The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-11-15
THE SPEAKING TELEPHONE.
The Controversy Causing Talk as to the
Validity of Many Other Patents.
Close of the Testimony in the Pending Case
-Speechess1br the Petitioners and
in Favor of the Bell Company.
Ipecial to the Indianapolis Journal.

Special to the Indianapolis journal.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 1.-THE discussion of the
validity of the telephone patents, before the In
terror Department, this week, has attracted at
tention again to other patents which have been
in controversy for years. and which have, in
many instances, involved the users in endless
trouble and litigation. The Green drive-well is
case in point. A number of patent attorneys
were discussing this subject in the presence of
Commissioner Montgomery. to-day. when one of
them remarked
This case illustrates the manner in which
some patentees will assert that the validity of
their patents has been passed upon by the United
States courts, and it also serves to do incalcula-
Bile injury to men who have innocently
bought patented article upon which a
royalty has been paid. In the case of this
drive-well the decision confirming the validity
of the patent was rendered by a court which
was equally divided, and it only sustained the
ruling of the court below in that one instance.
1t is evident that if the interested parties would
carry the case to the highest court and get de-
clslon upon its merits, the farmers of the
country would not be annoyed as they haye
been for years past by sharks claiming the
right to assess royalty, which right they back
with partial decision from the United States
courts"
The other attorneys present were Of the same
opinion as the gentleman who spoke. and Com
missioner Montgomery gave his views to the
ability of the patentees to sustain themselves
before the United States Supreme Court by
stating that when practicing before the bar in
Lansing Mich. he was approached by the agent
of the Drive-well Company, who desired to re-
tain him in suits then pending before the court
in Michigan Mr.. Montgomery said he declined
the retainer, and refused to have anything to do
with the patent
After recess Mr.. Beckwth followed for the
Globe company, in support of the claims of An
tonic Meurcci He said the government had
been petitioned in vain to inquire into Meurccis
claim. If they could establish the fact that
Muercci invented and used a speaking telephone
that would dispose of the claims of Bell and all
University of Florence and spent six
years there in the study of electric
ity. Mr.. Beckwith compared the researches
of Bell and Muercci Bell, he said. took out pat
ent in 1876 and it did not mention the word tele-
phone; he had no conception of its use as a
speech transmitter until he heard of Gray's in
vention. Three men tell us that as far back as
l649 Muercci used a speaking telegraph to trans
NIT the human voice. and in 1869 he invented q
perfect telephone. Mr.. Beckwith exhibited
duction of his telephone, made in 1860
declared that it contained the es-
sential parts of perfect telephone
This old man (Muercci) said Mr. Beckwith, sew
enty-three years of age had been chased up
within thelast three days by the sheriff set on by
this unearthly monopoly, and chased across the
bay to Staten island, to his home. Gould they
get justice in New York;" inquired Mr. Beck
with. They had invented the telephone that
they had used In the name of justice, of
science and Of fair dealing, he appealed to the
SO that this sd si0 inventor e@ mgns res
in peace ard the hounds of the
Bell company might keep their hands out his
gray hair Mr.. Beckwith rapidly reviewed the
testimony, showing the practicablity of Muerccis
telephone, and said that a mistake had been
made in his caveat-he never intended to insu-
late the persons speaking, only the wires. He
found perfect drawing of telephone Mr.
Beckwith then dwelt at length upon
Muercci's extreme poverty and the suffer
ings he had undergone. He alleged that
from the beginning Of the telephone
business down to the present day, there had been
a great deal of Observation-Disclosures had been a
great deal of lying, and professional swearers
were kept busy by the wholesale. Nothing could
be done without the consent of the government
it was the last ditch. There had never been a
moment when Muercci had abandoned his claims,
and it was but right that an opportunity should
be afforded to show that this man had invented
the telephone.
Mr.. Young followed in an argument for the
petitioners. He reviewed the facts leading up to
the present proceedings, and said it but fair
to the other side to fully open their case. There
fore, he laid down the following propositions:
That the government has the power and legal
authority to file this bill in any one of it's own
judicial tribunals having jurisdiction in such
matters to recall and declare void patent; that
it had the power, inherently and Independently.
of any express statute; that whenever it is
shown to the proper officers of the government,
by citizens, that patent has been frauduently
| issued. that power should be exercised; that the
evidence of the record in this case shows such a
state of facts as would warrant the government
in exercising that power: that there is abundant
precedent in the history of the government for
such action; that the Bell patent is invalid.
for the reason that it is too broad in
It's terms. and violative of the principles
of law that underlie the whole patent system
by giving the patentee control, not of process
but of an element of nature, a current of
electricity. 1t was void for want of utility 1t
| had never yet spoken into human ear single
sound. 1t was voidable because, in its progress
through the Patent Office there were such irreeu-
larities such disregard for the law as to divest
it of the sanctty that otherwise attached to the
issue of patent Mr. Young cited at length
the barbed wire case and others as presidents
where the government had gone into court to
test patents in the face Of numerous judicial
decisions upholding those patents. "Why were
the other side so alarmed" inquired Mr.. Young
now, when it was proposed TO proceed against
them through the government They had al
ready triumphed In eighteen suits, and expressed
themselves as secure in their rights Was it
not clear that the legal mind of the
country, &C we'll as the public
mind, was not satisfied with the
correctness of former decisions2 Mr. Young re-
ferred to what he termed the railroad speed with
which the Bell patent had been put through the
Patent Office, and contrasted it with the inter
ference proceedings, dragging along for FIVE years
he inquired who it was that paid Mr.. Baldwin
pnNf4 IN L ,
work, ii Professor Bell and his associates bad
not paid him. collusive or friendly litigation
could not be urged as judicial determination
that estopped further inquiry.
Secretary Lamar Wants Information.
To the Western Associated Press.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 14.-When the hearing of
the tsWphone cases was resumed, to-day, Mr.
Starrow submitted number of afidavts for
tho Ra1l Opa IF ID hxy