ars experience of his
conduct, think I have seen him under strong temptation to do injustice
with prospects of personal benefit, and with little chance of detection,
and yet firmly resisting."

Among the calumnies which were spread broadcast, both during the life of
the inventor and after his death, even down to the present day, was the
accusation of great ingratitude towards those who had helped him in his
early struggles, and especially towards Alfred Vail. The more the true
history of his connection with his associates is studied, the more
baseless do these accusations appear, and in this connection the
following extracts from letters to Alfred Vail and to his brother George
are most illuminating. The first letter is dated July 15, 1854:--

"The legal title to my Patent for the American Electro-Magnetic Telegraph
of June 20th, 1840, is, by the late extension of said patent for seven
years from the said date, now vested in me alone; but I have intended
that the pecuniary interest which was guaranteed to you in my invention
as it existed in 1838, and in my patent of 1840, should still inure to
your benefit (yet in a different shape) under the second patent and the
late extension of the first.

"For the simplification of my business transactions I prefer to let the
Articles of Agreement, which expired on the 20th June, 1854, remain
cancelled and not to renew them, retaining in my sole possession the
_legal title;_ but I hereby guarantee to you two sixteenths of such sums
as may be paid over to me in the sale of patent rights, after the
proportionate deductions of such necessary expenses as may be required in
the business of the agency for conducting the sales of said patent
rights, subject also to the terms of your agreement with Mr. Kendall.

"Mr. Kendall informs me that no assignment of an interest in my second
patent (the patent of 1846) was ever made to you. This was news to me. I
presumed it was done and that the assignment was duly recorded at the
Patent Office. The examination of the records in the progress of
obtaining my extension has, doubtless, led to the discovery of the
omission."

After going over much the same ground in the letter to George Vail, also
of July 15th, he gives as one of the reasons why the new arrangement is
better: "The annoyances of Smith are at an end, so far as the necessity
of consulting him is concerned."

And then he adds:--

"I presume it can be no matter of regret with Alfre