The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-06-16
THEGREAT TELEPHONE CASE
Text of Decision of Judges Pardee and
Billings Sustaining Bells Patents.
Bell Unquestionably Antedates Gray in Filing
the Discovery-No Truth in the WILDER
Affidavit of Fraud-The Evidence.

lie UlScOVcTJ-NO HUH III tHc WllUci
Affidavit of Fraud-The Evidence.
The following is the full text of the decision
rendered in the United States Court at New
Orleans, sustaining the Bell patents and enioin-
ing the National Telephone Company:
This cause is before us on an application for pre-
hminary injunction upon bill, answers numerous at
fdavits. dispositions and exhibits We heard the ap
plicaton discussed by the solicitors both sides,
with many adjuncts of experiment and illustration,
for the period of twentyone days and have srlven
to give to the question the study and consideration to
which it is entitled from the fact that of our
fellow-ctzens throughout the entire country are in
terested in its decision.
very long discussion in which solicitors of ability
and learning participated-such has been the one
conducted before ushas great advantage it tends
to separate by clear line of demarcation that which
is SOUND in law and sustained in fact, from that
which however plausible and forcibly urged analysis
and proof compel the abandonment of.
The plainants have urged that since the patents
involved here have been the subject of judicial nves
legations, ending in decisions in the Circuit Courts of
the United States maintaining their validity, that so
far as the issues presented in those have been
identical with those involved in this cause for the
pose OF granting preliminary injunction to pen
dente te those prior decisions elsewhere obtained
sufficient We assent to this doctrine.
PRIOR DECISIONS.
The proofs submitted to us include DEGREES affirming
these patents by Mr.. Justice Gray, Mr.. Justice Mat
thews. Judge Lowell Judge Blatchford Judge Wal
lace, Judge Nixon Judge McKennan, Judge Butler,
Judge Acheson; with opinions of less length
by Mr. Justice Gray, Judge Lowell and Judge Wal
lace. 1t has been urged by the respondents that in
all these one, there either an alb
sence of one more Of the defenses here urged,
collision between the parties, and consequent mposi
ton upon the COURTS that the DEGREES and decisions
submitted and referred to above should not, of
themselves be the basis of the decision and de-
cree here. In the Molecular case, decided by
Judge Wallace last june there has been charge of
collision and consequent imposition. We think that
these abundanty show that the substantial de-
lenses here submitted have been urged in several of
those cases Though, perhaps they have not been
urged with the vgor and persistence that have char
acterzed the defense here and that the settled prac
tice in the circuit courts of the United States would
authorize the granting of the I'M junction pendente
te upon the authority of the DEGREES in those
We do not understand that the weight given by
circuit court to the adudicaons Of another rests
tirely upon the basis of comfy but we'll upon that
of recognized rights and of convenience and that it is
largely to prevent the necessity of more than
court going through with the investigation of the
facts, that the inference derived by the first
court is for the purpose of determining whether or
not injunction shall CO. till the final decree adopted
by the other circuit courts In addition to the weight
to be given to the adudicatons in favor of the Bell
company in other circuits the basis of convenience
comfy and recognized rights it is urged that the Ma
tional Improved Telephone Company the principal de-
PENDANT here is estopped by tho final decree rendered
by Judge Mckennan in the Pttsburg case because it
was prvy to that suit, and had day in court there
The evidence shows that the National Improved
Telephone Company, claiming to certain patents
pertaining to telephony the censor of the Pitts
burg company. and contracted for consideration
received that in case of any litigation involving the
validity of said atters patent any of them, where
in the Pttsburg company should be defendant, the
said National Improved Telephone Company should
have prompt notice thereof and should assume con-
q Said and at optI0 ba qHp q
party thereto at its expenses that the Pittsburg
suit did involve the validity of said letters patent; that
the National Improved Telephone Company
promptly notified thereof and did assume control of
the litigation preparing elaborate defense and APP
pearing therein by council. who were heard by the
court and that becoming dissatisfied by the refusal of
the court to go behind the DEGREES of other circuits in
the matter of preliminary injunction, the National
Improved Telephone Company ordered the inlmedi.
att withdrawal from the court of all the evidence in
struments and documents OF every character con-
nected with the Defense and Immediately dismissed
the counsel in said case"
In Robbins VS.. Chicago Wallace, 657, it is said:
Conclusive effect of judgments respecting the
cause of action and between the parties rests
upon the just and expedent axiom that it is for the
interest of the community that limit should be OPP
posed to the continuance of litigation and that the
same of action should not be brought twice to
final determination.
Parties in that connection include all who are di-
recty interested in the subject matter and who had
right to make defense, control the proceedings,
inc and crossexamine witnesses and appeal from the
judgment Judgment :. ,.,, x;,.s.. .,,......,, :.
regarded strangers to the cause but all who di
recty interested in the suit and have knowledge of its
tendency and who refuse or neglect to appear and
avail themselves of those rights equally concluded
by the proceedings.
See also Chicago vs. Robbins, Black, 41S
To the effect Cromwell VS.. County of Sac,
81 US. 351; Chamberlain VS.. Preble,, II Allen:
$40; Tredway the Sioux City Il Pacific Railroad
Company 80 Iowa, 663.
The rule is applied in patent cases. Robertson
Hill, 6 Fisher, 460; Miller VS.. the Lggett Myers
Tobacco Co., Fed. Rep, 80
No authorities cited to the contrary. But
sci have argued that the National Improved Company
had right to withdraw from the litigation, and that
thereupon, in some unaccountable way, the company
was released from all responsibility, and that COM
plainant had no right to proceed to a decree.
We cannot avoid the conclusion that so far as the
National Improved Telephone Company is concerned
in this suit that is bound and concluded by the final
decree rendered at Pittsbug, and that that decree
alone warrants the injunction pendente lite in this
case. as against said telephone company and its
privles.
THE QUESTIONS EXAMINED.
But since have had the cause so exhaustively
presented and have fully considered it, we have
determined not to rest conclusions upon the de-
crees in the other circuits sufficient as deem those
to be, but to examine the questions de novo.
1t is urged by the defense that there should be given
a weight to the fact that the executive department of
the has directed the institution of suit
to annul this patent that should lead to refuse
defer any affirmation of the patentees right till the
conclusion of that suit. To this we cannot assent.
The executive department has not in this case at
tempted adjudicate rights could it in any
do more than start the judicial inquiry and present
the cause to the courts The filing OF information
cannot create presumption of guilt. No
the institution of suit to annul create presumption
of nullity. If any effect is to be given to the pen
dency of this suit to annu as TO suspend any rights
of the patentee it could only result from restraining
other orders issued in that suit, where the court
having the parties and the evidence upon which the
nuity is sought to be established before it, has also
the authority to annul then to suspend the force
of the patent.
There is class of cases where the decision of
class includes only those which present political
questions such which is the lawful government in
State or in foreign country-questions connected
with functions of sovereignty where promptness and
unity of action in all the departments of
are essential All questions properly judicial by
the very Constitution embraced within the judicial
power, and submitted exclusively to the courts
BELLS CLAM VALID.