The Portland daily press., 1884-09-24
Who Invented the Telephone
HelPs Suit Against Drawbaugh-An Argu
memtative Battle.
CNew York Sun. Tuesday,


Before Judge Wallace of the United States
Circuit Court yesterday arguments were begun
by distinguished counsel with regard to tho
validity OF the patents now held by the Bell
Telephone Company. 1t is the most important
patent suit in pecuniary sense ever brought
into court, and the expenses of legal prepara-
ton of the case have already exceeded half
million dollars. Whatever may be the dsci-
sion of Judge Wallace, the case will be carried
to the Supreme Court Of the United States,
and several years may elapse before the final
result is reached.
The session yesterday was occupied with the
argument of Mr.. j. j. Storrow of counsel for
the Bell Telephone Company. Occasionally
his associates, Roscoe Conkling and E. v.
Dickerson, and his opponents, Senator Ed
munds and Lysander Hill, would gather about
the Judges desk to give close attention to the
description Of various exhibits. There were
trunks full of models, and the printed part of
the case presented for the consideration of the
Court comprised nearly 10000 printed pages.
The present suit originated in an attempt in
1880 by the Klemm Telephone Company to
manufacture and introduce telephones based
Ou bAo lht0AtAOAo duu pob5Alo VI L = ~ htBmm
and A. g. Tisdel. The Bell Telephone Com
pany began suit for infringement OF the pa
tents granted to Alexander Graham Bell in
March, 1876. The first contest was fought
solely on the question of whether the Klemm
and Tisdel instruments were really infringe
ments of the Bell patents, and on that point
the Bell Company was successful, as it was
shown that the Kemm and Tisdel instru-
ments were substantial infringements of Bells
patent, and q temporary injunction was grant
ed by Judge Blatchford. But on the trial of
the case the Peoples Telephone Company Or
ganized by Klemm relied on totally different
point, which was that the Bell patents should
not have been granted The collection Of the
defendants testimony occupied a year-from
April, 1881, to April, 1882. More than hun
dred witnesses testified that long before Bells
invention Daniel Drawbaugh had invented
made and exhibited to others electrical speak
ing telephones, transmitters and receivers of
different kinds, including both the carbon
transmitters and the magnetic transmitters, to-
gether with several forms OF receivers, and
that by means of these instru nents articulate
speech had been on many different occasions
successfully transmitted and received. Then
the Bell Company took fourteen months to nut
in their Iebutting testimony. The defendants
then put in their sur-rebuttDg testimony, and
81 bH0 blLuO pdS5Gu3 UElil now the testimony
fills large printed volumes.
Daniel DraWbaugh, who is the principal de-.
PENDANT in the present suit, testified that the
subject occupied his thoughts as early as 1861;
that on Nov. 20, 1866, he had wrought out the
general principles and embodied them in
crude Instruments, which have been DESTROYED
or lost; that as early as 1867 or 1868 he had en-
bodied an invention in an improved form of
traDsmitter aud receiver, by means of which
he accomplished the actual transmission of ar
1lok0 as-tn fnnr. ala 60
duced the instruments with which he claims
that was done. He used in them the carbon
or resistance transmitter and a receiver on the
same general plan as those now in use. He
also testified that as early as 1870 or 1871 he
passed from the carbon form of transmitter to
the magnetic transmitter, and had embodied
the magnetic telephone in two complete opera
tive Instruments, the main parts of which now
exist. That from 1870 to 1880 he made efforts
to induce others to supply the money to patent
his invention: that he offered to sell a half
interest for this purpose, and that it was under
these crcums auces that he sold his rights to
tho Klemm Telephone Company. He testified
that from 1866 to 1880 he never abandoned his
invention nor ceased to devote his time atten-
ton and labor to it, but that his mind had
been epgrossed with it to such an extent as to
interfere with ether work, and that it had
consequently contributed materially to his i'm
poverishment during that long period.
Mr. Storrow argued yesterday that Mr.. Bell
ton in 1874; he conferred with Prof. Henry
about it in 1876 and constructed his first in
strument in June, 1875, got his first patent on
March Z, 1876, and exhibited it at the Centen-
NAL. The Bell instruments went into CONNER
cial use in the spriHg of 1877, and at the time
of Drawbaugh's application for patent were
in use all over the world.
Prof. Bell is a son of Alexander Melville
Bell of Canada, and previous to his discovery
and invention of the telephone had devoted
hfol 70 70 OOol 40 ho6 10 Lam,
study of the science of acoustics. He CON-
ceived the idea of impressing upon the current
of electricity the form of waves corresponding
with the form of soand waves in the air. Many
of his experiments and discovesies were in con-
nection with his invention of the harmonic
telegraph.
The compliments alege that certain Of the
| defendants associated themselves together
| with the intention of making speaking tele-
| phones according to certain improvements
| patented by Klemm and Tisdel; that thew be-
came aware that they could not make those
| instruments without Infringing the Bell
patent, and thereupon, searching for defence,
| they heard of Drawbaugh, and entered into
| an arrangement with him to set up and claim
| that he was the first inventor of the speaking
| telephone and to make an application for a
patent therefor, and afterward caused him to
| file an application for patent for speaking
| telephone as the first inventor; that Draw
| baugh was sought for, not because it YVES sup.
4
| cause 1t was hoped he could supply defence.
| In 1880 the other principal defendants I'M
| dertook to make telephones. They were ad-
| vised that the instruments they were about to
| make were infringements of the Bell patent.
| Then they got from Drawbaugh three-fourths
| of his pretensions for nothing. These preten-
sions were sold for $4,000 in money and an
unknown amount in stock. Then followed an
| application for patent, and a corporation
| with $5,OOO,OO0 share capital. The chief man
| in these negotiations was E. NJ. Chillis, who
| kept ninety. nine cent store in Harrisburg,
| and was man Of o speculative turn of mind.
| The complainant relies much on the allega-
| ton that Drawbaugh never produced a practi-
| cable telephone of any value to the public, but
| that his invention was only used from time to
| time experimsntally in his own shop. The
| complanant's brief asserts that during the
time between Drawbaugh's alleged inven ton
and the Bell patent, say ten or eleven years,
Drawbaugh took out four patents. He re-
| oeived $4,000 for his patents. He owned his
house, had the use Of a well equipped machine
shop, and exhibited at State fairs but did not
| exhibit telephone at the Centennial Exhbi-
ton. Drawbaugh says he had five or six sets of
| practical speaking telephones But he did
not even mention the subject to his neighbors
who went with him to the Centennial.
The claimants allege that even the imper-
| feet success which was had with Drawhaugh's
instruments was a false test, because those in
struments were not, in fact, the same as those
| actually used by Drawbaugh, but were much
| improved and composed partly on the plan OF
| MIR. Bells invention, which had at that time
| been in Uss six years. Mr.. StorrOw called at
| tention to the fact that most of the sentences
that were heard through the Drawbaugh tele-
| phone we're very common sentences. and
| urged the improbablity of Drawbaughs story
| that his telephone was used by ordinary
farmers who could hear readily through it.