Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-09-22
The Government vs.. the Bell TeIe-
phone Company, to Cancel the
latter's Patent.
now Casey Young, Attorney Tor the
Plaintin, Gives Seine Interesting
Points In the Case.
Ho" !, is Proposed to Abolish the Tr,epbonc
Monopoly and Leave an Open I1sId
to Inventive Genius.

the government has brought suit against
the Bell Telephone company to repeal
ITS patents. The suit win be prosecuted
In the federal court at Memphis and MIR.
Elser telegraphs that he Is confident the
result viii prove favorable to the contest.
ing companies. The attorneys for the
government are Messrs. j. II. Beckwith.
George Gault, Luke Wright and Casey
Young 1t is probably not generally
known that the United s ates govern
ment VIII prosecute suit for the repeal
OF patent No one has the right TO
compel the United States to file a bin of
complaint for this purpose In its own
name, and II only does so when evidence
has been presented showing fraud or
mistake In the issue of patent. The
MODE on PROCEDURE
is Tor the district attorney TO file an ap-
plication for permission to bring the suit
Having furnished an outline of the case,
presented satisfactory evidence, neces.
sarily of an oE-pdHe character, and oh.
tanned the permission of the department
of justice, the bill Of complaint can be
filed at once or at any time during the
life of the patent, upon order OF the com.
plajnant. in the circuit court of the dis
trict.
As the result of the suit will be looked
Tor with the warmeSt interest In Fort
Worth as well as by the people of the en-
tire country, involving, as IL does, the
question as to whether the right To one
of the greatest convenicnccs OF modern
times shall be vested in MONOPOLY. an
Interview is presented the readers of
THR GAZETTE from Hon. Casey Young,
congressman from the Memphis district,
which outlines the evidence OF the prose.
cutiOn:
"The suit is one of the most important
of the time" said Col. Young, sand its
merits cannot be discussed In mere par
agraph. | can best do so by treating of
II under separate heads
IT INVOLVES THE VALIDITY
OF the Bell patent OF March Z, 1876, under
which the American Bell Telephone
claims close monopoly In the broad art
OF telephony, The principal part of the
stock in this giant corporation is owned
by three other great corporations. II IL
stocked at between $50, 900, 600 and $780,
100000, and the stock Is greatly above
par. The business OF telephony is In its
infancy, yet the income of this monster
concern is even now estimated at over
Sl0,000,000 annually.
A SUCCESSFUL ATTACK
on the Bell patent will strike down this
monopoly and open the way TO a better
telephone service, and nj the same time
give value to many improvements on the
art, now held under letters patent from
the government by the inventors OF their
assignees, but of no value because of the
supremacy of the Bell patent. The
government has power 10 issue patents
only for new and useful discoveries aud
inventions. If by concealment, contriy-
ance, fraud or
FALSE SUGGESTION
patent Is obtained for something that
was before known, or is OF no value, or
for thing -patcntable Gas, for exam
pie, patent on a principle or force of
nature, and which belongs, as Of right, 10
all persons), and such patent Is working
injury to the public, or some part of the
public, the government may and will upon
application, accompanied by prlma facle
showing, order a bill TO be fled TO repeal,
recall and vacate the grant. II was in
this way this suit was set on foot. The
bill charges that
THE BELL PATENT
was procured by false suggestion, fraud
and contrivance; that the patent Office
was oyerreachcd; that said Office dis
closed secrets of other inventors to said
Bell, and thereby wronglully favored him,
In violation OF the act of congress; that
the art of telephone was not new, OF
discovered by said Bell, as he was fully
hnt kksffb h
out other discoveries aud inventions, II OF
no value. II is confidently and boldly
asserted by those who urge the suit, that
nothing useful in the telephone in gen
eral, and STYLED the Bell telephone, wac
invented by said Bell, or covered by his
patent. That the successes achieved II
litigation, in favor of said patent, have
been either collusiye, not contested, OF
1 by mistake rs to
FUNDAMENTAL AND VITAL FACT.
The earliest or among the earliest nn'
most important OF these suits was tina
/ known as the Dowd case. II was begun
( in 1879 against Dowd for infringing IN
/ Bell patent Dowd was agent for tire
/ Great aud wealthy corporations. Niue
proof was taken. Finally the partie
compromised, the defendants getting
large interest, by the terms OF the CON
promise, in the Bell patent, and agreeing
/ to decree In favor Of patent they thu
became interested in supporting The
I started out to defeat the Bell patent
4 Their antagonists made II TO their Inter
est TO let the Bell patent beat them. An
l IL Is the most natural thing In the worl
I for
A CORPORATION TO AGREE 70
what Is for its pecuniary interest. To III
public the result seemed success for Ia
Bell patent. The happy family, inside
knew better. This family soon ate
brought on collusiye interference col
tests in the patent Office, which wer
fore ordained TO 20 the way that led
the enrichment of the family. That Is 81
way they went The next case Of imp0
lance was the Spence case In that N
Bell patent succeeded, on the propositlo
of fact that the Reis conception OF tel
phony did not anticipate Bell, because
was 50
DEFECTIVE N PRlNCiPiE
that century Of improvement in col
struction would not make II speakii
telephone. II is insisted with great co
fidence by those urging this suit that u
learned Judge who sat in the Spence cai
was IN error MS to this vital fact, that =
ephones constructed on the Refs prluelp
-. s.llinar tntauhoufS aud that ltf