The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1885-11-12
gEI,EPHONE TROUBLES
professor Bell, Prof. Gray
Caveats and Patents.
PETTY KETTLE OF FISH.
snst 10 Claimed by Professor Bell
Aueg4 iOns by Professor Gray
1he Case Continues
Telsphone Trouble.

WASHINGTON, November las sup
PORTING the allegations of irregular
prsctices in the Patent Office, another
sTdayit by ex-Examiner Wilbur was
rad, reciting the circumstances attend
ing the brese nation of Gray's caveat
on the same day that Bell application
vas received. also endorsed BY Wilbur
on the Wrappe.. Gray'S caveat, filed
February p. 1876, stating that
Bells application had been sus-
pend ID because it had been the
prsct ce OF the Office to recognize
only difference in the date OF filing
such papers. The endorsement OF
Commissioner Ellis Speare, directing
he revocation of the suspensory Ter,
;or the reason that it appeare that
Bells application had been filed two
hours before the Gray caveat. was ais
ead. Extracts from the testimony
given in the DoWd suit Wels
presented as bearing on the alleged
unlawful disclosure of the nature of
gray's caveat. Mr.. Young read an affi-
lsylt made By Professor Elisha. Gray
dChicago, on the 9th instant. Profess
su Gray begins b is affidavit With the
statement that in the year 1876 he con-
Eyed 3 number of his patents, sup
posed among other things to relate TO
telephony, to the Harmonic Geographic
,Gompsny, in consideration of he stock
interest in that company. These
the American Speaking Telephone
Company for a consideration of one
bird of the stock of the American
Company. mr. Gray states that the
American Telephone, Gold and Stock,
Harmonic and Western Union Tele-
graph Companies we're real defendants
n the suit of the American Company.
Known as the DoTd case. Some time
alter the institution of that suit, SAYS
PiOs. Gray, these companies combined
n joint ownership of all the patents
involved IN the American Company,
sesEEng IN compromise 20 per cent. of
aspyalties received, and to share IN
tie expenses Of litigation and the plr-
chase G. other patents, before the CON-
Saasion vas effected, and when it was
Understood that compromise would
smade. Professor Gray says he aow
believes that the litigation was not
carried on in good faith with view to
anal settlement by the court. This,
ne says, resulted from fhe expectation
OF 2 compromise and after il had been
effected everything was done for the
common benefit OF the parties, and such
1decree as they desired was entered In
the case. Pro. essor Gray had no con-
I0l over this case at any time, be says,
ana his interest was represented by a
continuation in which. he was inter- |
ss!ed. de lied caveat for q tele (
phone on February 14th. 1876, and after /
Yards learned that Prof Bell, the same /
esY, hled an application for an i'm
INF IN 10 knTo +,
harmed, but not until after Bells patent
Aad been issued. that in it he claimed
% have invented a telephone. The
amsrt then reviews the circumstances
9ueading the dismissal of the inter
lsleace between himself and Bell, and
hsissae of a patent TO the latter.
Continuing, he says, be Is informed
and believes that in few days after
he issuance of that patent. Bell made
an instrument with which he trans
united speech. Long afterwards he
learned that Bell first transmitted
sLaculate speech through liquid trans
11ltIerS, substantially as described In
5lS t6ray 81 cavest and unlike anything
Hescn6ed II Bells application. For a
long tine be believed that Bell |
actually invented that instrn- I
Qent lndepend entity Of his (Graysl |
gsVlcS, de (GTay) informed his counsel I
MAI Bell had exhibited at the Cen /
sehnlsl an operative telephone, using a !
1gcelVer nearly resembling his (Gray's.) !
9s counsel informed him that his 4
ssim vas practically defeated and I
Ha Bell, having an operative /
-s.fument, would succeed. He did !
sV1 suspect anything wrong. but /
opposed that in the eyes of the Law
~ - haQ the advantage, as his counsel
ell and every oral statement and
.steSs letter coming from the aff4nt at
"a IA euOd vas made or written under
VIC ~ oslet that he had been fairly dealt
- II The matter OF his caveat. Re
auy and long since the oral statements
zee made and the letters referred to
gil'en, says Professor Gray. facts
Iage to his knowledge that convinced
~ ne was wrong IN assuming and be-
efng Professor Bell had fairly made
invention. He now believed Pro-
LsW Bell, on the contrary, had
AS4ied, IN some way. of his caVeat and
y contents, and that he made use
u mat knowledge IN Constructive
sc nc instrument with which he frsg
sSs.eSsSlully transmitted articulat {
~ sSn' He Gray had supposed that
Rs., ee.scOyery remained q secret IN the
soS M ONCE, as il should have done,
so>. vas not known to Bell. What he
I:a., s "a. on the subject was stated IN
d. OF o. information which satisfied him
e.. -oF. Bell, having obtained MS SCI
IL Claimed his discovery as
~ eSn. and by this means got
4et;naae alt OF his {Gray's) inVenti0n.l
de- i j. however, says Prof. Gray under
nsts..sN si That Mh. Bells fairness in the
Is u a. =. ana under the advice ofcounseI
nv = as rights as b fore explained, be Z
deoos;,SSs 81 a statements and gave said
sdF Fs'i DO as would seem to acknowl-
sada, fot- Bells invention. Being J
a. Say he did not take ss''s stems AT 70 !
lromnslu application on the caveat Z
oot a P..ly, but the matter rested with I
ls7S question until November 18Th Il
1es,;SS' iile tine prior to the fling Of I
hin ~ -PPhcation il was suggested "a 5
2bose4 ,,d she American Speaking Tele- !
1pahy' under the impression s