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, to my chagrin, the Attorney-General remarked that he had not had time to examine the letter.

He carelessly took it up and turned over the leaves without reading it, and then asked me if I had not taken measures for a patent in my own country.

And, upon my reply in the affirmative, he remarked that: 'America was a large country and I ought to be satisfied with a patent there.' I replied that, with all due deference, I did not consider that as a point submitted for the Attorney-General's decision; that the question submitted was whether there was any legal obstacle in the way of my obtaining letters patent for my Telegraph in England.