Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-03-20
ON A VERY CLOSE CALL
THR BELL COMPANY GAINS A VICTORY IN
THg SUPREME COURT.
Decision in The Famous Telephone Gases
4 Lengthy Review Of the Whole
MAttsr-Thrss Of the Judges Give
Dissenting Opinion.

have come up to claim priority to the dis
coveries Of Bell and the suits which have
been conducted in the courts to set aside
the Bell patent.
Justice Blatchford holds that the law
does not require, at the time application
is made for patent, that there shall have
been obtained high degree OF perfection
that the results may not have been entire
ly satisfactory at first in order that the
patent may issue and stand against the as
saults of others; that the electrical un.
dulation effects set forth by Bell in his
application have been fully attained, and
that the vibration is identical to his de-
scription. tits first necessary to describe
the process, and then the apparatus.
There is nothing requiring the operation
of instruments before patent issues. It is
the practicability of the process that is to
be shown. 1t is true that when Bell got
his patents he thought the magnetic pro-
cess best, but that does not prevent him
from using the electrical process and at
tanning the same results. Bell discovered
the way to attain the results we have now
in transmitting articulate sounds by cleo
tricity.
A lengthy review followed respecting
the Investigations by various electricians
about the time Of the issuance of Bells
patents, and the conclusion was that there
was nothing to show that anyone had in
vented an apparatus prior to that invented
by Bell, although vibrations by electricity
had been transmitted by wire prior to
! 1854. Ii was left for Bell 10 discover the
principle, and this he adopted and subse-
quently perfected.
Judge Blatchford, in reviewing the
charge Of fraud and collusion in the Patent
Office by means of which Bell, il is al
legged, obtained surreptitious information
with regard to the inventions of his rivals
and then amended his own specifications,
held that there was not the slightest eyi.
dence TO support this charge, or to cast
the slightest reflection upon the integrity
Of Bell or hisattorney.
No others have shown that they ever
thought of it. Its the difference between
failure and success. Bell took up the work
aud carried it on to success where Others had
LETT of The telephone is now conducted on
the principle Of the electrical telegraph, that
is by making and breaking circuits.
In the review Of the litigation in various
courts to test the validity Of the Bell pat
ents, the claims Of Drawbaugh were han
died very tersely. The Justice cited news
paper statements tending 10 show that
Drawbaugh was the original discoyerer of
transmission of articulate sounds by elec-
tricity and that combinations were form.
ing with this invention as a nucleus which
would compel Gray, Bell and others to pay
Drawbaugh royalty or quit the field.
At present Bell has more than 1000
electric speaking instruments in successful
operation, and the parties to the suits to
set aside his patents have done nothing 10
develop the telephone. Drawbaugh him.
self seems never to have told any one of
his discovery till called az witness against
the Bell patent, although he claims TO
have had an instrument in operation at
home in q little town in Pennsylvania,
some years prior to the Centennial Expo
sition at Philadelphia, in 1876, where Bell
made successful exhibitions of his inVen-
tions, and which Draw haugh witnessed
without mentioning his own discoveries.
Drawbaugh as witness referred to what
he had accomplished with his talking
machine" prior to the Phila.
delphia Centennial, but there
is no evidence 10 show that for years after.
wards he made any reference TO it, al.
though nc did continue his efforts 10 i'm,
Prove other inventions. lie seemed, &C,
cording to his own statement, to have lost
| oil in In tai "a
witnessing the exhibitions of the Bell
telephone in 1876. There was no testi
mony Drawbaugh ever took the telephone
ont Of his own town prior 10 1868 year
after Bells telephone had hSen in use. II
was hardly likely that Drawbaugh would
have remainGd silent in view of the wide
spread newspaper nOtoriety on telephone
matters. The instruments produced in
court by Drawbsugh were not understood
By any one but himself. The history ol
the tests of the prawbaugh instruments
the Judge said, was that they were unaat
isfactory.
In the Gray case the Judge said it had
been alleged by the counsel in this case
that the caveat fled by Gray in the Patent
Office had been examined by representa-
tiyes of the Bell telephone people by means
of collusion and underhand methods. III,
analyzed the charges ana testimony takeI
in support Of the allegation and ther
ruled that the charge was not made out IL
the face of af.idavits Of reputable scientist.
and officials. The claims Of the American
Telephone Company we're also considered
and dismissed as not proven.
In considering the question Of the al
legged anticipation of Bell's invention By
the telephone of Refs, in Germany, thu
Court holds that Refs discovered meani
Of transmitting musical tones and nothing
more. Bells patent, being for the process
or art Of transmitting speech, would have
been just as valid even if he had used tn,
apparatus of Reis in developing 1t. Th'
Court holds that the apparatus Of Refs wa!
not successful in transmitting speech, anC
that his invention was not in any rsspec
su anticipation of the discovery which wa
made by Bell.
Justice Blatchford then reviewed thI
Drawbaugh case. The Court holds tha
the force Of the testimony showing tba
Drawbaugh had telephones in use befor,
the invention Of Bell is completely broker
by his own conduct, and the indifference,
which he manifested with regard to hi
alleged invention until years after Bell't
telephones were known TO the Who'll,
world. The Drawbaugh claim is declares
to be unsustained.
The decision Of the Court is in favor o
the Bell Telephone Company ON all point
and in all cases, covering all the points Sc
up in the claims Of Refs, Vanderweyde
McD1nough and Drawbaugh.
Justice Bradley then read an opinion
dissenting from the decision of the Court
Justices Field and Harlan also dissent
Justices Gray and Lamar did not sit in tn
case.
The Bell patents are therefore sustaine,
by a majority Of one, the Court standinI
four 10 three.
The dissent of Justices Bradley, Fiel,
and Harlan in the telephone cases is base'
upon the DIaWbsugh claim. The thre
Justices are OF the opinion that the evidene
overw helmingly shows that Drawbaugl
: was the frst inventor of the speakin
telephone, although he was unconsciou
Of it and was not aware Of lis Importance
II Sufferers from Consumption,
Scrofula, Bronchitis, and General Debait
| will try Scott's Emulsion of Cod Liver O