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

A press dispatch received last night
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 8,
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 80, 1877, were illegally and
improperly procured to be issued, and for
this reason brings this bill in equity rs a
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 Res, OF Germany,
among others, is presented at length,
and it is claimed that he, in 1861, invent
ed and published to the world a descrp'
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 Il, 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 "the art OF transmitting vocal
sounds and conversation Geographically
through on 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 oi
apparatus then or at any time capable o.
transmitting speech. Yet Professor Bell
claimed a patent for transmitting vocal
or other sounds Geographically, as therein
described, by electrical unduations smi
lar in form to the vibrations of the all
accompanying the said vocal sounds sub
stantially as set forth"
The United States charges that Bel
was anticipated in the discovery of thu
electrical-speaking telephone by Philil
Refs, Elisha Gray, Thomas A. Edison
and many others. 1t is claimed that thi
valuable discovery is either the property
OF some one OF these prior discoverers
or, having been abandoned by the origi
nal discoverer, is now free to be used b,
the people of the United States. The bill
concludes with re-assertion that Bell i
not. the inventor OF the instrumen
which he now claims to own an,
operates through the American Bel
Telephone Company, and with
description of the monopolistic characte
OF the company. 1t is alleged that tn
telephone is of great public interest an
importance, and that the Bell Telephon
Company, by receiving and demandin
large sums of money for use OF telephone
alleged to be covered by its patents,
depressing the people OF the Unite
States.
The court is prayed that, if the patent
are not to be wholly repealed, to decid
on what part they are void, and make
decree covering that portion OF the pater
which is wrong or illegal.