811.54241/86
The Ambassador in Great Britain (Dawes) to the
Secretary of State
No. 3285
London, January 8, 1929.
[Received
January 18.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to the
Department’s instructions No. 1293 of February 15, 1928, and No.
1323 of March 2, 1928,53 in connection with the claims of British
inventors against the United States Government, and to state that on
January 4th the Counselor of this Embassy was asked to call at the
Foreign Office and a note with enclosure, copies of which are
transmitted herewith, were handed to him. The hope was expressed
that the information contained therein supplied all the data desired
by the American authorities.
In the conversation regarding these claims with several officers of
the Foreign Office, reference was made to the friendly spirit of the
negotiations between Sir John
Broderick of the British Embassy and Mr. Phenix of the State Department, and
these officers expressed their opinion that the State Department’s
note, dated July 23, 1928,54 in reply to Sir John Broderick’s Memorandum of
January 5, 1928,55 deviated from this spirit in its
phraseology and the purely legal points of view set forth therein,
more especially in view of the last paragraph of the exchange of
notes of May 19, 1927.56
I have [etc.]
For the Ambassador:
Ray
Atherton
Counselor of Embassy
[Enclosure]
The Head of the American Department, British
Foreign Office (Craigie),
to the American Chargé (Atherton)
No. A 8366/416/45
[London,] 31 December,
1928.
My Dear Atherton: You will remember that on
February 27th and March 12th last you wrote to me in connexion
with the claims of British inventors against the United States
Government, seeking certain information in regard to the
application of patent law in this country. I now have pleasure
in enclosing a memorandum57 replying to the queries contained in your
letters, together with one copy each of the First and Second
Reports of the Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors,58 which I think you will find of
interest, particularly paragraphs 13, 14 and 33–38 of the First
Report, and 12–14 of the Second Report.
I much regret that there should have been so long a delay in
replying to your letters. This was due in part to the
technicalities of the issues raised, but I should have been in a
position to answer you some months ago had it not been for the
State Department note of July 23rd last to Sir Esme Howard in which the
Ambassador was informed in categorical terms that the United
States Government were unable to consider our suggestion that
some body akin to the Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors
should be set up to deal both with patented and unpatented
claims of British inventors. While I have no intention of
troubling you with this aspect of the question, I may say that
we agree with the Department of State that British claimants in
respect of patented inventions enjoy facilities for prosecuting
their claims in the United States. As regards unpatented
inventions, however, we feel that British subjects are under
grave disabilities as matters stand at present, and in this
connexion we are supplying Sir Esme
Howard with some new facts upon which to base
further conversations with the authorities in Washington. I feel
confident that when the State Department have had the
opportunity to reconsider the matter in the light of this
further information, we will experience no difficulty in
disposing of these outstanding claims in a manner satisfactory
to both Governments.
Yours very sincerely,
