MOYLE EARLE & WILKINSON BUILDING - WASHINGTON, D.C: October 16, 1941, Re ee hoy M, Thatcher, sq. F First National Bank Bldg Ogden, Utah, Dear Roy: copy. of ‘thé Browning-leming tow’ ee ANS a> telegraphic goutajact re my wife was hot. very elear for At/ wa: She oes at of. the contrigt 6 Aon ‘by telegraph AS AVaiiable and feuthons ‘ea | ay gubafteine LtxtoGir, LToyt. got it promptiy, as I was in the widdle of randum bik Saad lab one or of the $uo ‘prior gto ‘I herely if you saw any obIt is well that I preparing a momo- mal bueter jeiebabis Know, the Bureau has, on necasiony, Anquiring as to the present étatus api were informed that since importa- tex if ti—ewksed Browhing was buying shotguns from remember particularly on one occasion when Hek+t Browning Arms Company might Still be con~- tA CF, i Ey aba lS that Woe INRSSS ad] eeee how (ag akppyer and iijable for the excise Ren- Wag @ @ shotgun covered by Browning patents CW ORE ely by Browning. i am just a little concerned abow ints contract on that score but do not see how you Gan eventually avoid the inquiry whieh I think is inevitabie, i presume that you went into this question quite thoroughly when the contract was drawn and it is possible that you have prepared a mémorendum of law in respect thereto. It is not entirely Glear to me, however, from reading the contract to what extent the shote “uns now manufactured for Browning Arms is whether Browning Company are covered by the patents, I am not so much concerned with the fact that Browning Arms Company have the exclusive right to have their names on shotguns purehased by that company under the contract, What ft might.be am more concerned construed as the about manufacturer since the Arms contract Company indicates