CORRESPONDENCE WITH CLIENTS.

It occurred that thousands of persons, seeing the advertisement for 200 inventions wanted and the offer of large prizes, and an easy way to get money, wrote to the respondents for information, and in reply received answers of the following tenor and effect:

DEAR SIR: We have received your letter of inquiry of recent date, and we herewith inclose copy of our $1,800 prize offer and our Hints to Inventors, which contain full information as to how our patent business is conducted.

We also send you, under separate cover, a copy of the National Recorder.

If you will send us a sketch of your invention, together with a description or model, if you have one, we will make a thorough examination of the Patent Office records and advise as to whether a patent can be obtained. We charge $5 for this service, which amount will entitle your invention to be entered in competition for our prizes and will be deducted from our fee for preparing the caso.

The letter closes with the statement

After a patent has been obtained we can place the same before the proper capitalists, if you do not intend to manufacture and market the goods yourself.

The italics are mine.

This ordinarily brought $5, which would doubtless yield a clear profit of $4.75 to the respondents, but if the party addressed failed to respond promptly, a letter of the following tenor was forwarded:

DEAR SIR: We have not heard from you since we replied to your favor of a recent date, sending you our pamphlet and a copy of the National Recorder.

We again ask your consideration of our excellent facilities for selling and procuring patents, and if you have not already selected your attorney, we should be most happy to advise you without charge, either in a personal interview or by mail, as to the patentability and salability of any device which you may have in mind.

The italics are mine.

This usually brought the required answer. Thereupon the client (?) was sent a letter of the following tenor:

instant, inclosing

DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of your esteemed favor of sketch and description of your invention, of which reference has been made to the chief of our sales department, and this is the principal cause of delay in answering. In his cxpert opinion a successful device of this nature, if patented immediatcly and properly handled, would net its owner not less than $5,000 on direct sale, or yield a good income for several years if transferred on the royalty plan. Its cheapness and simplicity are strongly desirable elements in its favor, as there would be little or no experimental cost to eat up the profits, and a practically unlimited market would be furnished for such a successful device.

There is no doubt of its patentable nature, but you will readily understand that no human being can carry in his head the hundreds of thousands of inventions ou file in the Patent Office. For this reason we always recommend our clients to have a special search of the records made, with a view of avoiding infringements on other patents. Our charge for this service is ordinarily $5 in each case; but we will make two searches on inventions submitted at the same time for $5; four for $10, or as many as you please in the same ratio, enter any invention you may select in competition for our monthly prizes, and will further agree to make our subsequent fee for the preparation and prosecution of your case $20 instead of $25.

The italics are mine.

JOHN WEDDERBURN & Co.

This letter was undoubtedly prepared by a lawyer, who had more capacity than conscience; as any expert will see that it affects to say what it does not in fact say, and is carefully worded to mislead.

The language, "In his expert opinion a successful device of this nature, if patented immediately and properly handled, would net its owner not less than $5,000 on direct sale, or yield a good income for several years if transferred on the royalty plan," is as shrewd as it is uncandid.

Five dollars is received, and a search is made in these cases, and thereupon a letter of the following tenor is addressed to the client:

DEAR SIR: We have made a thorough search of the records of the Patent Office and fail to find any reference approaching your invention sufficiently near to prevent you from securing a patent, and we therefore have to report that in our opinion a patent can be obtained.

Then he is advised to remit $20, to cover the first Government fee of $15, and $5, the cost of one sheet of official drawing, and this is followed by the statement that—

There is no doubt that your invention is a very valuable one, and that good money could be made out of the same if properly handled.

The italics are mine.

"If properly handled" always cuts a figure. The letter then states that the invention will be entered in competition for the "Wedderburn prize," and they then propose in the letter to find a purchaser.

After these alluring observations the applicant applies for a patent, which, in the vast majority of cases, he is not entitled to and never gets; and it often occurred that after having stated that the $5 would be credited on the fee of $25, we find the full amount of $25 is demanded and collected. (Greeley's report, p. 145.)

Following in the wake of the other communications, if the vein seemed to be one which could be profitably worked, a letter of the following tenor was addressed to the client: (The italics are mine.)

DEAR SIR: We take pleasure in informing you that the Board of Awards has selected your invention for special merit, and your name will appear on our Roll of Honor for last month for the Wedderburn prize. Under the terms of our recent decision to recognize those inventors submitting especially meritorious devices, we have determined to present a sterling silver medal to each person entitled to a place upon the Roll of · Honor.

We therefore send you by to-day's mail a Sterling Silver Medal, accompanied by a United States Treasury certificate as to its standard fineness. It is of pure silver, and we regard its design as exceedingly artistic and effective. Congratulating you upon the merit of your invention, which promises to be exceedingly profitable to you, we are, with kind regards,

Very truly yours,

JOHN WEDDERBURN & Co.

Then, as if they had forgotten to mention something of superior advantage, which the correspondent was entitled to enjoy, they add the following postscript:

P. S.-The receipt of this medal does not prevent your device from being favorably considered in subsequent contests for the big prize. We enclose a proposition from the National Recorder which we would recommend that you accept, as past experience shows that this publication has been the means of securing good prices for many of our clients' patents.

The italics are mine.

There probably could not be a more unblushing fraud perpetrated by the use of the same number of words thau crops out in this communication.

First, their "Board of Awards," for all practical purposes, was a myth, and their "Roll of Honor" a sham and a pretense, and their "Sterling Silver Medal," eleven thousand of which they sent out as a "reward of genius," was a cheap advertisement for Wedderburn & Co., and contained no reference to the invention, nor yet to the inventor, in recognition of whose genius it was supposed to have been a tribute. It is neither valuable for the silver nor for the inscription, nor for any one of the purposes for which the client is induced to believe it was sent.

Nor is that all. A certificate, as if issued with direct reference to that particular medal by the Treasury of the United States, is forwarded. This is another sham and pretense, which the Government should promptly put its foot upon.

Then comes the postscript, the last part of which is the catch penny clause.

There is no suggestion in it that John Wedderburn & Co. are the proprietors, for all practical purposes, of the National Recorder; that it is their organ, or that it is in anywise controlled by John Wedder. burn; and thus while they use the National Recorder to secure business for John Wedderburn & Co., John Wedderburn & Co. are used to secure business for the National Recorder. We shall see in a moment how the elements in this remarkable combination act and coact.

The next communication addressed to the client, after the foregoing, shows that the scheme has worked. It recites:

We have received your properly executed papers prepared in the matter of your invention in finger shield. The application will be promptly filed in the Pateut Office and the case prosecuted with diligence.

The next communication indicates that the client is becoming impa tient, and the cause of the delay is explained. The following letter does the same, and the next calls the attention of the client to the fact that the Examiner has "finally rejected the application," and that he has cited one or two patents, as the case may be, and "notwithstanding repeated amendment and argument he adheres to his opinion." There is surprise in the language of the letter whether there was in the mind of the writer or not.

They then state:

The only course now open, should you desire to contest the matter further, is to appeal to the Board of Examiners-in-Chief. The cost of such appeal is $25, covering the Government fee of $10 and our fee for presenting the appeal, $15. If you desire to pursue the course mentioned, remit the amount above, upon receipt of which we will take the necessary appeal in your behalf.

In some cases they use stronger language and state how earnestly they will endeavor to reverse the action below if the client will appeal. As stated herein before, they do not give any advice, as in duty bound, as to the propriety or wisdom of an appeal, but encourage the client to go ahead by leaving it to him to judge in a matter where his judgment would really at best be of little value, as it is a matter which the attor ney and not the client should in the first instance determine. (Greeley's report, p. 152.)

The statement, "There is no doubt but that your invention is a very valuable one and that good money could be made out of the same if properly handled," is a common form (except the italics, which are mine.)

It will be observed that they have made 33,000 searches during the brief time that they have been in business, and have filed less than 4,000 applications.

Of these applications, about 50 per cent have been rejected by the Office as containing nothing patentable, and yet, notwithstanding all this, Wedderburn & Co. have sent out over eleven thousand of these "sterling silver medals," as a "reward of genius" to the inventor, and as evidence of the superior merit of his invention, which he was assured was of value, etc., and they have placed as large, or possibly a larger, number on their fictitious roll of honor.

THE RECORDER "WRITE UP.”

It seems, if the correspondent is susceptible, or what he writes indicates that he is a proper subject for flattering treatment, immediately on the heels of his receipt of the silver medal and the information that he is now on the Wedderburn "roll of honor," he receives a letter from the National Recorder of the following tenor:

DEAR SIR: The National Recorder is informed that you have been awarded a silver medal by Messrs. John Wedderburn & Co. for an invention of unusual merit entered in that firm's competition. It is the purpose of the Recorder to publish, for the benfit of its readers, a short sketch and likeness of as many of these medal winners as possible, in order that inventors, and those who are striving to become such, may enjoy the advantage of the experience of their successful colleagues.

If, therefore, you will send us a photograph and a brief account of your life, giving special attention to the experiences that have aided you to become an inventor, accompanied by $5 to cover the cost of preparing sketch, inserting the same in Recorder, and engraving the accompanying portrait, we will write up and place upon our subscription list for one year the names of any two persons to whom you desire the paper to be sent.

An affirmative answer to this proposition must be mailed within a week after the receipt of this letter to insure publication.

After the National Recorder has expressed or suggested its admiration of the genius and perseverance of the individual who had invented an improvement on a latch string, or a shoe buckle, or a bottle stopper, or a finger guard, or suspected that he had invented something, and had proposed to him for 85 to publish a sketch of the now thoroughly captivated correspondent, it suggests as follows:

We would also say that when you are prepared to advertise your invention for sale, we will run it free for one month under our head of patents for sale, if you will inclose this letter with your order.

And then the correspondent is warned that

This combination proposition with regard to a write-up of yourself is the only one we make in this connection.

NATIONAL RECORDER PUBLISHING CO.

Unfortunately for the "client," there is an element in the "combination" with which he does not become familiar until he has parted with his money and has nothing in return except a 25-cent silver medal and a place on the Wedderburn "roll of honor."

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER'S REPORT.

In his report of the findings and evidence, Mr. Greeley has with care and candor gone through the whole range of discreditable conduct which characterized the career of the respondents. His comments are just and his recommendations timely and valuable. I will not review the report, but supplement it in announcing this decision.

I desire, however, to particularly call your attention to Mr. Greeley's findings respecting the conduct of the respondent's sale department and their conduct respecting foreign patents. As is clearly shown in said findings and report, their sale offer and their advice to take out foreign patents were mere traps for the unwary.

The respondents invariably represented to clients that their inventions were valuable and salable, whether in fact they were patentable or not. It only needed the skill and experience of respondents in handling such matters to make the clients sure of a good return. But before they could proceed to find a purchaser $20 for advertising purposes" must be paid by the client. This sum was asked for and accepted in a number of cases in which the respondents knew there was nothing patentable and nothing valuable. (See Greeley's report, pp. 146-147.)

The respondents also invariably advised their clients to take out foreign patents on inventions which they well knew were unpatentable, knowing that foreign patents, if granted, would be worthless. The taking out of foreign patents meant large fees to the respondents, for which the clients received no return. (See Greeley's report, pp. 147-148.) The character and influence of the methods and agencies used by respondents, and their potentiality for evil, become more apparent as the investigation proceeds, and when carefully studied are, in their adaptability for obtaining money under false pretenses and in their