar fibre and toughness not before known; sets forth the immense advantages to the Country resulting from these inventions both in Peace and War, alluding more especially to the use from that time of British Iron in the Navy to the exclusion of Foreign Iron, to the extensive development of the Railway system by the production of cheap and good bar-iron, to the creation of a magnificent steam-fleet and construction of iron-ships, gun-boats, and batteries; he considers such Inventions to have been instrumental in increasing the power and greatness of this Country; and prays for Inquiry into his Claims upon the gratitude of the Nation with a view to relief from that destitution of which he and his family complain.
From fifty-first report of House of Commons Select Committee, 4 July 1856.
|
The list of petitioners from the Society is headed by "Anthony Hill, Iron Master, Plymouth Works, Glamorganshire". Identified in the Dictionary of Welsh Biography as son of Richard Hill, manager at Cyfarthfa under Anthony Bacon. On Bacon's death. Richard took over the Plymouth works which later passed to Anthony.
Second name on the petitioners' list: Robert Stephenson, son of George and large-scale user of wrought iron. As in the Britannia tubular bridge over the Menai Strait and the High Level Bridge at Newscastle.
Third name: Crawshay Bailey, M.P., Ironmaster. Longevity here: 1789-1872, according the Dictionary of Welsh Biography. His mother was Richard Crawshay's sister Susannah.
Your petitioners humbly pray that your Honourable House may be induced to make some adequate provision for the declining years of the only surviving representatives of the late Mr. Henry Cort, being one son and three daughters, only one of whom is under seventy years of age, for having added, by the inventions of their father, at the expense of ruin to himself and family, so enormously to the wealth of the country year after year, for more than half a century, besides extending its commerce in British iron to all the markets of the world.
From Society of Arts petition to Parliament, published in their Journal, 4 July 1856.
|
52 other names listed in the Journal, including Charles Sanderson, Thomas Webster and David Mushet. Also "William B. Carpenter, M.D., F.R.S.", who is married to Cort's granddaughter - one of the hopeful beneficiaries is his mother-in-law!
John Arthur Roebuck, who hands in both petitions, is an MP with industrial credentials. Grandson of John Roebuck who founded the Carron Ironworks in Scotland.
Documents in the National Archives Granville Papers (PRO/29/19/2) shed light on some of the transactions involved. Apparently Granville is asked by the Government to look into Richard's claims, and engages the help of Royal Geographical Society President Sir Roderick Murchison: he in turn asks the opinion of John Percy, Lecturer on Metallurgy at the Government School of Mines, who replies in August 1856...
Henry Cort, the father of the present memorialist, was the inventor of the process which is universally known both in this country and abroad as "Cort's Puddling Process. It is a process by which the conversion of pig or cast iron into bar or wrought iron is effected with a degree of rapidity and economy previously unknown. Almost the whole of the wrought iron manufactured in this country is produced by this process. The iron of every rail in the kingdom and of a considerable part of every stem-engine, whether stationary, locomotive or marine is produced by Cort's process. It is scarcely possible to over-estimate the effect of Cort's invention upon the material interests of this country and I may add of the world. Modern civilization, I need not remind you, is due in no inconsiderable degree to cheap wrought iron and we owe cheap wrought iron to Henry Cort. Three gret discoveries, if I may be allowed so to designate practical applications, have been made in the iron trade of the country; - the first is the application of coal as a fuel by Dudley in the 17th century the second the process of puddling by Cort in the 18th - and the third the 'hot blast' by Neilson in the 19thh; and, assuredly, not the least important is that of Cort. Rail-roada and stem navigation are mighty improvements everywhere seen and recognized by the Public but Cort's invention, to which both in great measure owe their extension, remains comparatively unknown.
If a country should ever confer substantial rewards upon men, who by their inventions develope its resources and so mightily increase its wealth and power then, undoubtedly should Henry Cort have received such reward. But he is dead and rewards can no longer reach him. He died a poor man, who has enabled others to realize millions. He ought to have been rich; but peculiar circumstances, which justly excite our sympathy and which have been fully detailed contributed to his ruin. A son in comparative poverty and at an advanced age survives; and I cannot but think that if the whole country were appealed to the unanimous response would be to reward the son in grateful remembrance of the achievements of the father.
From letter of John Percy to Sir Roderick Murchison, 20 August 1856
|
Richard Cort later requests a copy of this appraisal, but Percy is not happy.
Have seen sufficient of Mr Cort to convince me that he is a very indiscreet person; and my fear is that he may make an improper us of the letter which I wrote to you concerning his late father's inventions by hawking it about with a view to obtain subscriptions to the fund which is being raised for his benefit among the iron masters.
As an instance of his want of prudence I enclose a copy of a letter from Mr Mushet to him... [copied from the original letter which I received from Mr Cort without reservation of any kind..]
From letter of John Percy to Sir Roderick Murchison, 13 November 1857.
|
More than £500 having now been collected in your fund I shall require a cheque for £100 in accordance with your note of 30th April last promising me a remuneration of one fifth of the whole result little or much of my labours in your behalf. - My losses upon patents and various matters which I set aside August 1855 with perhaps more zeal than prudence.. to attend to your great national case, have been considerable and inconvenienced me, as I cannot renew them until my time is disengaged from the present heavy efforts…
From letter of David Mushet jnr to Richard Cort, 2 January 1857
|
The matter is still occupying Parliament's attention in February 1759.
That there be laid before the House a Copy of the Paper from Dr Percy FRS to Sir Roderick Murchison, on the inventions of Henry Cort.
From Journal of the House of Commons, cxiv 66, 21 February 1859.
|
Report from the Museum of Practical Geology on the Invention of Puddling Iron by the late Henry Cort for making Cast Iron malleable; and of a Memorial praying for an inquiry.
From Journal of the House of Commons, cxiii 352 p57.
|
In addition to these two reports, a "Memorial to Viscount Palmerston signed by 25 of the most eminent scientific and practical authorities" is recorded.
Meanwhile Society member Thomas Webster has stoked the furore with a long series of articles on Cort in Mechanics Magazine.
Wesbster links the story of Cort's misfortunes in 1789 with Melville's impeachment in 1806.
He reckons Melville (Henry Dundas) was intent on some villainy of which Cort was the innocent victim.
And Parliament's verdict in 1812 was a whitewash to save the reputation of a prominent member!
There is little doubt that the part taken by Mr. Trotter in the proceedings against Cort was prompted by fraudulent motives, and were connected with that series of transactions for which Lord Melville was impeached by the House of Commons in 1805. Had time and opportunity been afforded to him, Cort could easily have made up Jellicoe's deficiency, as he was engaged in lucrative contracts for the navy, and his engagements with the ironmasters, then on the eve of completion, would have provided him with ample funds to meet the liability. But no, - Cort had been marked out as the victim of deception on every side. Not only were his patents taken possession of by the Admiralty, but also his contracts with the Welsh ironmasters, who, basely taking advantage of the difficulties which the unfortunate patentee had been thus placed in, faithlessly broke the engagements they were under for the payment of license dues, and never paid Cort a shilling out of the thousands which were justly due to him.
From Alverstoke Parish Magazine, June 1864.
|
Some contemporaries took Webster's conclusions seriously, as did Charles Morgan 40 years later.
Samuel Smiles, whose Industrial Biography was published in 1863, took a more rational approach. Although he acknowledged that Cort suffered an undeserved fate, he also saw that Melville was the victim of political intrigue.
There are two items of contemporary evidence that show that Dundas sympathised with Cort's plight.
From a Recollection of the great Kindness and condescending Attention which you so repeatedly manifested towards my late father Mr Henry Cort, I am induced to hope you will pardon the Liberty I take of addressing you by Letter.
From letter of Coningsby Cort to Robert Dundas, 23 March 1808 in National Archives of Scotland (GD51/4/1307). Robert Dundas had acted for several years as secretary to his father Henry, later Viscount Melville.
|
Upon the representation of Mr. H Dundas (Lord Melville), the Treasury by warrant granted him a similar pension of £200 which he enjoyed until his death in 1800.
From Weale collection, Vol 3 leaf 205
|
|