Moray Products Company.
The Sea Of Energy
In Which The Earth Floats
by
T. Henry Moray
Chapter 4 – Moray Products Company
It becomes a philosophical matter as to whether one should blame any one individual for a misunderstanding or whether one should consider human weaknesses and frailties. It is often possible to simply be in the wrong place in order to be criticized for the actions of others, even though one had no part in the actions that merit criticism.
Recently, for example, I found myself disengaging from a partnership that had become very distasteful. I am sure the other two partners believe they did what was correct. I do not doubt that justice considers well-meaning intentions and extenuating circumstances. Nevertheless, through neglect or ignorance, a person may deliberately avoid facing the implications of what he sees happening, and thus become a party to crime or serious mishap.
Our American philosophy, in a way, has become backwards. We have, in my estimation, lost the proper perspectives. What good does it do to tell a child that he has the right of way and then send him out on a busy street to walk blissfully in front of an oncoming automobile? In the Orient, a mother teaches her child that it is his responsibility not to be hit by an automobile.
I have the option in this chapter of lambasting the many promoters, lawyers and Indian Chiefs who came to Henry Moray, professing to want to help develop Radiant Energy for “mankind”, proposing to try to help Henry Moray in his efforts to bring about his marvelous discovery. However, it is not my place to judge any of these men or cast aspersions on them. I am sure that in their own view they did what they thought should be done.
Recently, I had a call from Provo, Utah, from a person whom I would categorize as another crackpot. He certainly had no knowledge of my background or of the work on Radiant Energy, because his first statement was, “Can you substantiate claims that your father had an energy device?” I said, “Well, come and see,” and I have heard nothing from the gentleman since. Does anyone seriously think a family spends two generations working on a scientific project just to perpetuate an illusion?
But let me develop some of the background of the business entanglements Henry became involved in.
In 1929-30, Henry Moray was offered $50,000 to sell out certain power interests, and he refused. He was approached by Yakovlev of Russia, and Yakovlev and his people insisted that Moray bring his work to Russia. Henry considered what happened to the Czar, and again he refused.
Thereafter, Henry Moray began to get threatening phone calls. He was told that there was “a contract out on him” and that he was to be killed. Is it any wonder that he did not know whom to trust?
Three men, the founders of the Moray Products Co., came to him and offered to put up a large amount of property in Mexico as a security, to sell millions of dollars worth of stock, and to help Henry Moray organize a manufacturing company, a research company, and a distribution company. Schade, Farnsworth, and Hayes offered to give Henry control of the corporation and to issue to him the largest amount of stock. Whatever he wanted them to do, they stated, they would do. Is it any wonder, then, that Henry thought that he would have control of a bona fide corporate operation in which no others could stop his work or threaten, as had been done previously, to withhold money as a means of forcing him to do what they wanted?
Henry withdrew from the R.L. Judd interests. Judd himself, representing Henry as his attorney, cleared the way to release Henry from his contract, although the other Judd interests took great exception to its dissolution.
Mrs. Gertrude Tracy, representing still another group, wrote Henry a letter on October 16, 1930, protesting that her people had not been given a chance to receive a fair hearing. In her letter, she referred to “your representatives” — apparently speaking of Henry’s attorneys, including Judd himself. However, the letter is amusing because of the great virtue she said these people had exhibited. One is reminded of Shakespeare — “Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”
“My Dear Dr. Moray:
“I can’t understand your attitude in regard to our relations on the `Radiant Energy.’
“Mr. Dustin, and his associate, came here prepared to do business in a large way. He brought to you the four requisites to that end; namely,
Unusual integrity;
Unquestioned ability of no small degree (as per references), Experience of years in this line of organization,
Almost unlimited financial backing to carry this through to a successful conclusion.
“He was therefore entitled to a fair chance and your time while here. Instead he had neither, but a bogus contract was sprung on him and that was all he had to work with. Even then he worked out a contract (tentative) to present and that was refused reviewal by your representative.
“I don’t wish you any bad luck, Dr. Moray, but I wouldn’t treat an enemy as you have treated Mr. McKnight and myself and the gentlemen from California. Nor would I expect to succeed, or deserve to, after such a procedure in any undertaking.
“Mr. Todd is an ex-soldier of the World War. He has an inventive turn of mind, like yourself, and did invent something to put on tanks in airplanes (he flies) and out of which he could have made a nice piece of money, but he gave it to the Government. He came back from the War with a shattered body and has been all of these years getting patched up to a semblance of health. He has recently inherited several millions of dollars and was willing and eager to put some of to work for you and your inventions if you had given him and Mr. Dustin an even break.
“In my opinion you have let slip through your hands one of the most capable and strongest group of men in every way for your undertaking that you will meet up with in many a day. They measured up in every respect and would have safe-guarded your interests to the last detail. Mr. McKnight and myself brought them here and I ask for an explanation of the treatment you gave them while here.
“I gambled on you and your fairness to the last moment and lost. Mr. McKnight and I are both hurt and justly indignant at such horse play.
“You may ask how I know they are the best men for this great undertaking, a woman’s intuition, coupled with Mr. Dustin’s list of accomplishments and his very evident inherent integrity. Please let your wife read this and be guided by her.
On the surface, the offer Mrs. Tracy’s group had given Dr. Moray was very interesting. They had an interesting idea of raising money. Payment of one million dollars was to go into the corporation. What could be wrong with that proposition? All the funds were to be withheld until three months after Henry completed the device. But if Henry had already perfected his device at that time, we ourselves would not still be trying to do research to be sure of how to standardize the “tubes.” It is important for the layman to understand that although through the years various generations of the device were demonstrated, none of these devices was totally new; rather, Henry Moray cannibalized the previous version of the machine to make each new version. Also, it had come to Henry’s attention that Mr. Todd was penniless, and not a millionaire as reported.
Finally, Henry’s attorneys advised him against doing business with these people, since they promised nothing until three months after the unit was perfected, and then to pay only in small increments. Business cannot be done on woman’s intuition or because someone is a war hero; instead, immediate funds are necessary for research, operation, capital investment and supplies.
This type of “rigged offer” seemed typical to Henry of all his negotiations through the years. Just because Henry had a “breadboard” unit that brought in energy, why would anyone knowledgeable about research and development of technical devices think that all research had been completed and that no further engineering needed to be done? Dr. Moray was no more ready to proceed to production than Bell Laboratories were when they first had a transistor device in their own laboratories, or than General Electric was the first time Tracy Hall built a press which made synthetic diamonds. It was almost fifteen years before synthetic diamonds, even of industrial grade, were finally put on the market using Hall’s process.
While the era of the individual inventor is not dead, it is extremely difficult for an inventor to take his device from a laboratory conceptual model to a completely engineered, marketable, reproducible device. The complications of producing a consistent product suitable to be manufactured in great quantity have become so gigantic that no one person can possibly comprehend all the ramifications, and few have the capital outlay required for such a massive undertaking. Consequently, for anyone to demand that Henry Moray have completed and produced a device, or that Cosray Research Institute have a finished energy device ready to go on the market today — that is truly pie in the sky.
All of the offers made to Henry had limitations. However, finally three gentlemen seemed to offer him a legitimate deal. They guaranteed to raise a specified amount of money in a certain amount of time, not depending upon Henry’s progress, but giving him adequate time to work on the project and ready it for marketing. This offer enticed Henry to form a company call the Moray Products Company, incorporated under the laws of the State of Nevada in the city of Reno, with the eleven original stockholders as the board of directors. A total of two million shares was authorized, of which one hundred shares were held among ten of the men and fifty thousand held by Henry Moray himself. The corporation started out vigorously and everything seemed to be going well until Henry found that a large amount of his personal stock was being sold; neither he nor the company was getting the benefit of the sales. There was some treasury stock being sold, but the millions of dollars that had been promised from sales in the United States and Mexico were not being generated. Consequently, the company was doing business hand-to-mouth.
As a result, Dr. Murray Hayes found it necessary to look for work elsewhere. He took a job with the Patent Divison of the U.S. Navy, but he agreed to continue to work on the energy patent if Henry Moray would deliver to him some of Moray’s own holding in company stock. Many wild and extraneous stories began to circulate, some of which took years to unfold and come back to Henry Moray. About this time, Henry’s closest friend, W.H.(Bill) Lovesy of the Utah Oil Refining Company mysteriously killed in a one-car accident. His passenger, a hitch-hiker who has never been identified, got up from the accident and walked away.
At this time Henry Moray prepared and published a booklet called The Patent Situation, which covers the dealings of the Moray Products Company and is included here. It also details much patent information which I will not repeat, but will refer to in the following sections.
The Patent Situation
Whenever I have asked for any direct information from the former officials of the Moray Products Company I have been given an evasive answer, in fact I was given practically no more information by them than if I had not been connected with the company.
Prior to the time that Murray O. Hayes left for Washington, D. C., I endeavored in every way to so thoroughly teach him every detail of the Radiant Energy Invention that he would know all the details, that 1 no longer would be the only man in a position to carry this work on. This was not done in a day, a month or a year but through a period of several years, and at no time was I able to see that Dr. Hayes was in any way betraying the confidence placed in him. He had the full detail description of the device given to him little by little, staring as far back as 1928. By October, 1929, In a letter to Mr. W. H. Lovesy, one of the leading officials from the Utah 011 Refining Co., he stated that “Moray has explained all to me without reservation and I am sure that this is a revolutionary and epoch-making invention.” He even acknowledges that I had explained the detector to him and to quote from his letter in referring to the detector: “In this he has applied a fundamental principle of electric circuits which, I believe, would not be noticed unless pointed out by him. This element of his device also, as above mentioned in respect to the circuits, has numerous features which appear incidental, but are the heart of the matter and of first importance.” To quote further from this letter, “I have seen the parts from which it is built. Recently Moray has shown to me the wiring diagram of the assembly and I am free to say that I can find no inconsistencies in it nor anything that does not appear to be logical and sound-and based on recognized laws of electricity when all is explained. There are many features which appear to be incidental but they are in reality of basic importance.”
I want to here point out a few things. You will notice Dr. Hayes speaks of features which appear to be “incidental” but are of basic importance. He states that these things would not be noticed unless pointed out by Moray. I will refer to this statement of Dr. Hayes further on.
Dr. Hayes has told many men that he knew enough about the Moray device so that he could make one of the machines himself from the information Moray had given him. In confirmation of this statement see Mr. Lovesy’s letter of June 29, 1932. Dr. Hayes also made the same statement to Mr. S. E. Bringhurst of Murray. Utah, and others.
In a letter addressed by Mr. W. H. Lovesy to Murray O. Hayes dated May 7, 1930 (and it must be remembered that Mr. Lovesy and Dr. Hayes were very, very intimate in regards to the Moray inventions) it is plainly shown that Dr. Hayes had told Mr. Lovesy that he was working on the patents of the Radiant Energy Device. To quote from this letter “I think you have memorandums prepared and possibly the greater part outlined of a patent presentation, and I think you should prepare for Henry a write-up, as near as you feel it possible, to cover the entire proposition thoroughly and completely, so that he will have it in his possession for use if desired, and it may be required at any time.”
I merely quote these things to substantiate my statement that Murray Hayes was given every opportunity to know. It must be remembered that Dr. Hayes represented himself to be and his records showed him to be a patent attorney of the highest grade. In addition, Dr. Hayes was a physicist of no mean ability. He had received his A. B. degree with Major in Physics. His Masters Degree included graduate courses in physics and mathematics. He had been acting head of the Department of Physics of the Brigham Young University. He had spent five years in examining corps U. S. Patent Office. He was a man of Science, one who should know, one who does know Science. A man that when he has made the statements that his original letters in Moray’s possession show that he has made relative to this Radiant Energy Machine, it leaves no loop hole for him to later say I did not know, I dill not understand, I have not been shown all.
Prior to the time that application was made Murray Hayes had everything in his possession. He selected, without any advice from Moray whatsoever, the man whom he wanted to make the patent drawing. The drawings were checked, the specifications were checked, lie was satisfied. Moray was not trained in patent requirements; he had only Dr. Hayes to depend on that everything was as it should be. Dr. Hayes went to Washington, not as it is generally supposed to prosecute the Moray patents, but to accept the position in the Patent Dlvision of the U. S. Navy, because his co-partners who lead agreed to put the Moray-Products Co. over had failed financially to do so.
In order to prove my last statement I will again refer to letters in my possession. This I feel is necessary, not to make men’s private affairs public but in order to prove that even in their sworn statements in the Second Judicial District Court, State of Nevada, In and for the County of Washoe, when they instituted restraining and enjoining proceedings against Moray under date of May 2, 1932, No. 39982 (Summons) to quote page 4, “That said Murray O. Hayes spent considerable time in the city of Washington, D, C. and is still in said city of Washington prosecuting the application for said patent,” they disagree with the facts in the case. Murray Hayes took the position as stated above because he financially had to do so. And why, because those who were supposed to raise sufficient money to carry on the work of the Moray inventions and patents had failed to do so.
To quote from a letter received from Murray Hayes Jan. 15, 1932, “The cost of sending our boys to school here is terrific, except that they are in school we are no better off here than we were in Salt Lake, but they are going ahead, and that is the important thing. They could not possibly have gone had we not moved.” To further show that Murray Hayes was disappointed in the results obtained by Mr. Schade and Mr. Farnsworth, let me quote from his letter of Jan. 9, 1932. “I, too, think that D. V. should make good on his Mexican proposition.” (By D. V. he is referring to I)., V. Farnsworth and his Mexican proposition was that Mr. Farnsworth had made so tiffany rosy promises as to the millions of dollars that he would be able to raise in Mexico.) Now to quote further front Dr. Hayes’ letter to Moray of Jan. 9, 1932: “If Knight can sell his own stock F. and S. (Farnsworth and Schade) should be able to move some if they buckled into the harness.-Why can’t they do the same for Moray Products?”
Again in a letter from Hayes to Moray dated Jan. 23, 1932, “I sent D. V. some time ago, a letter, asking why he does not try Mexico, but haven’t had a reply as yet. Have not had a letter from him for a long time, because there is no progress to report I Suppose.“
I have another letter from Dr. Hayes in which lie tells me I better get a job, for the Moray Products Co. would never be able to support me. I will come back to these statements later and show that it was because of these statements that I considered it necessary for me personally to endeavor to do something to raise the necessary finances to help carry oil my inventions. It has been complained that I sent men to Reno to sell my personal stock in competition to the men who were trying to help me put things over, but I can prove by their own statements In my possession that they were failing, and that my only purpose was to lend a helping hand. As far back as March 16, 1931, C. Fred Schade, in writing from the Golden Hotel at Reno, Nevada, to Moray had this to say, “We expect to leave Mere in a few days for the coast, but will keep Murray posted (you will note they say they will keep Murray posted, that was always their attitude, they never kept me posted). Things are going slow here now, and we feel it is a waste of time to remain here any longer.” Does this not plainly show that these men were through with Reno, blow then if I worked a field that they were discarding was I running competition to their efforts. When they were failing to raise necessary funds, how was I hindering by trying to use my own efforts to carry on.
I have been accused of withholding progress. I have not withheld any progress, but how could progress be made without the finances necessary for such progress. They had agreed to furnish sufficient sums to secure Moray a laboratory to carry on his work. See the Assignment made by Moray to the Moray Products Co. at the time of its organization. “It is further understood that the undersigned T. Henry (T. H.) Moray shall retain personal ownership and exclusive charge and control of the laboratories and equipment used by him and his assistants for experimental and development purposes.” If the men I had counted on to furnish me this laboratory could not do so, should I lay back and not try to do something myself? They acknowledged that in this they also failed as I will show by letters received. But first let me state that they had agreed to not only furnish me with a laboratory but also to pay me a salary of $1,000.00 per month as soon as the company was financially able to do ho. That this $1,000.00 per month should date back from tile tune that the company was organized and until this $1,000.00 per month could be paid, the Moray Products Co. should pay me sufficient to support myself and family and to pay my indebtedness. Was this ever done? No. The money that Moray did receive these men. sold his personal stock and after subtracting their commission of at first 33 1/3 per cent and later 20 per cent which they kept personally, Moray was given the balance. They may have changed the books and records to show otherwise, of this I do not know, but I can positively prove by written evidence in my possession that It was Moray’s personal stock that was being sold.
Not being able to perform the job that they had agreed to do, they began to look for some place to unload the responsibility of their failure. In a letter written by Dr. Hayes to Moray, Nov. 13, 1931, to quote, “Last Thursday night I went to a meeting of the IRE and got talking with a man who runs a Radio and Television Laboratory. He says that with the device as far along as it is he can get it ready for market in three months if we will turn him loose on it. He will not require any pay until it is ready except some stock.
“From what I can learn of him he is thoroughly reliable.”
In answer to this letter I wrote Dr. Hayes asking him why it was that his attitude had so thoroughly changed that his advice was contrary now to everything he had said before. (Dr. Hayes knew of the many chances I have had that were far superior to the offers they were now making me. That he had advised me strongly not to accept any of these offers knowing that they were contrary to the very thing that I had worked so hard to accomplish, i.e., that I should have my own laboratory in which to perfect my own inventions.) In this letter I asked him why it was that he was now willing that I should turn a man loose on it or in other words disclose all my secrets to a man that all he could say about him was that he had “got talking with,” not even giving me his name; not personally knowing the man but only from what he could learn of him he was thoroughly reliable.
Moray asked Dr. Hayes to give him the man’s name that some check might be made to ascertain the reliability of this chance acquaintance. No answer was ever made to these questions, but in answer to the question by Moray to Hayes as to why he had made this request to turn this man loose on it, Hayes made the reply that it was simply a case of not having the money to do it ourselves and that he thought it a good thing when they could not furnish me with a laboratory to let somebody try who did have a laboratory. I have later checked and as near as I can find out from what Mr. Farnsworth told me on his return from the East, the laboratory referred to was John Wolf’s laboratory.
In talking to men who have been in Mr. Wolf’s laboratory they tell me that his laboratory is no better equipped for my purposes than the one I have.
Dec. 20, 1931, D. V. Farnsworth, writing Moray from Brooklyn, N. Y., requested Moray to permit a commercial tube fact to build his-tubes, stated They make so many the do not know or care what they are for. There would be no chance of anyone getting next to what you even wanted them for.” Any reasonable man can see that this was one of the best ways for Moray to betray his stock holders and a fine way for him to throw away all that he had worked so many years to accomplish. For it must be remembered that we have no patent protection until the patent is granted sufficient to warrant such action. And furthermore, these requests were contrary to the very reason why Moray had secured the services of these men, i.e., that he should have laboratory in which he could accomplish the perfecting of his inventions.
Before leaving this subject .I would like to be plainly understood that Murray Hayes knew front the beginning of my acquaintance with him years ago and I can so prove by those acquainted with my relationships with Dr. Hayes that he thoroughly understood what my hopes and ambitions were and the things for which I stood and had worked so hard to accomplish. When Mr. Farnsworth and Mr. Schade came into the picture I again made myself clear that I was not interested and would not consider any proposition that did not guarantee to me, among other things, the following:
Sufficient finances to provide myself with a laboratory and the necessary equipment wherein my inventions might be perfected under my supervision in my own laboratory.
That during the time I was engaged In giving my services for the advancement of my inventions, that those dependent upon me should be properly cared for, and that any attempt to curtail, suppress or “salt down” any of my inventions when I should deem them perfected and ready for commercial use should constitute a breach of contract. Or in other words I was determined that the public should be permitted to enjoy at a reasonable cost the benefits of my inventions.
Now to quote again from the above mentioned Summons No. 39982 they further state “that the defendant herein, Thomas Henry Moray, has refused neglected. and does now refuse and neglected to furnish plaintiff herein with models, drawings and demonstrations which the patent office requires for the perfection of the patents on the machines and processes referred to in the contract entered into by plaintiff and defendant on or about the 31st day of Jan. 1931, although this plaintiff and its attorney, Murray 0. Hayes, have on numerous occasions within the last year written to said Thomas Henry Moray and demanding that he furnish the necessary information plans and demonstrations required to perfect said patents. That said defendant in answer to all these letters has refused to comply with the terms of his agreement with plaintiff herein.”
In answer to the above I will state that no one can show any letters where at any time prior to the beginning of court action have I refused to render all the help possible in the prosecution of the patent application I have in my possession every question that Murray Hayes asked me and I also have in my possession copies of the letters that I sent to Murray Hayes, and in these letters I always stated that if I had not made myself clear for Hayes to tell me so and I would be willing to go over the whole matter with him again. It is true I expressed my disappointment and surprise at Mr. Hayes’ seemingly ignorance of the device after my years of association with him, in which I had tried hard to fully acquaint him with all details of the Radiant Energy Device. On December 21, 1931, Mr. Hayes wrote me anion other things and referring to one of my letters to him in answer to questions he had asked “The information came through all right. I believe that is enough to make full and complete disclosures, so everything will be O. K.” ` Soon after-That Ietter Dr: Hayes again asked me-for more information. I should not say more information, for he was asking the same questions over and over again in a different way – questions lie had asked in the beginning of my disclosures to him while he was still in Salt Lake City years before-questions that I had answered him in detail in which I had copies in his own handwriting of my answers to these questions.
I wrote Mr. Hayes informing him that I had given him the same information time and again, expressing my regret that I was not in Washington so that I might again go over with him every detail, telling him if necessary to pull things out of the Patent Office, delay the action until I could get sufficient money to come to Washington. In answer to my expressing a desire to come to Washington, he told me such an action on my part was not necessary, and to quote from a letter from him he states: “It would be a fruitless waste of money for you to come to Washington. Our attorneys are fully qualified to do all the argument necessary.”
It is true in some of his later letters he asked me to come to Washington but that only to demonstrate the device, plainly informing me, however, not to come unless I came prepared to demonstrate. This Mr. Hayes positively knew I could not do, and I will later take up the question of demonstration.
I would like to quote from another letter written by Murray Hayes March 24, 1932. In writing to a certain gentleman who made an inquiry regarding the patent: “The patent situation on the Moray invention is very good. I had a talk with the chief of the division where the Radiant Energy application is being examined, and lie was favorably inclined. I cannot personally do the patent work, being in the government service, but we have some of the best men in Washington handling it. Do not tell Moray what I have told you, as we are trying to get him to do some things that will mean rapid progress for the company, but he probably will not It he learns that things are going well here. If we can get him back here to demonstrate it will mean all the money we need, but he will not unless he believes it necessary to sate things. The sooner we can get him back here to demonstrate, the sooner there will be returns from the company.”
I would like to analyze some of the statements In the above quotation. If I had been refusing any of the requests of the patent office, how could the patent situation be “very good?” Why should there be that “don’t tell Moray?” Does not that show that they had been trying to deceive me? What were some of these things they were trying to get Moray to do?
They were, as ‘shown by former quotations, to give my secrets to strangers, not the Patent Office. They already had everything. Murray Hayes had not been asking for this additional information for the Patent Office. He had been asking it that he might turn this information over to those that they later acknowledged had tried to make my machine (and that contrary to all agreements. See assignment Moray Products Company) and could not make it work.
Why could they not make it work? I will give my version of that later on.
Why did they wish these demonstrations? Because the Patent Office had asked for them? No. There were other parties in the east who were saying that if I would come forward and make such a demonstration they would buy this sales and manufacturing contract that Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes claimed to have, and which was obtained by misrepresentation, deceit and the attempt to manipulate so as to get something for nothing.
Was it their aim and purpose that the Moray Products Company would receive the full benefit from this contract? No. The sales and manufacturing contract Is a proposition in and of itself — a personal affair between myself and Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes. It was not their idea that the stockholders, the investors who had put their money into this thing should receive the benefit, but it was an idea of theirs that through the manipulation of words and misrepresentation that they should claim they had paid me $15,000.00 for this contract, and thereby be able to satisfy their own personal greed, and their desire to profit by something they had never earned. Let me go on record that while it is not my purpose in this account to even consider the sales and manufacturing contract, for your information I will say that the parties above referred to have hot paid $15,000.00 for any contracts — they have not paid fifteen cents nor ono cent for this contract nor any other contract, and I have written evidence to prove this statement. The sales and manufacturing contract has not, is not and never shall be recognized by me. If and when any profits are made from any source whatsoever on my inventions, the investors, not the, manipulators, shall realize their just and right pro rate share of these profit.
I would like to call attention again to that letter quoted above written by Mr. Hayes on March 24, 1932, in which he states that he could not personally do the patent work, being in the government service. Does this statement agree with their sworn statement presented to the Court in the State of Nevada that said Murray 0. Hayes spent considerable time in the city of Washington, D. C. and is still in said city of Washington prosecuting the application of said patent!
Murray Hayes took 50,000 shares of my personal stock which was in payment for doing the patent work. He takes a job with the U. S. Government. He plainly stated in his letter of March 24, 1932, that because of his position with the government he could not do this work, but that they had patent attorneys, some of the best in Washington, handling it. Did Dr. Hayes pay these attorneys? He had received his pay from me to do this work, he is unable to do so, so they hire Cameron, Kerkam and Sutton and pay these gentlemen large sums of-money out of the Moray Products treasury to do something that Mr. Hayes had already been paid to do.
How are we going to answer these questions? One time he says he is doing it, one time he says he is not and cannot If he cannot and they have to pay some one else for doing it, why should he be paid? If he can do the patent work, why should he accept payment for his services which he is supposed to render his government and which he evidently cannot be doing if he is doing as they reported to the Court?
Under date of July 15, 1931, Murray Hayes wrote me from Washington, D. C. a letter which gave me the first idea that he would be unable to Deecute the patent application of my invention. I will later quote from this letter. Let me state here that at the time Dr. Hayes left Salt Lake City, he did not inform me until two days before he left that he was going. When I expressed my anxiety as to my patents and who should handle them when he had accepted a position with the government, he assured me that that had been taken care of and that the U. S. Navy was so anxious to get his services and had been trying to do so for a whole year, that ‘hey were willing to permit him to continue on with my applications because he had explained to them his situation.
In the above referred to letter of July 15, 1931. in referring to the fact that he could not do my patent work I will quote: “There 1,3 a man working where I do who says he makes more from his private patent practice than his salary. He does it through an associate, but we intend to have associates anyhow, so that is O. K. by us. This is strictly confidential and especially should be kept from anyone connected with Smoot’s office. I will be right on the job looking after our stuff.”
Murray Hayes has from the beginning been fully aware of the danger that existed with anything as big as this Radiant Energy Device. In a letter received by Dr. Hayes April 17, 1931, it proves that he was aware of my fears of this thing being stolen from me if I disclosed too much to strangers until I had full and complete patent protection and financial backing, as many a good thing had been lost for the want of sufficient caution in handling it. This quotation that I am about to make from the above mentioned letter expresses the identical idea that is expressed in a letter written by C. Fred Schade to Murray Hayes at a later date relative to his (Schade’s) conversation with a certain influential man in California.
Now to quote from the above mentioned letter of April 17, 1931: “One of the parties interested formerly held a confidential position with the General Electric and later with the Westinghouse: He nearly took my breath when I told him regarding Moray’s fears that the proposition might be stolen from the Patent Office. He said, ‘It will, just as sure as you send it there, that the U. S. Patent Office is honey-combed with employees of the General Motors, General Electric and other large companies. That he had helped steal valuable data from the Patent Office at the request of the above companies. He said you were crazy if you sent a description of this device to Washington before you had plenty of money to follow it through and Influence enough to prevent a theft.’ So I confess after leaving him that I was in error scoffing at the fears of Moray.”
It was because of such statements and the infringement cases I had known of where inventors had lost all or had to follow through long years of court action in order to get what was justly theirs, that has made me so cautious, and the reason why I was so insistent that my patents should first fall directly into the hands of the Commissioner of Patents, knowing that if such an official should be the first one to receive them, then there would be no later danger of someone getting possession of my secrets who had no right to do so.
I have been very cautious, have tried hard to make no mistakes and I am fully convinced that my disclosures have been fully protected and will be protected from such things as referred to above by the Commissioner of Patents, I am a great believer in keeping the barn door closed before the horse Is gone, rather than after.
Reference was made above to D. V. Farnsworth’s Mexican proposition. In leaving that subject I would like to quote from a letter dated December 21, 1931, received .by me from Carlos M. Gaxiola, the Mexican scientist who so thoroughly investigated my device. “Dear Sir: I have received many days ago your pamphlets related to your wonderful invention which I personally inspected in your home last year in the company of Hon. Milton H. Welling, Secretary of State there.
“I am still interested in the future of this Invention and its industrialization, and would like to know if you will, as you and Mr. Farnsworth offered me then to keep me in mind for the propaganda and territory in Mexico.”
Let me state here I did my uttermost to get Mr. Farnsworth to make good on his Mexican proposition but which he has entirely failed to do.
Let me now briefly cover the patent situation.
As has been stated above I sincerely tried to fully advise Murray Hayes on all details of the Radiant Energy Device, and he in turn informed me and others that he understood all and that I had shown him all. I have shown Dr. Hayes’ qualifications which prove hint to be a competent scientist and one in a position to know what he was talking about.
After Dr. Hayes left here to go- to Washington, the idea came to me that it would be well to segregate or separate certain parts of the patent. Accordingly, I wrote him to this effect. In his answer to me dated July 15. 1931, is acknowledged the above statement. “We shall put in by amendment those things you mention that are not claimed. I wanted to cover everything broadly, but did not want to run over twenty claims as It costs one dollar per claim for all over twenty when filing.”
I naturally took it for granted that the matter had been taken care of until a paper copy of the Patent Office report under date of February 16. 1932, asked for the division of my patent into three divisions. In other words, in July, 1931, they promised to do this thing, by February they had not done so, and as late as July 20, 1932, when I received a communication direct from the Patent Office, wherein they again ask for this same division Into three classes, stating that the requirement is repeated and made final. It seems that some sort of an answer to the request of the Patent Office was made by them on March 4, 1932, but that the request of the Patent Office had not been complied with or why should the Patent Office have to repeat its request July 20, and state “The requirement is repeated and made final.”
In answer to this communication I wrote the Patent Office asking them just exactly what I should do and stating to them that I was most anxious to have the papers exactly as per requirements and also asking the Patent Office if they would kindly give me information and advice so that I might place the papers in shape so as to meet the requirements of the patent office. I sent this letter air mail and attached an envelope with air mail stamps so that I might receive a quick answer to my inquiry.
The above is ail the information I have as to the patent itself. Nothing is asked for in the shape of additional information, demonstration or anything but the division of the patent as stated. I have had other correspondence with the Patent Office during the months of June, July and August in which it was arranged that all future communications relative to the patents would be sent direct to Moray.
It has been necessary for me to file with the Patent Office certified copies of the Court Decrees in order to establish my right to have this information because of the action of D. V. Farnsworth and the others. On August 10th, 1932. I was informed that under date of July 23, the Patent Office received a paper from D. V. Farnsworth, as President of the Moray Products Company, requesting that Moray be denied access to his applications. This paper was supported by an affidavit signed by D. V. Farnsworth that he was President of the Moray Products Company. It was also signed by Murray 0. Hayes as Secretary and Treasurer.
There can be only one conclusion drawn from the action of these men. They were trying to get possession of certain papers and information by the same methods that they have used in all their transactions. It must be remembered that District Judge Ben F. Curler under date of June . 11, 1932, removed Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes as directors of the Moray Products Company. Then it was found that the Court had been deceived and that Mr. Farnsworth had resigned prior to the time that judgment was rendered and because of this deception by these men to the Court, it was necessary that Judge Curler, under date of July 22, 1932, Issue an amended judgment and decree in order to cover this deception.
These men could not possibly have supposed that they would remain officers of the Moray Products Company in spite of the action of the Nevada District Court. Their only hope could be to cause more temporary delay and to carry on their plan of deception. Needless to say, proper steps have been taken to overcome this deception as in all other cases.
I did not want trouble. It will be noted that during my visit to Reno in March, 1932, 1 made no reference to any of these facts above referred to, and everything that happened prior to my visit in Reno I was fully aware of, as much so then as I am now, excepting that I was assured at all times that these men whom I had entrusted as officers of the Moray Products Company would, as soon as possible, issue certificates of stock to cover the sales that I had made In Nevada. In fact less than an hour before I left Salt Lake City, D. Y. Farnsworth called me up on the telephone and assured me that the certificates would be issued without further delay. It is a matter of record that I sent to these officials a stock certificate No. 285 for 16,667 shares, and a list of the investors to whom I wished certificates Issued. This certificate was the smallest one I had, hence the necessity of turning so large a certificate over to them, it covering about sixteen times more stock than that which was to be transferred.
They kept this certificate and yet did not issue the stock according to my order. They even went so far as to try later to deny having received this certificate, but I had registered it to them through my attorney, Mr. Musser, at Salt Lake and we had positive proof that the certificate was in their possession.
It is also a known fact that when Mr. Schade was asked why he had not issued the certificates to the people in Nevada from Moray’s personal stock his answer was that attorney R. L. Judd had put in a restraining order against his issuing or transferring any stock owned by Moray. When Moray heard this he knew that it was just another of Mr. Schade’s misrepresentations, because he knew that attorney Judd was a friend of the Moray inventions, would not if he could and could not if he would have issued such an order; that Mr. Judd’s only attitude to the Moray Inventions was one of helpfulness and nothing else.
However, so that Moray could say that he had personally interviewed attorney Judd, Moray called on him and found things as he expected and that Mr. Judd knew nothing of such a claim and was surprised at the statement. Later, on about the 10th of April, 1932, Messrs. Penny and Lilinquist, unbeknown to Moray, called on Mr. Judd and Mr. Judd told them most emphatically that he had not done this thing and that he would have absolutely no reason for doing such a thing.
At last when the officers of the Moray Products Company found they could no longer beat about the bush, they instructed the Resident Agent of the Moray Products Company at Reno, Nevada, to inform me that among other reasons why they would not issue stock to my order was that the stock issued to Moray was invalid, or, in other words, that I no longer had any stock in the Moray Products Company. They were putting me out of my own company. or in other words, it was going to be a case that the creator of these inventions, should have to step down and out after having spent his whole life on this work in favor of some promoters who have never invested one cent of their own money In this thing, but on the other hand had taken out large commissions, issued themselves, because Moray trusted them, 150,000 shares of stock, from Moray’s own personal block, and then made the claim that they would either ran and control the whole thing or ruin it all.
Moray was up against the wall, he must go to court. He had tried to bear everything he could in order to protect the Moray Products Company and its investors from the results of law suits, but he had no choice, they had forced him to take an issue.
You that were at the trial at Reno know how much mud throwing was done by the other side. I was financially unable to be present at the trial because it took all my money to furnish myself with attorneys. I would like to refer you to a statement made by Moray at the directors meeting held in Salt Lake City, Friday, July 29. 1932.
I can see that it will be impossible for me to cover even the ground I had expected to do. I have been continually putting letters aside that I had intended to quote from, but this is already far ‘longer than I intended to make it. I could show you Mr. Farnsworth’s records as an oil stock promoter. I could show you what those who are supposed to know Mr. Schade in Ogden, Utah, and other places have to say about him. But If you care to investigate these things yourself, I do not think you will have any trouble in finding out what you may care to discover.
I have before me written proof that the fifty thousand shares which C. F. Schade claims to own has never been paid for. Mr. Schade under oath in the courts of Salt Lake City, in his wife’s divorce case, testified that he could not make a division of this Moray Products Company stock that he was reported as owning. because it was not his, he had not earned it. I have before me a memorandum in Mr. Schade’s own hand writing acknowledging seven certificates, giving me the number of these certificates and the number of shares totaling 2500 shares, which he states “given Schade to pay some obligations with.” Here Schade acknowledges that lie paid obligations with stock that he wished to “term” that Moray had given him, and he states they were used to pay some obligations, yet when Moray pays obligations with Moray’s personal stock, obligations incurred in the forwarding of his Inventions, some of you people cry “crook.” Moray paying debts incurred that the inventions might go on. out of his own personal property, and instead of this being appreciated he has been censured for it. More may be said about Moray’s “crookedness” later on.
I have shown above that Dr. Hayes’ claim on personal stock is based on the promise that he would do the patent work. He himself acknowledges he cannot do it, therefore he is trying to claim property without paying for the same. Mr. Schade has acknowledged he has not paid for his and Mr. Farnsworth’s claim on stock is exactly in the same status as Mr. Schade’s. Both were working under the same agreements, the same promises and identical conditions.
Mr. Schade, under date of October 5, 1931, went to an attorney at Salt Lake City, named E. D. Hatch, and there obtained 29 receipts of personal transactions of Moray’s and some of his relations, under the false pretense to this attorney that they were for the use and benefit of T. H. Moray. This was for the sole purpose of again fraudulently deceiving the public, and he fraudulently deceived attorney Hatch when he signed the receipt that I have in my possession before me in which be claimed he was getting these receipts because I had sent him to get them for me for my use and benefit, and it was not for six or seven months later that I knew that Mr. Schade had obtained these papers and signed a receipt for them and at the time I found out this had been done I wondered what use he would try and put these receipts to. It has later become very evident that he is using them in his same old game of deception.
There has been another man by the name of H.C. Carlisle who has also made gross statements of misrepresentations. I have before me a letter dated May 22, 1932, front Greeley, Colorado. which positively proves that Mr. Carlisle on May 20, 1932, was in Greeley and there falsified and misrepresented facts so grossly that they wrote me from Greeley stating that they positively knew from their own experience that this Mr. Carlisle was not stating the facts. I will quote in part from this letter: “Mr. Carlisle told me of several instances that I knew were not so, having been in Salt Lake and knowing the facts. One especially that he knew Mr. Noffsinger was there-that they saw me while there. If so he did not recognize me while in Mr. VarveIs office. He also said that Mr. T. H. Moray refused to accept papers served on him. I asked him what time he accepted the papers and he said that they tried all day to serve them and along in the evening late, Wednesday, May’ 11, T. H. Moray accepted them. This I know is not true because I, myself, in person, was sitting in T. H. Moray’s home at 2484 South 5th ‘East, when they were served and T. H. Moray did not refuse the papers in the least.”
I could go on and show where Mr. Carlisle has come into my home and discussed matters before witnesses and gone away and misquoted and misrepresented what took place and I can show other misrepresentations made by this man.
Under date of June 13, 1932, Murray O. Hayes wrote me among other things that a certain party had come to his office to see him and that this party had told Hayes that his brother and father had been to Salt Lake City in either December, 1931, or January, 1932, and had there witnessed a demonstration of the Moray Radiant Energy Device. After some investigation I found out that Mr. Gervis Reed whom Mr. Hayes reported had made the above statement had a father by the name of Ira E. Reed and a twin brother T. V. Reed. To quote from their letter to me of June 24, 1932: “This is to clear the mistake rumored that a Mr. Reed from Greeley, Colorado has seen a demonstration in Salt Lake City or any other place.” Mr. Ira E. Reed, the father of Mr. Gervis Reed, of Camden, N. J. and T. V. Reed, a twin brother, states these facts and acknowledges these statements by signing a letter of testimony.
Mr. Reed also states the fact that he nor his son have not been in Salt Lake City in the last ten years.
There has been souse attempt by the former officers of the Moray Products Company to try and say that former associates with Moray have found him faulty in judgment and desirous of cheating people out of their just rights. I will quote from a letter of June 14, 1932, written by a Mr. E. G. Jensen of 903 Continental Bank Building, Salt Lake City, Utah, one of those who have assisted Moray financially in times past and who, while not having stock in the Moray Products Company Is fully aware of all that has taken place; has followed Moray in his work for the past six or seven years and positively knows that when Moray realizes anything on his inventions commercially that each and every investor be they stockholders or otherwise, shall receive their just share and equity for any favor or assistance rendered Moray in his work to put over his inventions. To quote from the above mentioned letter signed by Mr. Jensen to a friend in the east:
“The more I follow this thing and know about it, the more convinced I am of the soundness of Moray’s plans and Judgment.”
I would now like to quote from a copy before me of a release of agreement signed by certain parties to a contract of April 15, 1925. In this agreement it states that differences have arisen between the parties as to the operations of the terms of the said agreement “for which neither party blames the other.” These people know that they shall be justly dealt with and therefore were willing to sign this release and agreement.
It has been claimed that certain parties invested $29,000.00, turned this money over to me, that I took the same, banked it in my wife’s name and did not use it for the purpose for which it was given me. In the first place, they are wrong as to the amount, exaggerating as usual by nearly 100 per cent, and they are equally wrong in the claim that the money was given tome and that I banked it in my wife’s name, for the very reason that the money received by these parties was at our mutual request placed in the bank under the name and check of one of their own parties. He checked through full report and Invoices where every cent was to go before the checks were issued. Mr. Jensen was one of these parties and I have referred to him above. The people who put up this money are not kicking, why should untruths be hatched up by those who are in no way concerned.
The question may be asked, why did I trust Farnsworth. Schade and Hayes as I did? My criticism of most inventors has been that they have been too distrustful of mankind and they have not only wanted to be the inventor but the office boy, general manager and everything else. So I went the other extreme and gave too much power to men, so much so that they were like the camel and the Arab. Murray Hayes was the man that I counted on, the man I thought I knew after years of trying, the man that promised to stand by me if I would only give them unlimited power. I followed his advice and it was nearly my undoing. I do not intend to burden this statement with replies to their accusations of how I have misused money furnished me by the Moray Products Company for the very simple reason that all the money that I have received from Schade, Farnsworth and Hayes, was from the sale of my personal stock after they had deducted their commission. They have not lived up to their agreement that the Moray Products Company should furnish certain sums, but have even taken commissions from deals that I personally put over, in which they had no part In the transaction except to collect their commission. This was the case In the S. E. Bringhurst deal in which Mr. Bringhurst will tell you they had no part, but they did not fail to deduct their commission to cover this transaction from other transactions of mine they had made.
It stands to reason that I should put forth every possible effort to forward my inventions because I am the one that will benefit the most by the success and marketing of the Moray inventions. If it is money Moray wanted, he could have gotten that long ago. If it is the chance to put over his inventions in his own laboratory, that takes finances, and if Moray squanders the finances how can he ever hope for a successful conclusion and realization of the hopes of his life? While it is true that I have a large automobile. I had a large automobile many, many years ago. I turned this car in on this new car and have been paying for it in small monthly payments out of the small balance I have allowed myself as a means of support. No reasonable man can deny me the right to exist and support my family. No large sums have been paid out in extravagant living. I did not organize the Moray Products Company so that I could earn a living, and I have been willing to sacrifice and have done so, spending large sums of my own money and that of relations in order to carry on the advancement of my inventions, but I do not propose that my family should go in want just to satisfy the criticism of certain unreasonable, unscrupulous promoters.
It must be remembered that I have an income, and while it is small it is entirely independent In every shape and form from the Moray Products Company.
It is true that I ride horses for exercise (just as other men play golf). Sorry to say I very seldom have the chance to ride as I am kept too busy trying to make a success of my inventions. A man must keep himself physically fit in order to stand the strain I have been under, and those who object to my taking a little recreation and exercise are very unreasonable. However, I want to make the positive and emphatic statement that not one cent of money that has ever come out of Nevada has been invested in any horse of mine.
I am not going into detail on this horse question, but will say that like all the rest of the stories, it has been falsified, exaggerated and misrepresented.
I have shown above that Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes have, by their own statements, proven that they have done nothing in payment for the stock they claimed, and for the information of all concerned let me most emphatically and definitely declare that their stock manipulations in the giving away of stock and their other stock transfers is and shall not be recognized by me nor by the Moray Products Company.
There may be some anxiety felt as to just how much harm Dr. Hayes and. his associates may be able to do because of the information in all its detail that Dr. Hayes acknowledges to have been given by Moray. It was brought out in the trial at Reno that Dr. Hayes and others had tried to make this machine and it did not work. That has been partially covered above. If Dr. Hayes could have done any harm, he would have done so long before now, for I have reason to believe that he has for the past eight or nine months been endeavoring to the best of his ability to betray me and my secrets, secrets that were entrusted to him in a professional way and therefore they became professional secrets. You will notice that he mentions that there are many “incidental” features or rather features that appear to be incidental and would not be noticed by anyone unless they were pointed out by Moray. These apparent incidental features are in reality of basic importance and to quote from his letter “has numerous features which appear to be incidental but are the heart of the matter and of first importance.”
It is very evident that Dr. Hayes has forgotten the telephone number of these numerous incidental features that are the heart of the device, and having forgotten is unable to recall them and therefore he can put no light in the machine without the heart. Because of Dr. Hayes’ faulty memory it apparently seems that I still am the only man of whom the public has any knowledge that can duplicate this Radiant Energy Device.
As to demonstrations: So many stories have been going around relative to my giving demonstrations as mentioned in a letter received from Dr. Hayes August 27. 1932: “I have first hand, written, unimpeachable evidence that you have recently been giving some of the most successful demonstrations of your career.”
If it were not for the fact that I also want to repudiate their bald faced lies in this respect also, I do not deem the source of their “unimpeachable” evidence worth considering. The only direct and concrete evidence that they have been able to show is that there is one party by the name of John Burt who even told me to my face that last October, I gave hint a demonstration. Mind you a private, personal demonstration, to a man who has neither the financial backing, the community prestige nor the scientific training that a demonstration would amount to anything one way or another, yet I go to the danger, the expense, the trouble and the time to give this man an absolutely useless, uncalled for and fruitless demonstration. I am not going to argue the man’s sincerity, veracity nor anything else, but can say that it it were necessary I can rove by at least twelve people that this, thing is not so. If the man is subject to hallucinations and great imagination I cannot say, but I would have no trouble in establishing which one of us is oft.
It has been claimed that I gave a demonstration in the Y. M. M. I. A. “M” Men’s Class of the Forest Dale Ward in Salt Lake City. Again to answer this foolish statement, what would I gain by such a useless demonstration? Am I still out trying to prove this thing? The Moray Radiant Energy Machine is no longer on the defensive, it is a settled, proven fact. But to answer that as I have all their other lies, I will state that I have not been inside the Forest Dale Ward buildings during the past eight years, and never at any time during my lifetime have I attended any Y. M. M. I. A. meetings in the Forest Dale Ward. The supervisor of the class, when questioned by me, stated that Mr. Carlisle had asked him concerning this purported demonstration, and he made the statement to Mr. Carlisle most emphatically, that such a demonstration had not been given in his class. The bishop of the Ward, the president of the Mutual nor any officer of the Ward knows anything of such a demonstration.
Now why should I go ahead and give a lot of these useless demonstrations, and what would be gained by so doing, and what would be my object in lying about it? If I could give demonstrations and should feel like giving demonstrations there is no need of my hiding among the bush and lying about it. No one has any right to say that I shall or shall not give demonstrations. I have full charge, personal ownership and control of the laboratories and equipment used by me and my assistants for experimental and development purposes, and this device most certainly is still in its experimental and development stage. Having such unlimited power why in the name of reason should I lie about it?
The device was burned up after a noted scientist had completed his scientific investigation and could find no fault with the demonstration so began his tinkering and tried to turn police detective instead of remaining in his realm of science and he did what can be done to any electrical machine-he burned it up. A very interesting account of this demonstration may be found in two letters written by Dr. Hayes, one on May 25, 1931, and the other May 27, 1931. Since that time I have been left without sufficient substance of one particular kind to carry on further demonstrations, and all these reported demonstrations have been hatched up and are the product of a feverish mind. Their unimpeachable evidence, if hunted down, would be found to be a will-of-the-wisp.
Hearsay reports have come to me that the Moray tubes are lost, that through my failure to perform certain things (and these things have never been defined to me that I have failed to do) but the accusation is that something, a missing link, some indefinite, unexplained something is missing and they seem to be unable to fully inform themselves just what it is they are talking about, I think I have proven and shown above that Murray Hayes acknowledged to have at one time known all. Then it we turn to his letter of August 7, 1931, written at Washington, D. C.: “I spent the whole day in the search room of the Patent Office and examined every patent issued by the U. S. on devices for the reception of Radiant Energy. Most of them were so obviously dissimilar to your invention that they did not consume much time, and not one is there which shows on reading, even the remotest resemblance of your Radiant Energy Machine. Not one mentions such an idea.
“Neither is there any patent which suggests anything like your oscillator tubes.”
If at the time the patent was applied for in July, 1931, and then in August Dr. Hayes makes the above statement, how in the name of reason can t lost if Dr. Hayes and his associates have done the right thing when we were in the patent office prior to the time of any other patent which suggests anything like Moray’s oscillator tubes.
If mistakes have been made, they are Dr. Hayes’ mistakes. He was the patent man and should have known, and I am convinced did know, and that the patent situation is exactly as we quoted from his letter of March 24, 1932, in which he stated “the patent situation the Moray Invention is very good.”
They have also made the statement that the lead and rubber discoveries are also lost. These statements like all their others, I am fully convinced are exaggerated, misleading and falsified. How can they say that these two discoveries are lost; can they name the parties who are able to do the same thing; can they give the patent numbers of patents where the same thing is accomplished? And after they have done all of this (which I am positive they cannot do), that would still not prove their statement. Even if someone else could accomplish the identical thing that is accomplished in this lead and rubber discovery, that would not prove that they had discovered the method used by us. There would be room for two three different methods to accomplish this same thing without greatly affecting the value of one method. How can they say that our method has been lost when they have not the slightest idea how we accomplish either the lead or rubber discovery. These two discoveries have never been disclosed to any man, and at one time when Murray Hayes asked me last December to apply for the patent on the.- lead and the rubber, in my letter to him of Dec. 7, 1931, I stated, “The lead and the rubber will never be patented until they are sold, and then those who buy them can do as they want and the seventeen years will not have started. I can send samples of either any place and have no fear of anyone making them.”
If I have never disclosed these two discoveries to any one, how can they then say that someone else has found the same thing?
In closing let me say that the court proceedings at Reno during the month of May, 1932, proved beyond the shadow of a doubt the genuineness of the Moray Radiant Energy Device. The hundreds of demonstrations given to some of the World’s greatest scientists, both foreign and American and the hundreds of intelligent people who have seen demonstrations as have been recorded in the accounts of these demonstrations, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the genuineness of what is claimed.
And last, my enemies, the former officers of the Moray Products Co., have done everything; have hunted everywhere; have stooped to the lowest, most contemptible falsehoods, but through it all the Moray Radiant Energy invention has come unscratched, its genuineness proven and unimpeachable.
I appeal for whole-hearted cooperation of all the investors to the end that we may, with the least possible delay, advance to the success which will mean a realization beyond your fondest dreams and hopes of the success of this enterprise. .
T.H. MORAY.
Directors meeting of the Moray Products Company, held according to notices mailed at 2484 South 5th East, Salt Lake City, Utah, Priday, July 29, 1932, at 2 P. M. Present: T. H. Moray and S. E. Bringhurst, a majority of the directors appointed by Court action of July 22. 1932, Reno, Nevada. Proof of notice to Walter Rowson, the third director appointed by the court, is contained in a telegram of July 28, 1932, from Reno, Nevada, and a copy of a letter of July 8th, and telegram of July 26, 1932, to Mr. Rowson and which will be found in the files of this office.
Meeting was called to order by T. Henry Moray. T. Henry Moray was voted upon as President of the Moray Products Company. S. E. Bringhurst was voted upon as Secretary-Treasurer and Walter Rowson was voted upon as Vice-President of the Moray Products Company.
Mr. Moray and Mr. Bringhurst executed oath of office as directors and as President and Secretary-Treasurer, respectively. Blanks were sent to Mr. Rowson at his Reno address requesting that he execute the regulation oath of office. T. Henry Moray desired and did make general statement for the benefit of stockholders and officers of the company, and it is hereby made a part of the record.
“I would like to have spread upon the minutes of this meeting some few facts that are very vital and some that are more a matter of comment. It is a matter of common knowledge that with a few other stockholders, I petitioned the Court at Reno, Nevada, that new directors of the Moray Products Company be appointed because of the failure of the old directors and officers to comply with the laws of Nevada and the By-laws of the Moray Products Company. There were also other reasons why it was necessary that a reorganization be affected which might be summed down to the fact that no progress was being made and that time was being wasted. No matter what they said at or about the trial at Reno,-We (those who petitioned the Court) won the decision of the Court, notwithstanding the many, many witnesses and their statements. No attempt was made by my attorneys to place any counter testimony as to my character for the simple reason that my character or reputation was not on trial. To any of those who wish to know about me personally I will gladly furnish references of reliable citizens of this State and elsewhere who have known me for more than thirty-five years and my record is such that I am willing that it should be gone into in as much detail as anyone may desire. Those who testified as to my character at Reno, strange to say, do not know me more than in a casual way and I have letters proving their testimony was based on their own purposes and not on fact and truth. I well dismiss this with the statement that I enjoy a reputation that cannot be impeached and while I feel sorry for those who for ultra motives have tried every kind of method to gain their point I feel great satisfaction in the fact that they have failed in their efforts to ruin the value of the inventions I am trying to put on the market to the benefit of mankind. I wish to go on record as saying that nothing shall go undone by myself or those connected with me over which I have any control that will tend to promote the interests of the investors – in these inventions. Every investor, large or small, shall be protected to the best of my ability.
Much that I have said has been twisted and misquoted and the spirit of my attitude changed by my enemies, but investigation of both sides will show where the fault lies. As to the patent. Much has been said by those just removed by the Court action. Personally, I know very little as to the patent situation, but by recent letters in my possession I do know that the only complaint, if it might be so called, has come through the failure of those who were in charge to comply with the requirements of the patent office. Their accusations that anything has been held back is foolishness and can be so proved by written evidence in my possession. The Patent Office has not made such a complaint. I assure everyone that anyone who makes such statements are not telling the truth and that it has been and shall continue to be my aim to see to it that there shall be no delay that I can help in getting patents on my inventions. The only delays so far have been caused by the lack of finances over which I have had no control. Finances are at this time the cause of delays. We can move no faster than we have means to do so. Reason and good judgment must be used and we cannot rush blindly on not knowing where we are going nor how we are going to get there because of the lack of finances. I would like to make a part of this record the recent letter from the patent office and my answer to the same. This does not sound like the patent offices is claiming that any data has been withheld. It was stated at the trial in Reno that others had tried to make the device and it would not work. It was known before starting that they did not have the material for the valve and therefore they could not make !t work and that there were other very positive reasons why it would not work but which were theirs, not my fault. I have written evidence to prove this statement. However, that does not prove that all had not been disclosed. I shall at the first chance I get go to Washington; D. C., and see for myself just what has been done there. I have been kept in ignorance both as to the patent situation and the condition of the Moray Products Company affairs.
At this time we are not in possession of the Corporation books, but we are going ahead and will take the proper legal steps to get possession of them. I call on all the officers and investors to get behind me and I promise that I will do all in my power to put my inventions over in a successful way both for the investor and the public: From now on we want facts not untruths, cooperation not friction, all working for the one purpose. I have contracts with the Moray Products Company. In these I have been blocked at every turn and unreasonable requests have been made of me that it was clearly understood from the first I would never consent to as I have always felt they would mean the loss of everything. I have more than lived up to my contracts. I will continue to do so if conditions have not been created that make success under them impossible. I claim these contracts have been violated by those who have been in office to the extent that they almost if they did not fully accomplish their aim to either run or ruin. Stock has been thrown right and left at from a few cents to giving it away until it is hard to say just what will be necessary to protect the honest investors’ money. I am not discouraged, never felt better, and I am convinced of the final success of my efforts, and assure all that if and when I make and realize on my efforts that the investors shall also realize their full proto share.”
It was the unanimous decision of the directors present to remove by this action all officers and directors, and officials of whatsoever nature and kind other than those stated above, particularly offices that may have been held by Messrs. D. V. Farnsworth, C. Fred Schade, E. H. Hursh, H. C. Carlisle, H. B. Carlisle, Murray O. Hayes and any others that may have been appointed to or acted as official of the Moray Products Company.
With this action of removal from office there is further the definite declaration made that the present and only officers of the Moray Products Company are: T. Henry Moray, Director and President; Walter Rowson, Director and Vice-President; S. E. Bringhurst, Director and Secretary and Treasurer.
As a matter of record and a part of these minutes the Court’s Decision signed at Reno, Nevada, July 22, 1932, is herein written in detail.
No. 39886
Dept. No. 2.
IN THE SECOND
JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE
IN RE MORAY PRODUCTS COMPANY,
Amended Judgment and Decree: This matter coming on regularly to be heard on the 25th day of May, 1932, upon the petition of Thomas Henry Moray, said petitioner appearing by Messrs. Brown & Belford, his attorneys, and Moray Products Company, a corporation, together with certain stockholders therein, appearing by Messrs. Walter Rowson and Ernest S. Brown, their attorneys, and oral and documentary evidence having been introduced and the matter having been argued to the Court by counsel for the respective parties, and the Court having duly considered the same, and it appearing to the Court that due and legal notice of the hearing of said petition has been given, as required by that certain order duly made and entered in the above entitled court and cause on the 23rd of April, 1932, and it further appearing to the Court that said Moray Products .Company has failed to elect directors within six months after the time designated for its annual meeting. to-wit, the third Monday of October, 1931, and it further appearing to the Court that the petitioner, Thomas Henry Moray, is a stockholder of said corporation and holds stock entitling him to exercise a majority of the voting power of said corporation, and it further appearing to the Court that the principal office of said corporation is located in the City of Reno, County of Washoe, State of Nevada; IT IS – HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That E. H. Hursh, C. Fred Schade and Murray 0. Hayes be, and they hereby are removed as directors of said Moray Products Company, a corporation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That Thomas Henry Moray. S. E. Bringhurst and Walter Rowson be, and they hereby are appointed directors of said Moray Products Company, a corporation, and that the Board of Directors of said corporatoin shall consist of said directors, and that said appointees shall have the same rights, powers and duties, and the same tenure of office as directors duly elected by the stockholders at the annual meeting held at the time prescribed thereforto-wit, the third Monday of October, 1931, would have had.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That petitioner shall have and recover his costs of suit.
DATED THIS 22nd day of July, 1932.
(Signed) D. F. CURLER,
District Judge.
It was unanimously decided that the working office of the Moray Products Company at which place files, records, and accounts are to be kept will be located at Salt Lake City, Utah, however, with due consideration to complying with all the requirements of the State of Nevada under which the Moray Products Company was incorporated.
Consideration was given to the suggestion of the appointment of additional directors, and it was decided that for the present and until the books, records and affairs of the old officers could be audited and presented to the Company, we should recognize only the directors appointed by the Court’s Decision.
Demand having been made on Director Rowson for the old records, certificates, minutes and files of the company, and lie having deneid the request and continues in holding the same, it was decided to order New Certificates printed, new records started, and to work out a plan to protect all having legitimately secured certificates by issuing new certificates therefor; and it is declared that the Moray Products Company cannot and must not be held accountable for certificates unless legitimately issued.
Motion was made and authority given to have all books and records audited when secured.
It was decided at the next directors’ meeting a resolution would be adopted amending the By-laws to read in:
Article 1, Section 6: Special meeting of the stockholders may be held when called by the President or by a majority of the directors of the corporation or by a majority of the issued and outstanding stock of the corporation.
Meeting adjourned sine die.
(Signed) S. E. BRINGHURST,
Secretary.
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA,
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE
IN RE MORAY PRODUCTS COMPANY
Judgment and Decree
This matter coming on regularly to be heard the 25th day of May, 1932, upon the petition of Thomas Henry Moray, said petitioner appearing by Messrs. Brown & Belford, his attorneys, and Moray Products Company, a corporation. together with certain stockholders therein, appearing by Messrs. Walter Rowson and Ernest S. Brown, their attorneys, and oral and documentary evidence having been introduced, and the matter having been argued to the Court by counsel for the respective parties, and the Court having duly considered the same, and it appearing to the Court that due and legal notice of the hearing of said petition has been given, as required by that certain order duly made and entered in the above entitled court and cause on the 23rd day of April, 1932, and it further appearing to the Court that said Moray Products Company has failed to elect directors within six months after the time designated for its annual meeting, to-wit, the third Monday of October, 1931, and it further appearing to the Court that the petitioner, Thomas Henry Moray, is a stockholder of said corporation and holds stock entitling him to exercise a majority of the voting power of said corporation, and it further appearing to the Court that the principal office of said corporation is located in the City of Reno, County of Washoe. State of Nevada;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED; That D. V. Farnsworth, C. Fred Schade and Murray O. Hayes be, and they hereby are removed as directors of said Moray Products Company, a corporation.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That Thomas Henry Moray, S. E. Bringhurst and Walter Rowson be, and they hereby are appointed directors of said Moray Products Company, a corporation, and that said appointees shall have the game rights, powers and duties, and the same tenure of office as directors duly elected by the stockholders at the annual meeting held at the time prescribed therefor, to-wit, the third Monday of October, 1931, would have had.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That petitioner shall have and recover his costs of suit.
DATED this 11th day of June, 1932.
BEN F. CURLER.
District Judge.
ASSIGNMENT
FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of one million and fifty thousand (1,050,000) shares of the capital stock of the Moray Products Company, a corporation of Nevada, to be issued and delivered to me or my order by said corporation, and other valuable consideration, receipt of which I hereby acknowledge, I hereby give, grant, transfer, sell, assign and set over to said Moray Products Company, all of my rights, title, interest and equity in and to the following described property: Any and all Inventions and improvements thereto, processes and discoveries, chemical and/or mechanical combinations, and formulas, now or heretofore belonging to the undersigned T. Henry (T. H.) Moray; and any and all inventions, and improvements thereto, processes, discoveries, formulas, chemical and/or mechanical combinations secured under Letters Patent, trademarks, copy rights and rights in the nature thereof of the United States or of any other countries by the said T. Henry (T. H.) Moray, or any for which letters patent, trademarks, copyrights, and rights in the nature thereof, of the United States or other countries, applications have been, are now, or shall hereafter be made by or allowed to the said T. Henry (T. H.) Moray, together with any or all of said letters patent, trade-marks, copy rights or rights in the nature thereof of the United States or other countries; all completed machines of the said T. Henry (T. H.) Moray; and I hereby further agree to give to said corporation until October 1, 1940, my exclusive time, talents and ability in perfecting and completing said discoveries, chemical and/or mechanical combinations and Improvements thereto and In making further scientific and other discoveries for such salary as Is provided by the board of directors; and I further agree to give, transfer and assign to the said corporation all inventions, improvements thereto, discoveries, processes, formulas, chemical and/or mechanical combinations, patent rights, trade-marks, copy rights and rights in the nature thereof, which I may acquire any right, title, interest or equity in during a period of ten years following the date of Incorporation of said company, all of which said property, aforementioned, is, however, transferred, assigned and sold to said corporation, and by it accepted, subject to one certain written contract dated the 1st day of October, 1930, copy of which is hereto attached, and made a part thereof, marked “Exhibit A,” by and between T. H. Moray. party of the first part, and D. V. Farnsworth, C. Fred Schade, and Murray O. Hayes, parties of the second part, granting to parties of the second part the exclusive right, under the terms and conditions set forth in said agreement. to manufacture, sell and distribute all of the machines, discoveries, formulas. processes. chemical and/or mechanical combinations so owned or acquired by the said corporation, by paying to said corporation 10%; royalty thereon.
It is further understood that the undersigned, T. Henry (T. H.) Moray shall retain personal ownership and exclusive charge and control of the laboratories and equipment used by hint and his assistants for experimental and development purposes.
Signed, sealed and executed at Salt Lake City, Utah, this 31st day of January, 1931.
T. H. MORAY.
Witnesses: Robert A. Stelter, D. Thomsen
STATE OF UTAH
COUNTY OF SALT LAKE.
On this 31st day of January, 1931, personally appeared T. Henry (T. H.) Moray, the signed of the foregoing instrument, who duly acknowledged to me that he executed the same.
ROBERT A. STELTER,
Notary Public, Residing at
Salt Lake City, Utah.
My Com. exp. 3-6-1934. (SEAL)
MURRAY O. HAYES
Lawyer
Salt Lake City, Utah
Jan. 10, 1931.
T. H. Moray,
2484 So. Fifth East.
Dear Henry:
We the undersigned, D. V. Farnsworth, C. Fred Schade, and Murray 0. Hayes, do hereby promise and agree that, as directors of the Moray Products Company, we will vote to have the said company pay you a minimum salary of $1000.00 per month as soon as the company can do so, consistently with due regard for the safety and stability of the company, and from the tine of the organization thereof until It Is able to pay the aforesaid salary, to hay you sufficient sums to meet your Indebtedness and provide you with sufficient. money for keeping yourself and family.
D. V. FARNSWORTH,
C. FRED SCHADE,
MURRAY O. HAYES.
SALES AND MANUFACTURING CONTRACT
There were two contracts (the one expired January 1, 1932, which gave then the right to sell stock tinder certain conditions) that were prepared by Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes.
One was for the sale of certain block or blocks of stock in which it was agreed that Farnsworth and Schade were to sell sufficient stock to net me or the corporation the sum of $10,000.00 on or before January 1, 1932. To guarantee this sale Farnsworth and his wife executed a deed to certain ranch property in Mexico in my favor. They placed the value of this ranch at $15,000.00. This deed was held in escrow by M. O. Hayes. (You see, technically, the deed was never delivered to me, as M. O. Hayes was a party to the contract and was one of the second parties. Furthermore, it was impossible under the laws of Mexico for them to have deeded this property to me.)
I told them I had no interest in this ranch, that they were doing this thing without my request or desire and for their own purposes, and that if they should fail to sell the required amount of stock it would be impossible for me to get the ranch anyway.
M. O. Hayes and I, to please Farnsworth and to quiet the fears of his wife and his friends that he would lose this ranch in Mexico, released him from the jeopardy (which he called it) of losing this ranch, as he claimed to have fulfilled that part of the agreement as to the raising of the $10,000.00 in the sale of stock.
(This ranch transaction being wholly a matter connected with their guarantee in the sale of stock and nothing to do with the so called “Sales and Mfg.” contract, an illegal manipulation of the requirements necessary for a, good contract.)
I want to point out here that this $15,000.00 claimed, and it is so stated in the contract, consisted of the execution of the above mentioned deed and that no claim is made, nor was any cash or any consideration received for any contract.
Both of these contract Hayes brought to my home when I was sick, and he asked me to sign them. I told him I was not well enough to read them, and he said, “Henry, can you not trust me? And it at any time you decide you wish the sales and manufacturing contract back, I will sell it to you for $1.00. I can do this, you know, because the actions of one partner are binding on the others, and this sales and manufacturing contract is strictly a partnership arrangement between the three of us, i. e., Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes, and I am always in a position to protect you, being in this partnership arrangement.”
As time went on I saw that Schade and Farnsworth were using this contract for purposes other than that agreed upon; that they were not using it to protect the company, as they had first represented to me that it was necessary to have this contract for the protection of the company, but that they were attempting to capitalize on it personally.
I took this matter up with Hayes, pointed out where they had violated their contract, and he agreed with me and I said I would revoke the contract.
With this thought in mind, on April 21, 1931, I wrote Hayes a certain letter, copy of which I am enclosing and which I will refer to as letter “A.” Hayes requested that I leave the matter in his hands, again asking me to trust him, and pointing out that the actions of one partner are binding upon the others and that inasmuch as I could trust him I had nothing to fear as he would always be there to protect me and to give back the sales and manufacturing rights. and that anyway there had been no consideration paid me for the contract. (It must be remembered that Hayes had passed the bar examination and as an attorney he was supposed to know that the advice he was giving me was good and legal.)
After Hayes went to Washington I wrote and told him the conditions were getting so bad that they simply could not go on between the other parties and myself and I asked him to return to me, according to his promise, the sales and manufacturing rights. I have a letter from Hayes, dated August 7, 1931, in which, among other things, he states, “I talked to the man who draws the contracts for the Navy Department, about the form of assignment for transferring the sales rights to you, and he said it cannot be done. He says that a contract is not partnership property and that the persons who are the parties of the one part to the contract are not partners, but merely engaged in a joint enterprise. I had no idea that contracts stood in this special status. If it has reached the point where you simply cannot get on with Schade, why do you not ask him to resign from the Company? If he will not, you have the control -and can call a stockholder’s meeting and vote him out, then he will have nothing to say about the Company business.
“I think Vernon Romney or Carlisle would be a good man, maybe it would be best to have both.”
I would like to point out the second paragraph just quoted in Hayes’ letter, and those acquainted with the recent law suits can readily see that I could not do the things mentioned in that paragraph and it is reasonable to believe that Hayes deliberately deceived me, as he was one of those who had to do with the incorporating of the company and the drawing up of the bylaws. In order for me to accomplish what it was my understanding could be easily done and which Hayes herein proves that he right along had given me to understand, yet I was unable to do this thing so easy, and it was necessary for me at great expense to go to court to accomplish something which I had been given to understand I could do by a simple act of my own.
Now to return to my request for the return of the sales and manufacturing contract.
You can see by the first paragraph just quoted above that Hayes has to acknowledge that he had grossly misinformed me as to his ability to return to me this contract. He later wrote me a letter telling me he was willing to return me this contract if I were willing to guarantee to support his family. while he was in jail if Schade and Farnsworth should put him there for selling this contract to me, and many other ridiculous things he wrote in this letter.
After much correspondence back and forth, on February 6, 1932, in answer to a request from me that he at least return to me all right and title he had to this contract, he wrote me among other things the following:
“What would it avail if I turned back my interests in the sales contract, with Farnsworth and Schade still holding theirs? Have they agreed to relinquish it? Why shoud I, who worked with you for four years before they heard about it, give it up and let them continue to benefit by it? As it is, no one can benefit by it unless you do also.”
So I have been unable to get Hayes to in any way live up to what he promised. In the above paragraph it plainly shows he will not do what he has promised and could it be because .of his greed-his fear someone else is going to get something that he may not, keeps him from doing the right thing Could it be he holds with those he knows are in the wrong because he deceived himself into believing they had me in a box? Perhaps they tell him they have me tied and he is in fear that he will lose if he does not hang with them. Does he sell himself thinking he will make millions if he hangs with those he thinks have sprung a trap on me and have me secure even when he knows they are wrong?
As stated above, the whole purpose of this sales and manufacturing contract was not intended for their individual, personal benefit, as they had given me nothing in return for this contract, but it was because Hayes and Schade and Farnsworth made the claim that it was the only, way I could keep the power interests from tying up the invention.
Hayes was an attorney. I trusted him. When I told the three of them that I could not see where this Sales and Manufacturing contract offered any protection, they told me that Attorney Bowen and Attorney Clark said it was the only way, and Hayes, as an attorney, also said it was the only way.
I want to point out that in these agreements that very plainly state that the $15,000.00 was not cash, but the deed to this property, executed by Farnsworth and his wife, held by Hayes and given as a guarantee that $10,000.00 worth of stock would be sold on or before January 1, 1932, and that they make this same deed to this Mexican property the consideration for the Sales and Manufacturing contract, that it was not possible that through any violation of the Sales and Manufacturing contract for me ever to receive this Mexican property only through the violation or failure on their part to sell $10,000.00 worth of stock could I have received this property. The laws of Mexico make even that. impossible. Again I want to point out that even if they had failed in the one agreement of the sale of stock, which was an absolute, separate and distinctly another agreement from the Sales and Manufacturing contract, I could never have received the property in Mexico anyway.
Then in the Sales and Manufacturing contract they turn around and make the claim that they have paid me $15,000.00 for the Sales and Manufacturing contract, but acknowledge that this $15,000.00 consideration is this same deed to the Mexican property mentioned in the other agreement, and no provision is made in this contract whereby I ever could have obtained this ranch. How fn the name of reason can such an arrangement be considered a consideration for any contract?
They claim to have raised $10,000.00 in the sale of stock, and, which as pay for so doing they received 33 1/3 %, and that in fulfillment of that claim Murray Hayes, with my permission, returned the deed to the Mexican Ranch, which was a guarantee that they would sell $10,000.00 worth of stock on or before January 1, 1932. What money they did turn over to me was not theirs but received from the sale of my personal stock on which they received large commissions.
$10,000.00 is not $15,000.00, and I never received any consideration of any kind for the Sales and Manufacturing contract or any other contract.
Besides, they have failed to do a score of things they promised to do in other contracts, including the Sales and Manufacturing contract.
Can the Mexican ranch property be considered a consideration for any contract? Can it be considered a consideration for a guarantee of the sales of $10,000.00 worth of stock in the stock selling contract and at the same time be a consideration for a separate and another contract known as the Sales and Manufacturing contract not the sales of stock but the sale of the inventions after they are perfected? No provision being made on the second contract whereby I ever could have gotten the consideration.
Mr. Walter Rowson, Attorney,
223 E. C. Lyon Building,
Reno, Nevada,
Dear Mr. Rowson:
I am writing you for two reasons.
First, as President of the Moray Products Company, and in accordance with the resolution passed at the directors meeting of July 29, 19132, I am requesting you to send to me at 2484 South 5th East, Salt Lake City, Utah, all books and records and papers, in fact everything in your possession that belongs to the Moray Products Company. This does not include, of course, such records as are required by law to remain in Nevada with the company agent, Mr. Brown, May I look for these records at once? Send them express, charges collect.
The second reason I am writing you is that I would like to be able to decide just how honest and sincere your convictions are in regard to the “controversial matter” as you call it, and just what this matter is.
I am giving you the benefit of every doubt, for I respect every man’s honest opinion even when I know ‘ he Is wrong. If I were fully convinced you were deceitful and of the same type as those I once trusted I would not try to work with you, for such would be useless, and 1 would request that you resign.
I must have those around me who know and understand the truth and will help, not hinder. Your attitude is dead wrong in regard to the true situation. You have based your conclusions and opposition wholly on the reports and statements of Farnsworth and the others who have not worried or thought It necessary to give their story the slightest resemblance of truth.
Your attitude would have to change if you expect to remain with me; for so long as you believe or support the same viewpoint as those removed you cannot help.
At no time have I done anything, nor will I do anything to hinder the progress of my inventions.
I am the one most interested and the one who will receive the greatest benefit by my inventions going ahead as fast as they can. The patent office has not made a request of me that I have not granted. I intend to grant every request made by the government that I can.
If you are honest in your belief, I would be willing to go all the way to prove to you that you have been deceived by untruths and misrepresentations.
I have never in all my life met with men who value the truth as little as Farnsworth. Schade, Carlisle and Hayes.
For your information, I would like to let you know that there has not been one cent of value invested In the Sales and Manufacturing Contract.
The parties have drawn large commissions for every effort they set forth to sell stock, and I have again informed Schade. Farnsworth and Hayes that I do not and will not recognize them in any contract or in anything they do.
I have not changed my idea nor my policy on the patent or any other aim which was the basis on which I permitted the Moray Products Company to be formed.
I am in the right, am doing all I can to push things to a successful conclusion for every investor.
The falsehood of certain parties have not and shall not prevent me from going ahead to the fulfillment of the thing I set out to do.
I welcome suggestions, but will take commands from no man, and more especially when I know they come from the type of men who have only their own selfish ends and purposes to accomplish.
My policy has not changed and shall not so long as I believe myself in the right.
I am going ahead to success. I went into this for a very definite purpose, have let that purpose be known from the first, and see no reason why I should change.
Mr. Rowson, I have been frank because the time has come for united effort. You have fought me long enough. It is a matter of either you work with me and help me make a success of these inventions, as an officer of the Moray Products Company, or there .will be a parting. I want only justice and right.
I want you to have a chance, for your benefit, not mine, to cleanse your mind of the false statements of others. With you it may be just another page in life. With me, this work Is my life and I can permit nothing to stand in the way of success and the final and lasting benefit to mankind that my inventions will be.
You surely must realize that Moray is the one man that cannot be replaced in an organization to work out the final success of the Moray inventions. There is not room for men who share the views and believe the untruths that certain ones have been circulating for their own selfish motives.
Hence, this letter stating that a thorough enlightenment of the truth will be necessary on your part if you are to be of use in the organization.
THM/T
(Signed) T. H. MORAY.
August 30, 1932.
Mr. Walter Rowson,
Attorney and Counsellor-at-Law,
223-225 E. C. Lyon Building,
Reno, Nevada,
Dear Mr. Rowson:
Acknowledging receipt of your kind letter of August 26th.
By this time you have no doubt received my letter of August 27th, in which I endeavored, in as kind a way as possible, to place before you my attitude in the premises. I hope you will read carefully and conclude consistently what is necessary in regard to your relations with the Moray Products Company and with the undersigned, if there is a sincere desire to continue with the Company.
Now in answer to your kind communication. In the first place, let me state plainly that Messrs. Lillenquist and Penney were not my emissaries for conference with you. They are salesmen selling on commission only, selling my own personal stock until such a time as we can have the company In shape so that we can have regular and proper salesman selling company stock. They are selling my stock that I might have the necessary means to exist on and to continue my very earnest effort to continue with the patents and the perfecting of the same.
I am somewhat annoyed that Messrs. Lillenquist and Penney should have assumed the prerogative of being emissaries in regard to company matters of the Moray Products Company, as they know little of then, and have no authority or right to discuss them or endeavor to present or determine what might be company policy matters.
In regard to visiting Reno. I have no particular reason for visiting Reno, — I have no aversion to visiting Reno, — and I know of no benefit that the company could secure by my expending money to visit Reno. Furthermore, and definitely, I have no money to pay out for such a visit.
I appreciate your letter, which you state Is In the spirit of conciliation, but I must assure you that I am asking no concessions, and if you will read carefully my letter of August 27th you will note I am asking for cooperation, not conciliation and concessions, and I am asking for cooperation that we might continue definitely and properly as the Moray Products Company.
I am again asking that you definitely and positively please send the records of the Moray Products Company to Salt Lake City, as requested in my letter of August 27th, In order that we might have them properly audited and have the company placed right in its business affairs as quickly – as possible.
Again referring to your kind letter. There deeds to be nothing but constructive action, — there needs to be no controversy, — there needs to be no legal entanglements, — all that Is asked for and all that is needed is cooperation.
THM/T
Yours truly,
(Signed) T. H. MORAY.
P. S. Dear Mr. Rowson, if money had been available for me to make a trip to Reno, I would have been present at the trial, as it was far more important for me to be at Reno at that time than it is now or has been at any time.
Reno, Nevada,
June 1, 1932.
Dear Sir:
As Incorporators of Moray Products Company we have at all times had a solicitous interest in the sales of the company’s stock, whether made from the treasurer or from Dr. Moray’s personal holdings. From the outset, in our initial efforts to raise sufficient funds for the Company, to carry on, and to defray the expense of proceeding to patent the Company’s Radiant Energy Device and other inventions, the response accorded us by yourself and other stockholders was most gratifying.
Had matters progressed as we had hoped, it was our expectation to have surprised the stockholders by personally repaying the full amount invested to every stockholder who had purchased stock at Five Dollars per share.
Unfortunately, due to the obstructionist policy followed by Dr. Moray and which has resulted in the litigation now in progress in the Nevada Courts, we have all been disappointed in our desire to see the Company definitely under way.
For that reason, and in lieu of the cash refund of your investment which we had hoped to make and tentatively arranged among ourselves, we have decided to donate to you from our personal stock holdings shares of stock in the amount now owned by you. In. so doubling your stock holdings, without additional cost to you, we hope in some measure to off-set the unavoidable delay in placing your company on a paying basis.
Stock Certificate No ……………… issued in your name for ……..:…….shares, is herewith enclosed.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) FARNSWORTH, SCHADE & HAYES.
Any stock issued under the above arrangement will never be recognized by me.
T. H. MORAY.
MURRAY O. HAYES
Lawyer
Salt Lake City, Utah
May 27, 1931.
W. H. Lovesy,
Newhouse Bldg.,
City.
Dear Mr. Lovesy:
This letter is written to supply to you some information you desire regarding the Moray radiant energy invention.
One question which is frequently raised is whether there is an available supply of radiant energy, and what is its source. The answer to this is to be found in the conclusions of some of our eminent scientists, among whom Tesla is perhaps as well known as any, and whose knowledge of high frequency is probably as extensive and thorough as that of any living man, In his book “Experiments With Alternate Currents of High Potential and High Frequency,” published in 1904, he says on pages 57 and 58 that there is a vast quantity of available energy in space, and that it will not be long until man will hitch their machines to the very wheelwork of nature.
Further, Dr. Gunn, a civilian scientist of the Naval Research Laboratory, has proved that, the earth is generating 200,000,000 amperes of electric current. The aurora borealis is considered to be very definitely an electrical phenomenon produced by the passage of electric charges through the rarified gases of the higher atmosphere.
The conversion of matter to energy in the stars is now very generally accepted as demonstrated, and reasoning from what occurs in radioactive disintegration, during which evergy waves are radiated we may conclude that energy waves of very high frequency are sent out from the stars, one of which is our sun.
Moray has not proved the source of the energy which he obtains from his device, and it is possible that it is from both space and the earth, as he uses an antenna and a ground wire, and the power ceases to flow if either is disconnected from the machine.
As in the reception of radio waves; so in this case the .circuit is tuned by the right arrangement of inductances and capacities to respond to the particular wave frequency which it is desired to intercept. He uses a valve to prevent return of the power to the outer circuit and force it to go through the power application circuit.
The new hook-up of inductances, capacities, and resistances, in association with the peculiar valve already mentioned and the unique and. very remarkable oscillator tubes of his invention, now make available 4,000 watts of electric energy, and he asserts that given the requisite materials to modify his present device he can produce 50,000 watts from one machine.
All that is necessary to put the device in operation when properly assembled and connected to antenna and ground wire is to start electric oscillations in the circuit, which may be done in many ways, but one of the simplest is to pass a few sparks from an electrophorous disk into the circuit.
The frequency of the current is extremely high, as is shown by the brush discharge when either the antenna lead-in or the ground wire is disconnected from the machine. Certain difficulties of insulation inherent in high frequency currents are avoided by an ingenious device which reduced the frequency on the output side.
It is difficult to make a full presentation without stating some facts which It would be imprudent to reveal at the present time. However, some phenomena observed in connection with it may be mentioned.
The electric light globes (standard articles bought in the open market) become exceedingly hot when operated on this current, due to the fact that the gas in the globes becomes incanescent under the influence of. the very high frequency, and because of the incandescent gas the luminosity is much higher than with ordinary current.
Ordinarily when a potential is applied to the terminals of a condenser a full charge is acquired almost instantaneously, but with the oscillators filling up somewhat as when water is poured into a bucket, the longer the voltage is applied the greater the charge taken, up to the maximum capacity for the given voltage.
The quantity of current passing through the secondary of the transformer is sufficient to burn up wire of that size if ordinary current were used, yet there is no heating of the secondary even though there is no circulation of air through it to cool it, as it is completely enclosed in friction tape. All parts of the machine run absolutely cool regardless of the length of time operated.
It makes no difference whether one fifty watt lamp is used or whether fifty of them are connected to the machine, the draft of current is adapted to the load.
There is not a sound from the machine when in operation, there being no moving parts. The entire mechanism is enclosed in a box 7x7x27 inches, including the transformer.
It cannot be derived from batteries, as it can be transformed and only an alternating current can be so handled, and battery current is direct.
It cannot be induction from adjacent power lines, as an induced current is always of the same frequency as the inducing current, and there is no line on earth carrying current of the frequency to it. It is not radio power being much too great; even to operate aloud speaker it is necessary to amplify a radio current many times, to say nothing of lighting a lamp or heating a flat iron, and further the frequency of this current Is higher than radio currents.
Hoping this brief exposition will be of assistance to you, I am,
Very truly yours,
(Signed)
MURRAY 0. HAYES.
MURRAY 0. HAYES
Lawyer
Salt Lake City, Utah
May 25, 1931.
W. H. Lovesy,
Newhouse Bldg.,
City.
Dear Mr. Lovesy:
This letter is in compliance with your request for some facts relating to the Moray radiant energy invention.
A short time ago a demonstration was given for a nationally known physicist, a professor in one of the greatest universities of the country, at which time he noted and mentioned the following.
That when the oscillators are connected in the circuit the condensers fill slowly, and the longer the current is applied to charge them the greater the charge they take, up to their maximum for the applied voltage, much as in filling a bucket by pouring the water into It, instead of taking the charge practically instantaneously as is ordinarily the case.
That the lights are much hotter than is ever the case with any current used at the present time, due to the incandescence of the gas In the globes under the influence of the very high frequency.
That the size of wire in the transformer could not carry the amperage passing through It without burning up, if ordinary current were used, yet the wires remained absolutely cool no matter how long the machine operated.
The above points show that there is developed something which is entirely out of the ordinary, and can not be accounted for on the basis of induction from existing power lines or current from batteries.
I believe the above, in addition to the presentation made in the letter whereof I gave you a copy a few days ago will enable anyone to form a reliable opinion as to this device.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) MURRAY 0. HAYES.
UTAH OIL REFINING COMPANY
Salt Lake City, Utah
June
29, 1932.
Mr. T. Henry Moray,
2484 So. 5th East.,
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Henry:
I have handed you the original letter of Murray 0. Hayes, dated October 24, 1929, in which he advised of his being shown and having explained to him the wiring diagram of the assembly, and also the fundamentals of the detector, and in which he stated plainly that while it would not have been noticed unless pointed out by you, at the same time he had become familiar with all of the detail of the construction of your device for utilizing cosmic energy, and added that you had applied only fundamental principles of electric circuits.
There is attached a second letter in which Mr. Hayes furnished me a detail of his educational record.
The memorandums on the face of these two original documents were made by me at the time ‘l was consulting with Murray 0. Hayes in my office and, at the time, he definitely advised me that he had been shown every detail of your invention and added that lie could make one of the machines himself from the information that had been given him.
Murray O. Hayes made these similar statements to me several times, and it may be from my determination in having him repeatedly make the declaration that lie had been shown every detail of the Invention that would give hint the impression that I had a doubt about the Invention.
Personally, I have never had a doubt, but I thought the real detail secrets of the invention were held only by yourself and after my conference at New York with Harvey Fletcher and Carl Eyring, at the Bell Laboratories, — having agreed with them that I would endeavor to induce you to give the detail of your invention to Murray 0. Hayes, — I did, as I have stated, repeatedly asked Murray O. Hayes. If he could duplicate your machine, and in every Instance his answer was emphatic and to the effect that he could do so.
Yours truly,
W.H. LOVESY.
August 17, 1932.
Your letter of August 4th was handed to me by Mr. Moray for answer, and this on account of the fact that I have been endeavoring to help him in the premises and relieve him of letter writing, etc.
If any reasonable explanation was made to you at the time the stock was sold you, it would start out with the explanation that the incorporated value of the stock was only a means to an end of avoiding a high State Tax on values that were to be developed later, and if you have purchased any amounts of stocks you would, of course, realize that the par price has nothing to do with the selling price.
It has been agreed by those who control and have interest in and have stock of the Moray Products Company that the stock shall not be sold for less than $5.00 per share.
Mr. Moray is applying every cent of money he receives for the sale of this stock, — which is his own personal stock, — to further the development and with a desire to perfect his invention.
I have spent a considerable amount of time with him and in his laboratory and with his correspondence, and have written most of the letters to the Patent Office and know positively whereof I speak when I say that things are progressing nicely and there is a desire and hope that they do continue to progress until a very favorable result is secured for those who have invested in the enterprise.
Unfortunately, for Mr. Moray, he got into the hands of promoters who wanted to sell stock and had only a desire to sell stock and were not interested in the development of his patent or perfecting of his machine. It has been a source of considerable expense and great annoyance. However, he has triumphed up to this time, and I feet very confident that he will continue to do so because in my several years connection with and knowledge of his efforts I have known him solely and wholly to be honest and earnest in his efforts.
Now if anybody could convince you or any other man who had money. to invest that they would secure a million times their investment after a brief period of time, the stocks would sell like wild fire. However, the honest investor of stock should be satisfied if there is an honest and earnest effort made to accomplish a desire for a favorable end.
Hoping that I have explained this matter and helped in the premises. I am,
WHL/T
Yours truly,
(Signed)
W. H. LOVESY.
Salt Lake City, Utah,
August 29, 1932.
To Whom It May Concern:
It has come to my attention that the claim is being made that T. H. Moray is reported to have made demonstrations In my “M” Men’s Mutual class of his Radiant Energy Device.
This is to state that at no time has T. H, Moray been In my class in the Forest Dale Ward for any reason what-so-ever and none of his inventions have been shown or even talked of by him or anyone representing him.
I personally have never seen Mr. Moray’s inventions and know nothing about them for the past fifteen years although I have known Mr. Moray for over twenty years.
Very truly yours,
PARNELL HINCKLEY.
BROWN & BELFORD
Attorneys at Law
First National Bank Building
Reno, Nevada
July Eleventh, Nineteen Thirty-two.
Burton W. Musser, Esq.,
C/o Messrs. Bail, Musser & Mitchell,
804 Newhouse Building,
Salt Lake City, Utah.
In re Moray Products Company
Dear Mr. Musser:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of July 9th, and also your letter of June 28th which Judge Brown answered. I have just gotten back from Chicago and went over to see Rowsen today.
As stated to you in my letter of June 9th, Rowsen informed me that a meeting of the directors had been held and that the number of directors had been increased to seven. Since this was done while these men were directors, I saw no way of attacking its validity. However, he today Informed me that what he said was that they had been considering increasing the board. This is not at all my understanding of our conversation, and if the facts are as he states them I can see no reaosn why I should have agreed with him to permit them representation on the new board. As Judge Brown wrote you, E. H. Hursh has been appointed a director.
In view of our understanding, it appears to me that the only thing Rowsen can decently do is to resign, but this he refuses to do. He asked me to delay any action until he could take up the matter with Farnsworth, Schade and Hayes, two of whom are in the East. I informed him that I intend to institute proceedings immediately, and If he could arrange matters in the meantime all well and good. I am exceedingly chagrined that matters have taken the course which they have, and am determined to force the matter to as speedy a conclusion as possible.
I am preparing and will file a motion to modify the decree hereinbefore entered, removing Hursh and substituting one of Moray’s nominees. The motion will he based on the ground of fraud and deceit, reciting the facts that Farnsworth, Schade,” Hayes and Hursh at all times knew that there were four directors instead of three, anti willfully and fraudulently deceived the court. It is my personal opinion that .fudge Curler will not look kindly upon these men playing ducks and drakes with his court.
I was sorry not to see you in Salt Lake, but was in a hurry both going and coming.
With kind personal regards, I remain
Very truly yours,
(Signed) JOHN S. BELFORD.
JSB/H
BROWN & BELFORD
Attorneys at Law
First National Bank Building
Reno, Nevada
July twenty-first, Nineteen Thirty-two.
Burton W. -Musser, Esq.,
C/o Messrs. Ball, Musser & Mitchell,
Attorneys at Law,
804 Newhouse Building,
Salt Lake City, Utah.
In re Moray Products Company
Dear Mr. Musser:
I today argued the motion to amend the judgment, and the Court granted our motion. I am preparing form of judgment and will send you a copy thereof as soon as the same is signed.
You will recall that I wrote you to the effect that we had agreed to permit the minority stockholders to have three members on the Board of Directors, inasmuch as it had been increased to seven. In view of Rowsen’s disregard of our oral stipulation to this effect, I feel that I am not bound in any way to recognize it and have so informed Rowsen, consequently you can fill the vacancies of the Board or not, just as you see fit.
The whole thing was an example of shiftiness and bad faith, and you may be assured that none of it escaped Curler. I took particular pleasure in informing the Court in my argument as to how I regarded that sort of thing in the practice of law.
I am now making an effort to secure the books of the corporation from Rowsen, and will write you as to this within a few days.
With kind regards, I remain
Very truly yours,
(Signed) JOHN S. BELFORD.
JSB/H.
BROWN & BELFORD
Attorneys at Law
First National Bank Building
Reno, Nevada
July Twenty-fifth, Nineteen Thirty-two.
Burton W. Musser, Esq.,
C/o Messrs. Ball, Musser & Mitchell,
Attorneys at Law,
804 Newhouse Building,
Salt Lake City, Utah.
Dear Mr. Musser:
I today argued the Motion to Strike the amended complaint in the action of Moray Products Company v. Moray. The motion was granted without leave to amend, so I presume that this phase of the matter is cleared up unless Rowson takes an appeal. If he gets too troublesome about the matter all that is necessary, of course, is to have the directors order him to discontinue the action.
With kind personal regards, I remain,
Very truly yours,
(Signed) JOHN S. BELFORD.
JSB/H.
The Moray Products Company, beset by double dealing, finally necessitated that Henry Moray take legal action. The reader should particularly note the court case and results at the end of “The Patent Situation.” The amended decree was found in Henry Moray’s favor, and all the ownership for the patent rights were returned to Moray from the Moray Products Company. The Moray Products Company lasted only a short while after this. Henry Moray was given complete control of the corporation and finally it was dissolved. The company was unable to function because of the bad publicity and background it had been given in its court involvements.
A number of other corporations were formed by Henry over the next few years, from 1932 to 1936. First, one known as the Moray Manufacturing Company or Manufacturing Company was formed and, secondly, an ElRay Corporation (the El came from Ella, my mother’s name, and Ray came from the electromagnetic rays). A Cosmoray Corporation was also formed, later contracted to “Cosray” when Henry Moray found “Cosmoray” had already been registered as a trademark in Chicago. None of these corporations lasted any considerable length of time, and they played only a very minor role.
In 1936, Henry Moray formed the Research Institute. He intended to form a nonprofit corporation. The stock was gradually turned back to the Moray family by the original incorporators. None of the original incorporators paid for their stock but held it simply as a service to help Henry continue with his work.
Eventually resolving the maze of confusion that had resulted from failure of the Moray Products, all ownership and assignment was made to The Research Institute. At the present time The Research Institute has ownership of all Dr. Moray’s discoveries.
My brother Richard and I would more than gladly accept help in developing Radiant Energy. However, we will not be forced into a compromising position because of any information people think they have.
Regardless of the fact that some of the corporations Dad was associated with did not succeed due to circumstances beyond his control, he did not intend that any of those individuals who genuinely tried to help him, or any of their heirs, should lose on the development of Radiant Energy. In the meantime, we have spent our lives to continue his efforts.
Sea of Energy in Which the Earth Floats - Chapter Selection
Chapter 10 – Capture Of Energy By Resonance
The Sea Of Energy In Which The Earth Floats
Chapter 08 – Reactions By Electron Excitation
The Sea Of Energy In Which The Earth Floats
