National Republican., 1884-10-25
THE FIRST TELEPHONE.
Important Decision Giving the Pri-
orlry OF Invention to Bell,


ority OF Invention TO Bell.
Mcssrs. Fisher, Clarke, and Bates, ex-
aminers in chief of the patent Office, have
rendered their decision in the matter of
Voelker VS.. Gray ct al, patent inter
ference case, involving the invention of
the speaking telephone. of the fourteen
original parties, there remaining only six,
viz, Wm. l.. Voelker two applications),
Thomas A. Edison (live applications),
Elisha Gray -four applcations), John ii.
Irwin, James w. McDonough lone appli-
cation each), and Alexander Graham Bell
two patentsl.
The examiner of interferences had
awarded priority of invention to Bell in
cases A, Is, G, l., +, |, ], aud l.; In cases
d aud No. to Edison, and in case G to
McDonough. Case G is generally re-
garded as the principal point ut issue, and
covers the telephone invention, for IL Is
an application for "a telephone receiver,
consisting of the combination In an
electric circuit of magnet, and a da-
phragm supported and arranged in close
proximity thereto, whereby sounds
thrown upon tho line may be reproduced
accurately as to pitch and quality"
Bell is the only one of the contestants
having patents. Before taking up the
issues in detail the examiners say: "Tho
courts have held that those seeking to
overthrow patents should be held to strict
proof of actual and successful prior en-
bodiment, and tho Office has applied the
same rule to those askinga patent for that
which has already been patented to an-
other. In this case the rule of the office
is to be applied with strictness. for Bells
patent has not only not been declared
invalid by any court, but it has actually
been sustained. and upon n record which
is part of the record here. 1t follows,
therefore, that, although satisfied from
the evidence that Bell had made tho In
vention before the filing of his appli-
cation, it will not be necessary for the
general purposes Of this case to review
those portions of it which have led to this
conclusion. 1t will be sufficient to deter
mine whether or not the other parties
have overcome his record dates"
The issues are then taken up separately
and decided. Issue "a" is "the art Of
transmitting and reproducing at \ dis
tance sonorous waves or vibrations of any
description by increasing and decreasing
the strength of an electric current" &c.
Edison, Bell, aud Voelker were the prn-
cipal contestants. and the decision is that:
at must be concluded that Edison, like
Voelker, has not overcome Bells record
dates"
Issue "B" is the Improvement in art of
transmitting vocal sounds and words
Geographically by throwing upon the
line, through the medium of q varying
resistance, electric impulses correspond
ing to tho vibrations of diaphragm,
&c. The decision of the examiner in
favor of Bell is sustained ON this point
and also on issue &C." which relates to
tho transmitter, consisting OF the conbi-
nation of diaphragm and u liquid or
equivalent substance of high resistance.
Issue "G" Is for an armlturo plate, the
electric magnet for tho same, and closed
circuit passing from the helix to the
unduatory electric energy, and is also
awarded TO Bell.
Issue III, )" concerning tho transmitter,
was not appealed, and stands to Bells
credit.
Issue &C." telephone receiver consist
ing of the combination in an electric
circuit of magnet aud . diaphragm
supported aud arranged in close proXim-
ity thereto, whereby sounds thrown upon
tho limo may be reproduced accurately
rs to pitch and quality, WAS awarded by
tho examiner TO MoDOnough. The par
ties were Bell, McDouough, Gray, and
Edison.
Alter an exhaustive review OF the great
mass of evidence adduced upon this point,
aud stating At lungth tho reasons leading
u the conclusion, the examiners say ;
Upon tho whole McDOuOugh's proofs
cannot be held to DO sufficient TO over
come Bells record dates. We tave seen
that a party contesting the right Of a
patent must show completed aud per-