St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-05-22
A SENSATIONAL STORY
Told by an Ex- Patent Office Ex.
aminer.
He States in an Affidavit That Gray
Owns the Telephone.
BelIs' Caveat Filed Last and Af1anf
Bride Taker.

WASHINGTON, May 21.-Mr. Van Ben
thusen to-day in the telephone investiga-
ton presented sensational affidavit, and
the committee will decide in secret to-mor-
row whether it will go into this phase of
the case or not. 1t was made by ZeDos
Fish WILDER, examined in the electrical in
vention division of the patent office, from
1875 till May, 1877. Mr.. WILDER deposes
that he personally examined and passed to
issue letters patent on the application
! OF Alex Graham Bell, the patent
being dated March z, 1876; that
he is the same WILDER who made affidayits
in the suit brought at Columbus, o., by the
United States to annul Bells patent, and
before the commission OF inquiry into the
same in the interior department., that in
none OF these affidayits have the exact facts
and entire truth been told in relation to the
circumstances connected with the issuance
OF the first Bell patent; that he proposes to
state the circumstances under which they
were obtained from him ''to serve the ends
and purposes of the party, who
influenced him; that in order
that Justice may be rectified'' he
has concluded to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, to tell of the inAu-
ence brought to bear on him and which
caused him to show Prof Bell Elisha
Grays caveat" and ito favor Bell in vari-
Gus ways in acting on several applications
for patents by him made; that he does this
with full knowledge of the consequences
to himself which may result, and without
hope or promise of reward" He then goes
on to say that the affidavit of Oct 81. 1885.
was given at the request of Mr.. Swan. of
counsel for the Bell company; that at the
time affiant was
SUFFERING FROM ALCOHOLISM;
was not in a condition to realize what he
was doing, and was in effect duped to sign
1t" That Mr.. Swan paid him 500 there
for for the Bell company. He says that he
Is now free from the influence of liquor,
and added:
II am convinced that by my action while
examiner of patents Elisha Gray was de-
prived of proper opportunity to establish his
right to the invention of the telephone and
| now propose to tell how it was
1.-THE application of Bell or the caveat Of Gray
was filed the earlier on Feb. IL, 1876 and to
be governed by such finding OF facts as to the
maintenance or dissolution of such suspen-
sion. From the circumstances herein before
detailed was anxious to please Mai. Bailey,
keep on the best and most friendly of terrni
with him, and hence was DESTROYS of finding
that the Bell application was the earlier iled,
and did not make as thorough an examina.
ton as 1 should have done in justice ia
all concerned. So when 1 found in
the leash blotter'' the entry of receipts
of Bells fee ahead of the entry of the re-
ceipt of GraY's fee, closed the examination
and determined that Bell was the earliest,
whereas should have
CALLED FOR PROOF
from both Bell and Gray and have investt.
gated into other directions instead of beina
controlled by the entries alluded to and the
statements Of Maj Bailey to me. The effect
without his having had an OPP
portunity to be heard or of having
his rights protected, and the issuance
of the patent hurried and in advance OF its
turn to Bell. After the suspension of Bells
application had been revoked, Prof. Bell
called upon me in person at the office, and
showed him the original drawings of Gray's
eaveat, and fully explained Gray's method OF
transmitting and receiving. Prof. Bell was
with me quite a time ON this occasion-proba-
bly, upwards Of an hour-when / showed him
the drawing and explained Gray's methods to
him. This visit was either the next day or
the second day after the revocation OF the
suspension
WILDER then goes on to say that on the
afternoon OF the same day Bell returned
and on leaving presented him with 500
bill. He says Prof. Bell will probably deny
the statements made by affiant,-has in
fact, already denied some. He then goes on
to say that Maj. Bailey was one of Prot,
Bells attorneys in the matter of his first
patent; that affiant and Maj. Bailey had
been soldiers and officers in the
same command; that they were close
friends; that affiant had borrowed
MONEY OF THE MAJOR;
that the latter had presented atlantis wife
with handsome watch, and afiiant had
borrowed 800 of him at about this time,
all of which put afiant under many obliga-
tons to Maj. Bailey, and made him ex-
tremely anxious to oblige him in every way
possible. The affidavit adds:
When I suspended Bells application be-
cause of the Gray caveat, did not in the
official letters give the name of the caveat, nor
his date of filing. Maj. Bailey appearing before
me in regard to such suspension, allowed
him to become acquainted with both facts.
telling him personally the same, so that he
knew the exact facts upon which to base the
protest he subsequently fled against such
suspension, and which was referred by me to
the commissioner in person for instruction.