I have just
observed, there was _nothing in common in the two systems_ but the use of
electricity upon metallic conductors, for which no one could obtain an
exclusive privilege.

"The various steps required by the English law were taken by me to
procure a patent for my mode, and the fees were paid at the Clerk's
office, June 22, and at the Home Department, June 25, 1838; also, June
26, caveats were entered at the Attorney and Solicitor-General's, and I
had reached that part of the process which required the sanction of the
Attorney-General. At this point I met the opposition of Messrs.
Wheatstone and Cooke, and also of Mr. Davy, and a hearing was ordered
before the Attorney-General, Sir John Campbell, on July 12, 1838. I
attended at the Attorney-General's residence on the morning of that day,
carrying with me my telegraphic apparatus for the purpose of explaining
to him the total dissimilarity between my system and those of my
opponents. But, contrary to my expectation, the similarity or
dissimilarity of my mode from that of my opponents was not considered by
the Attorney-General. He neither examined my instrument, which I had
brought for that purpose, nor did he ask any questions bearing upon its
resemblance to my opponents' system. I was met by the single declaration
that my '_invention had been published_,' and in proof a copy of the
London 'Mechanics' Magazine,' No. 757, for February 10, 1838, was
produced, and I was told that 'in consequence of said publication I could
not proceed.'

"At this summary decision I was certainly surprised, being conscious that
there had been no such publication of my method as the law required to
invalidate a patent; and, even if there had been, I ventured to hint to
the Attorney-General that, if I was rightly informed in regard to the
British law, it was the province of a court and jury, and not of the
Attorney-General, to try, and to decide that point."

The publication to which the Attorney-General referred had merely stated
results, with no description whatever of the means by which these results
were to be obtained and it was manifestly unfair to Morse on the part of
this official to have refused his sanction; but he remained obdurate.
Morse then wrote him a long letter, after consultation with Mr. Smith,
setting forth all these points and begging for another interview.

"In consequence of my request in this letter I was allowed a second
hearing. I attended accordingly, but, t