The original agreement between James the Younger and Frederick Beesley. James the Younger was a trained stocker and successful inventor in his own right, and was apparently convinced of the merits of Beesley’s design. On 2 January 1880 the two men signed a provisional agreement, which set out their roles in patenting the design. Under these terms, Beesley was to undertake all the design and descriptive work necessary for securing the patent. In return, James not only took on all costs and risks associated with the process, but paid Beesley four sums once significant stages had been passed. The first of these was the registration of the patent, which happened the same day and for which Beesley received £20. 
Beesley’s receipt for the initial payment of £20. The second payment of £10 was to be made once Beesley turned over a working model of the design, together with the drawings necessary for the patent specification. He received an advance of £3 on 11 March, with the full amount paid on 3 May. As such, we can assume that the second milestone had been passed to James’ satisfaction by that date. The third sum became due once the patent was sealed, which took place on 29 July. On that day Beesley signed an indenture which transferred the rights to the patent to James Purdey, and in return received £20. The Indenture also laid out an agreement for royalties: 5 shillings per gun on the first two hundred made, or a lump sum of £35 provided this was paid by 29 November. Beesley acknowledged receipt of the £35 on 16 November, meaning that he received the total sum of £85 for his invention. 
Beesley’s receipt for the final payment of £35. According to his granddaughters, when interviewed by David Baker in the 1980s, this helped to secure his business. It is also worth considering the costs that Purdey bore, above those paid directly to Beesley. Registration of the patent cost another £50 plus fees, and the upkeep of the patent, as well as defending it, cost significantly more. Although the Purdey records have some gaps, there are invoices spread over a fourteen-year period totalling around £190. It seems reasonable to estimate Purdey’s total investment in the patent itself at nearly £250, not including payments made to Beesley. Given his granddaughters comments, Beesley’s company may have struggled to bear those costs alone during its formative period. Having reviewed the surviving records held at Audley House, Beesley’s departure from Purdey in 1878 was of his own free will, rather than being dismissed for poor behaviour. Aware of the costs involved in patenting his invention, he returned to his former employer, working with him to secure the patent. The money Beesley raised in doing so, together with the liabilities that James the Younger took on as part of the agreement, gave him the capital to support his fledgling company, which is a name that survives today. Frederick Beesley went on to patent another twenty designs, and remained involved in the gun trade almost until his death in 1928. In return for his investment, James the Younger purchased an action that has become synonymous with his company, and which continues to define the ideal of a London side-by-side gun to this day.