The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-11-13
BELL GETS A BLACK EYE.
THE GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT
TO ANNUL PATENTS.

Multifariousness Denied on the
Ground that the Two Patents
Related to One Subject-As Much
Right to Set Aside Patents for Inven-
tions as for Lands.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 12.-The supreme
court of the United States to-day rendered
an opinion in favor of the government in
the case of the United States against the
American Bel Telephone Company, brought
here on an appeal from the decision OF the
circuit court of Massachusetts, which sus-
tanned the demurrer entered by
the Bell Company to the govern
ment's suit. The decision of the
court to-day reverses the Judgment Of
the circuit court and remands the case to
that court for trial ON its merits Solicitor
General jerks acting as attorney general,
brought a suit in equity in the circuit court
of Massachusetts, to have the Bell company's
patent cancelled and declared null and void
on the ground that it was procured by
fraud, and that Bell was not the first in
ventor Of the telephone.
REPLY OF THE BELL COMPANY,
The Bell company, through its attorneys,
allegations made in the governments bill
in equity, filed demurrer in which they
asserted that the United States had no
right, in the absence Of a specific statute
granting that power, to bring suit to
cancel a patent for an invention.
They declared that such a
suit could only be brought by private
party, and not by the government. The
circuit court sustained the Bell company's
demurrer and refused to entertain the gov
ernment's bill. From that decision the
United States took an appeal to the
supreme court, which, to-day, through
Justice Miller, reversed the decision of the
lower court in long and elaborate opinion.
MULTIFARIoUsNEss DENIED.
Justice Miller first took up the plea of
multifariousneSS urged by the Bell COM
pany, and said that it could not hold good /;
that the suit brought by the United States,
although it soug t to cancel two patents
Issued a year apart, really related to one
subject. AS to the Bell company's conten-
tions that the United States could not
bring. and that no circuit court could ell
terrain suit to cancel patent brought in
the name of the government, no matter
whether fraud had been committed or not.
Justice Miller said that there was no ques-
ton that an individual had a right
to judicially seek redresss for a wrong
COmmlJU6u%agalDSD MIN, ana YET IL
was contended that the United States, the
representative of 100000 of people, could
do nothing in their behalf. Justice Miller
said that such state of things would be a
great anomaly in system of government
like ours.
SIMILAR TO LAND FORFEITURE RIGHTS.
The patent system, he said, was derived
from the same clause in the constitution as
that relating to the public lands. The
government, although no express statu te
had been enacted, it had been repeated
held had the right to set aside land patents
obtained by fraud, and the same thing was
true of patents for inventions. The CON
tention that the government should not
take action because a remedy existed
with private parties, he said,
did not hold good One person
might bring suit against the holder Of a
patent and obtain judgment in that par
ticular case, and yet other parties who
subsequently brought suit would be unable
to bring proof The government alone had
the power to bring the suit which would
finally settle the whole matter.
Justice Gray did not sit in this case. Some
of his relatives are holders of Bell telephone
stock.
Solicitor General jerks will proceed at
once under the decision of to-day (which
came out just as predicted) to press the bill
of the government against the Bell Tele-
phone Company in the circuit court at Bos-
ton. He IS confident of winning this suit,
now that the Bell company is to be required
to answer directly to his bill.