The Portland daily press., 1885-11-10
THE TELEPHONE HEARING.
The Government Asked to Begin Pro-
ceedings to Set Aside Bel Patents.

WASHINGTON, Nov. 9.-The telephone
hearing before Secretary Lamar began this
morning before room full of lawyers and
politicians. Nine applications were pre-
sented to him asking the government to be-
gin judicial proceedings to set aside the Bell
telephone patents Their attorneys were
chiefly Southern Democratic politicians,
chief among them being Gen. Bradley John
son and eX-Congressman Young of Tennes-
see. The Bell attorneys who appeared were
Messrs. Chauncy Smith and J.. J. Storrow
of Boston and Mr.. Dickinson of New York.
Mr.. Lamar said he wished all the applicants
would agree on one presentation of their case
but as they could not, he agreed to hear their
statements of facts and arguments thereon,
to be followed by the rebuttal of the Bell
people The reading of the various applica-
tions was then begun. The first case called
was that of the Globe Telephone Company.
The attorney for the company proceeded to
read the petition filed in its behalf. In brief
the petition sets forth that the patent exam
iner who passed Bells patent was under the
impression that it related to a system of
multiplex .telegraphy; that Bells original
telephone was imperative and that this was
admitted by himself; that he could not
truthfully claim priority of invention be-
cause it vas commonly known that Relss,
Mencci, Gray and others made and used tele-
phones before Bells application; that it
could be shown that Mencei had used a tel
ephone in 1S49 and that he had not aban-
doned his!invention; that the Western I'm
ion Telegraph Company, controlling certain
telephone patents, had entered into con-
tract with the Bell Company to compromise
their difficulties by which the Western Un-
ion Company received 20 per cent. of the
profits of the telephone company, and that
these great corporations had united to COM
pei the people to pay tribute to them. There
fore the Globe Telephone Company prayed
the Department of Justice to begin suits to
yacate the Bell patent
The remainder of the petitions were read
in the order of their presentation and includ-
ed substantially the same matter in the
foregoing petition.
During the reading of the petition of the
Cushman Company, Mr.. Humphrey stated
that there was a contract in existence be-
tween the Bell Company and Cushman, by
the terms of which Cushman agreed to re-
main quiet and avoid interference with the
Bell patents. That document was in the
hands of the attorney of the Bell Company
and later on they would be called upon to
produce it.
In the petition of the Pan Electric Com
pany 1t is set out that Gray filed caveat for
a telephone on the day of Bells application
and that contrary to law the contents of
Gray'S caveat were made known to Bell by
an official of the patent office and that with
in.iye days Bell made an important amend
mentto his application, covering matter de-
scribed in Gray's caveat.
Mr.. Storrow stated that the Bell Company
had no desire to submit written answer to
the petitions 1t was sufficient to deny gen.
orally everything that had been set up. He
asserted that all of the allegations material
to this investigation were disproved by the
papers which the petitioners themselves had
presented and referredl TO, with perhaps a
few other records from the patent office.
Mr.. Humphreys then proceeded to read
the affidavit submitted in support of the Pc
titions Beginning, the affidavit states that
after an examination of Gray's cayeat and
Bell application, he suspended Bells ap-
plication and notified Gray to complete his
cayeat within three months Those orders
had been revoked and the patent issued to
Bell, and in all his experience in eleven
years experience he had not known of sim
liar ruling Had the usual course been fol-
lowed, under the suspensory order Bell
could not have received a patent, and had
Mencci's caveat been renewed in 1875 no pa
tent could have issued to Bell. Affiant did
not suspect crookedness at the time. He did
not believe that Bells application was for a
talking telephone but for a multiplex tele-
graph and is convinced that his device as de-
scribed in his original application is lnopera,,
tive. E. K. Eaton, an electrical expert and
inventor, deposes that in his opinion Reiss
was the inventor of the telephone. S. S. Pratt
corroborates the statement Of Eaton. Prof:
Dolbear of Tufts College makes affidavit that
he was told by Bell in the fall OF 1876 that he
(BelD had patented a magnetic telephone
Two or Llree years D6IOIe tHdI anu tild0 ~
did not amount to anything. This statement
discouraged the afiant and he did not carry
out his intention of applying for patent for
his own invention. Affiant's instrument had
through the Gold and Stock Company come
under the control of the Western sse l uulon ion
represented at the interference proceedings
before the patent Office because Of the fact
that the Bell Company controlled his 1nven-
tions.
Mr.. Beckwith, representing theGlobe Com
pany, read the affidavit of Antonio. Mencci
describing his inventions and exhibits were
laid before the Secretary to support his allie
cation. Mencci recounts his struggles
against extreme provery, which he says pre-
vented him taking out patent for the tele-
phone conceived by him in 1845, while in
Havana, and for which he made a .cayeat in
1871 A long transcription from his notes OF
experiments in telephony, antedating the
Bell patents, were read, and number. of
corroborative affidavits were submitted, clos
ing the case for the Globe and Washington
companies and the case was adjourned for
the day.