New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-01-15
ACHANCE FOR PAN-ELECTRIC
DECIDING AGAINST THE BELL COMPANY.
MR.. LAMAR DELIVERS AN OPINION IN THE TELE-
PHONE CONTROVERSY.

MR.. LAMAR DELIVERS AN OPINION IN THE TELE-
PHONE CONTROVERSY.
WASHINGTON, Jan 14.-Secretary OF the
Interior Lamar this afternoon sent to Acting Attorney
General Goode letter. containing his conclusions upon
the proofs and arguments submitted touching the wand
lty OF the Bell telephone patent Of March % 1870 MI
Lamar says In substance:
"The petitioners upon the grounds and for the rea
sons set forth in their petitions, ask the Depaftme'
Justice to allow appropriate legal pfoceeuns
to bensttuted in the proper court by the "oVefneh'
or IN the name of the Government on their reiaou W
yacxe and annu the Bell telephone patent OF the n OIL
March, 1876 in the petitions specified. you h"'o@s
me to communicate any Information on INC eu'9os
he gathered from the files OF this Department anu W
sugeest generally my views as to the action which
shoud be taken by your department III the premises
A tho Patent Office appertaius to this Department
have be N especially DESTROYS to understand iuiy All
that is alleged ground for relief In these peuohs III
regard to what done IN that office; ana Dehe'oi
can assure you that all the information on that subject
TO be gathered from the files of the Office Is empooeu III
the record herewith transmitted. also send You the
views OF the Commissioner and of Assistant Secretaries
Muldrow and jerks, respectively. Ihoue"'
that my consideration should be directed 70 wv
ouestions and to meet these questions IT,
suested that the argument Of counsel snou'"
bs shaped. They are First, has the oo'cih
meut the right to such suit for such purpose
Second IL IL has such right. should the proceedings i
yited In the respective petitions or either Oh them oe
Instituted
"The first OF these questions specially within the cog
nzapce OF your Department 1t is has the Affirmative
or.wer of numerous presidents N Department and
has received like affirmative answer from the courts Vi
the United States If 1t had not been thns au'nort'
lively settled, should principle have reseheu 'ho
same ooncuson. The Government Is asked 70 'ns''"
iudical INQUIRIES as the patent OF the Bell IeFPhohc
Comnanv upon the allegation that such patent was OBJ
taned by the fraud psentee with the cousion OF
nv the inadverence and mistake OF the executive Objects
OF the Government II these allegations be Tue gea'
wrong TO the whole people rests In the nane ana sus
tanned by the power, OF the United States 10 say na'
the Government inicts the wrong would seem 10 Imply
tina, acme where among resources the Government
would have the power to redress IT, Ihe argument
against prayer of the petitioners does not
this but rests upon the theory that the government
has provided remedy which excludes all other modes
and therefore precudes further governmen'a ac'on'
surely II a power to vacate a patent wrongfuly
isuec exists at ALL there need not be statute 10 pro
vide mode OF its exercise when node exists "i'no"'
n statute. A patent for land may for good cause III
proper case be at the suit Of the Government
without statute and there no difference as 10 the
,ncules here inv between patent for lana anu
a patept for an invention there is
only one patent and 1t has been frauduieny oplaheu
to the exclusion OF the one really emitted 70 DC Paehoe'
or ~ patent issued for something not
an invention already belonging TO the word- becomes
the duty as well the right of the Government "heh
of sufcient public Importance to actively seek lts can
collation. because private litigation Is not posSloe Ut
adeouato remedy, and because the whole people are
nyrrnment trdst can never fail for want Of trustee
nor can fraud. mistake or accident In business
fious escape investigation Tor wait OF tTouhti mo
court OF Equity is maintained Representing me
sovereign in his person In the mother e1un'' beH
in sense and relation OF nearness
"Mr second INQUIRY was as to whether the right OF the
Government existing tho proceedings invited Dy tee
ba grounds Of invalidy allie ged against the Bell tee
phone patent be Substantially snmm"di]e9h 'nu a
FIRST the patent procured by the fraud OF ns pay
entee through the collision or mistake OF the VI
e a1 named Elisha Gray Second. the invention pat
ented was patentable because already papei d ~,
inquiry 1t is apparent that these alllegaons describe
the occasions in which the Government upon ny view
emit II manifest that decision upon tne merits o.
the as 70 I.e Tour reoaes The
before INC lies outside OF the ultimate merits OF te case
smSIseu Ti sSond bo have not felt called upon
70 form, and II had formed would not express o an
shown upon the hearing require the submission OF me
court at the instance S vol
umlnous and very conflicting In many respects ~ n
oms Intricate iega questions The allegations ana the
evidence touching tue cireumstances s'ienuns oe ISSUE
port as in my opinion improper 10 gnore OK
dismiss them such case Is presence 'na
that many suits have been pending ana many arc U
ne mai assam it, In none Of these there
been or can there be- think such thorough lnysst-
cation and full adjudication as TO the alleged irauds or
mistakes occurring In the Patent once In the
fssnance patent, as eould Dc hhu
tn proceeding instituted and carried on
by the Government itself In q case IN
such questions seems to me especially lnpera-
tive upop the Government duty TO its own Officers 10
yndcate OF condemn ana duty to the people 10 SET on
foot aud follow up complete investigation In my
oninion tie proceeding should be IN t6@ name ana
wholly by the Oyernment not on the relation or Tor te
beneft OF all OF any Of the petitioners, but III the In
tersst OF the and the people and wholly AZ
the and under the conduct and control OF thc
ciovernmant l think it should be instituted at such
point and In such court will hest subserye the pur-
noses of pubc convenience and full inquiry. Sncn
Proceeding so conducted. WILL think comport with the
dgnity of the Government and the gravity OF the SUP
tect a,d will insure final and just adjudication OF the
merits of the controversy"