Chemical Foundation, Inc

Minutes of the Joint Meeting [Oct. 11, 1920] of the Committee on Institute for Drug Research and Representatives of the Chemical Foundation, Inc." Three-page typescript, Abel Papers. 

Notebook Chemical Foundation, Inc." vol. 2, pp. 67, 74. Francis P. Garvan Estate Collection, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming, Laramie, Small File 13. I am indebted to P. Thomas Carroll for calling my attention to this reference. 

Howe, H.E. Chemistry in Industry. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., New York. 1924. 

Haynes (ref. 7), 220 District Court of the United States for the District of Delaware, USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., record of final hearing. No. 502 in Equity (1923), 3,1390 Trading with the enemy act approved October 6,1917 (New York, 1917), Record Group 131, Records of the Office of Alien Property, entry 15, box 1, National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland. 

Francis P. Garvan," Chemical industries, 41 (Dec 1937), 561 A. Mitchell Palmer and Francis P. Garvan, Aims and purposes of the Chemical Foundation, Inc. (New York,... 

The War Trade Board appointed an advisory committee on dyes composed of representatives from the American dyes industry and the American textile industry. The committee recommended prohibiting the old importing agencies from shipping reparations chemicals. "Minutes of the advisory committee on dyes, July 24, 1919," excerpted on p. 40 in an untitled collection of evidence for USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., RG 60 (Department of Justice), Classified Subject File, entry 114 (Correspondence), Case 9-17-10-12, box 750, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, D.C. 

Rhodes (ref. 76) "Rules on alien patents," New York Times (20 Nov 1928), 16 several Section 10 (f) cases reached the Supreme Court together, including case no. 179, Farbwerke vormals Meister Lucius und Bruning, Deutsche Gold und Silher Scheide Anstalt vorm. Roessler, and Badische-Anilin und Soda-Fabrik v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, and Walter O. Woods, as Treasurer of the United States, and also cases 180, 181,182, 271-174, in the Supreme Court of the United States, 1931. Unlike the German firms, some of the American importers for German chemical companies were able to collect seized assets under Section 10 (f). "Receipt and release of the H.A. Metz Laboratories, Inc.," 16 Jun 1931, RG 60, entry 114, box 750, case 9-17-10-12. 

Victor Lefebure, The Riddle of the Rhine Chemical Strategy in Peace and War (New York The Chemical Foundation, Inc. 1923) p. 218. 

Consequently, when USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc. opened in 1923, several issues were at stake. At the most basic level, the court case would determine whether the formation of the Chemical Foundation and the sale of patents to it violated U.S. law. Second, the trial raised questions about German chemical patents and patenting strategies. During the... 

They argued again that USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc. had clearly demonstrated a government right to license any patent from the Chemical Foundation and that the courts recognized a public interest in the formation of the Chemical Foundation. Therefore, fair compensation to the German patent owners would include consideration at least of Chemical Foundation patents used by the government. 

The number of exchanges peaked with five in June 1918, Minutes, American Dyestuff Institute, July 10, 1918, recorded as Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 521 in USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., 9 (exhibits vol. 2) 1090 Robert C. Jeffcott and Harry E. Danner testimonies, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Hearings, Alleged Dye Monopoly (1922), 453, 497 Minutes, American Dyestuff Institute, July 10, 1918, recorded as Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 521 in USA v. The Chemical Foundation, Inc., 9 (exhibits vol. 2) 1093 Minutes,... 

---