Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1886-11-12
THE TELEPHONE WIRES.
Ohio Government versus American Tele.
phone COmpany-A Voluminous Dec-s.
len Rendered.
CINCINNATI. O. Nov II

v. i L.
The opinion of the U. S. circuit court in
the case of the government against the Ameri-
can Telephone Co, was delivered this morn
ing by Judge Sage. 1t is very voluminous
and is in favor of the American Telephone
Co.
Judge Gage read the decision. He occu-
pied an hour and half and said it was the
conclu -ion of the whole bench. The suit was
brought by the government TO inquire by
what right the American Bell Co was doing
business here and ulterlorilty to test the val
idity of the Bell patent. The chief questions
TO be determined by the counsel were the
validity of MarshalPs returns on the writ of
subpoena and the jurisdiction of the United
States court Of the Southern district of Ohio
over the subject matter of action. The dis
cussion OF the latter question raised all the
points necessary to be examined in the entire
case. The bill of the government charged
that the American Bell Telephone Co. was a
foreign corporation, carving on business in
the State of Ohio through local corporation
and set forth actual and legal relation. of the
Bell Co. with local bodies 1t alleges that
the Bell Co. was found herein personam; but
a careful consideration OF the facts in the case
showed the foreign corporation was not carry
ing on its own business in the State of Ohio.
1t had no agent, properly so-called resident
here nor didn't have any partners here.
The local companies were no agents nor
partners, but only licensees of the American
Bell Telephone Co, the licenser whose legal
stus was in Massachusetts. The defendants
did not even share in the profits although
the exact relationship of the foreign with the
local corporations was set forth in the con-
tract renting out telephones. In order to
make out that foreign rorpOration is doing
business in the State of Ohio it would be
necessary to show that some one definitely
appointed as such was acting or managin <
agent. Several States have a foreign cor
poration act, each one showing clearly that
there mlst be an actual bona fide agent ap-
pointed in order to make the corporation sub
ject to be found for the purpose of service of
wrlts. In the present case neither contracts
or plea in allotment showed this bona fide
agent, relationship and ownership of the
property here and everywhere did not nat
ionalize or domesicate the corporation as
the government had argued. The jurisdic-
tion OF the court could certainly not be es-
tablshed by that argument
Msrshalfs return sets forth that the ser
vice was had on agent and partner Of defend
ants, but rs the court found that the local
corporations acted in no such capacity the
return was invalid and it was quashed. On
those findings Jugde Sage, for the whole
court, dismissed the bill of the government,
without prejudice. This means that there
can be no trial here except through making
the local companies parties defendant but
Massachusetts, which 10 the home of the
American Bell Telephone Co., is proper
territory or which the government can sue
and the fight will doubtless be transferred
there.