New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-01-16
FROM THE BELL POINT or VIEW.
now THE COUNSEL OF THE BILL COMPANY LOOK
on SECRETARY LAMAR's DECISION.

now THE COUNSEL OF THE BILL COMPANY LOOKS
on SECRETARY LAMAR's DECISION.
Edward n. Dlckerson, counsel for the Bell
Telephone Company, smiled when asked yesterday
what he thought OF Secretary Lamars telephone dec
sion 81 have not seen the opinions Of Mr. lamarH
assistants" he said. and have only hastily read his
or course eIpecte advance decision IN the pecu
liar circumstances that surround this Tho only
curiosity felt was the grounds for such decision
That the secretary is all wrong Is evident upon the
slightest examination Of the statutes The substance OF
his decision Is In these words:
"If however thernis only one patent and II has been
fraudueniy obtained 10 tue exclusion OF the one really
entitled be pAtentre, or IL patent mas lsSled "F
ing To- the wOrl becomes the duty ss well asthe night
OF the Government when OF sufficient public importance
tiou is not possibe adequate remedy. and because
the whole people are wrongcd without other mode vi
redress.
"fit were true as the Secretary supposes IL 10 be.
that private litigation Is not possible or adequate
remedy I'm these cases II would be nonstrous wrong
which courts would do their utmost 10 remedy But
II he had read Section 1920 Of the Revised Statutes no
would have found that for which he says
private litigation is not possible or adequate remedy
are in the most specific terms provided for.
"Under that section the defendants may setup
"second-That he had surreptitiousy or unjn.tly OBJ
tained the patent for that which was IN TACT Invented D
another who using reasonable diligence In adapt
ing and perfecting the same or ,,,
printed publication prior to his suppaed Invention or
Fourth"Tnat ho was not the original ana fret
ventor dseoyerer Of any material and substantial
part OF the thing patented
"And the statute provides that ~ any OF
the special matters alleged shall be found for the de-
PENDANT ud shall be rendered for him with costs
1.-THE ,roubs with this case In Washington IL that
very deences which the secretary supposes not 10
constitute remedy In private litigation have been set
ND in a number of SUITS deliberately tried before the
Circuit Courts OF the first three circuits and have boon
untenAbe by all those courts without dis
sentpg voice. There is fact before the Secretary
which has not been fully set out In these deences and
decided IL s probable that more than 100000 have
been spent by infrngers the attempt to establish the
ruth OF those propositions which Mr. Lamar thinks
not ,rabe private SUITS and there Is now ON appeal
| before the Supreme Court every fact which was
laid before him by the petitioners and the cases
will be reached next fall unless the Attorney General
will ioIn us I'm asking for hearing which we have In.
yited him do II that were done II would be hnay
and the Bell patent would be either defeated or aus
by the Patent ONCE for trnng variations In the Bell
81 su.a capital STOCK Would
be worth cent because the public would he entitled
which the instrument exists H. the other hand the
| Bell patent Is sustained, then the lnunetlon-
i TEnie Il is the Interest Of these com
panies keep the matter in doubt by proonEng ltea
se stock ignorant persons at small prices but more
1t cost TO print IT, who suppose that tho defeat OF
yeptOr the telephone and who are caught by tho dis
| tuRushed names IN the companies The Secretary
seems to suppose that the law would be different II the
limited states party TO the suit aud that the
courts would decide the Attorney Generals suit upon
| different principles from those governing Other
| cases or he would not have been led to be
| IIoyo that the decision OF HIS case would
| he any more conclusive than the decision
of the Supreme Court the questions IN private
|
1T is not possible to bring which IA begun now
IN the Supreme Court before those the caen
dar will be reached II IN those the Bell patent
decided adversely 10 IT, then II is dead and II not tn,
suit will be dead II II never haC
| beop begun. The decision IL pure question OF Law
upon facts that are record in the Patent Ofice
undisputed upon the testimony or Witnesses which
cannot be altered The secretary advises the sui
10 he brought In such will best the pub
and insure full inquiry. IL 10 be pre-
rsction of the parties and It ia evident that he doe
not think that Memphis Tenn, Is the place that con
| niles with any OF those conditions"