Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-03-24
THE BIG TELEPHONE SUIT.

II
states that the Government yesterday
commenced suit in the United States
Court at Columbus, Ohio, to test the
validity of the Bell telephone patents, the
defendants named in the petition being
the American Bell Telephone Company,
several corporations operating in Ohio
and other States, and Alexander Graham
Bell. Prominent among counsel acting
on behalf of the Government are ex-
Senator Thurman of Ohio, and Solicitor
General Goode.
This suit is brought under Section s,
Article L., of the Constitution, and the
acts of Congress passed hereunder, by
which the United States is authorized
and empowered, under certain
conditions, to restrain all persons
within its jurisdiction from exercising
their natural rights to employ their
industry, ingenuity and means in making,
vending, operating or using certain arts,
machines, manufactures or composition
of matter. The United States charges
that certain letters patent issued to Alex
ander Graham Bell, dated March z, 1876,
and January so, 1877, were illegally and
improperly procured to be issued, and for
this reason brings this bill in equity as
means OF causing justice to be done. Pro-
fessor Bell is plainly charged with not
only failing to meet the requirements of
the law, but with misleading and deceiv-
ing the examining officials of the Patent
Office
The case of Philip Refs, of Germany,
among others, is presented at length,
and it is claimed that he, in 1861, invent
ed and published to the world descrip.
ton OF an apparatus whereby speech
could be transmitted. Particular stress
is laid upon the case OF Elisha Gray, who
on the same day-February IA, 1876
that Professor Bell appeared at the Patent
Office with his document, filed caveat.
In this he expressly declared that he had
invented an instrument for which he
claimed 'fthe art of transmitting vocal
sounds and conversation Geographically
through an electric circuit" Professor
Bells application was filed later
in the day. 1t contained no refer
ence to articulate speech, and lacked in
description or drawings any machine or
apparatus then or at any time capable of
transmitting speech. Yet Professor Bell
claimed patent for transmitting vocal
or other sounds Geographically, as therein
described, by electrical undulations SINH
lar in form to the vibrations of the air
accompanying the said vocal sounds sub
stantially as set forth
The United States charges that Bell
was anticipated in the discovery OF the
electrical-speaking telephone by Philip
Refs, Elisha Gray, Thomas A. Edison
and many others. 1t is claimed that this
valuable discovery is either the property
of some one of these prior discoverers,
or, having been abandoned by the origi-
the people of the United States The bill
concludes with re-assertion that Bell is
not the inventor of the instrument
which he now claims to own and
operates through the American Bell
Telephone Company, and with a
description of the monopolistic character
of the company. 1t is alleged that the
telephone is of great public interest and
Importance, and that the Bell Telephone
Company, by receiving and demanding
large sums of money for use of telephones
alleged to be covered by its patents, is
expressing the people OF the United
States.
The court is prayed that, if the patents
are not to be wholly repealed, to decide
on what part they are void, and make
decree covering that portion of the patent
which is wrong or illegal