"While, therefore, I claim to be the first to propose the use of the _electro-magnet for telegraphic purposes_, and the _first_ to _construct a telegraph on the basis of the electro-magnet_, yet to Professor Henry is unquestionably due the honor of the _discovery of a fact in science_ which proves the practicability of exciting magnetism through a long coil or at a distance, either to _deflect a needle_ or _to magnetize soft iron_." I wish he had never revised this opinion, although he was sincere in thinking that a more careful study of the subject justified him in doing so. A few years afterwards Morse and his associates became involved in a series of bitterly contested litigations with parties interested in breaking down the original patent rights, and Henry was called as a witness for the opponents of Morse. He gave his testimony with great reluctance, but it was tinged with the bitterness caused by the failure of Vail to do him justice and his apparent conviction that Morse was disingenuous. He denied to the latter any scientific discoveries, and gave the impression (at least, to others) that Henry, and not Morse, was the real inventor of the telegraph. His testimony was used by the enemies of Morse, both at home and abroad, to invalidate the claims of the latter, and, stung by these aspersions on his character and attainments, and urged thereto by injudicious friends, Morse published a lengthy pamphlet entitled: "A Defense against the Injurious Deductions drawn from the Deposition of Professor Joseph Henry." In this pamphlet he not only attempted to prove that he owed nothing to the discoveries of Henry, but he called in question the truthfulness of that distinguished man. The breach between these two honorable, highly sensitive men was now complete, and it was never healed.