ipril as IL OW 18,1950. LTS y ears @ ie) Val's letter of d4 * ii earerully gone over Do not know to you dated er : SOE ie wlth a@ if there Yebruary bas ser > erea ~, " " £Ps Be of interest, is anything to say in accition Ye are all agreed that 26th. t imports nt thing is to have 7.N. put in an installation manufacture of the machine gun. It is of course proper use care, torcther with Colt's, but neither one of us should cau ta us nor have our ideas so high thet we never realize any: so thing in the way on guns manufactured there is any oriticism to be made of Colt's licenses, it would Beem that it to say saying Polish *a half when it of royalties leaf is better requested that machine rifle business has been with just over there. regard that. its sub+ Unele John used than none"; Colt 's reminded us we consent to a ©10,.00 royalty and, should it tf to sect ro of on this the in the neeotiations which will take place when Mr, chols arrives over there, you may want to remind it that the pres sent Situation is in the §same category, Because of the question of doubtful patent vro~« tection, it would seem that each of us should be very reasonable. Although Colt's has led us to believe that Mr. Nichols was soiling suleah on account of the automatic cannon sublicense with Vickers and has said nothing of the machine gun situation abroad, it would appear that the latter is the more important of the two. bf course the should we F.N. will ereatest turned. sublicense be put step able in to an that with Vickers work out the installation, we could ever should be machine it would sun take and we whipped into situation seem that should this so leave shape, but, that. the is the no stone The following is notedin the Colt's letter to f.N, ated January 27th: “It is through no fault of this Company's that no action other than sant > ates (see our letter of January mo was taken for Six years With Speck to our patent applications” — you be able to get a Pet of this letter, please send it on to us We cannot see why Colt's can be any other than to Dlame in the mat tter. Colt's and not Browning has always taken out foreign patents, and,if there is no patent in Poland, it must certainly be Whether Browming has recourse against Colt's, we ars Colt's fault. not prepared to say at the present time, but in any event Colt's should be reasonable ~~ the best of the situation and, if it Will not be, we should put pressure upon it, if possible. un-