Springfield daily republic. [volume] (Springfield, O. [Ohio]) 1887-1888, 1888-03-21
KING BELL.
THE GREAT TELEPHONE CASE De-
ClDED BY THE SUPREME COURT.
All Other Claimants Knocked Out, and
Bell Declared the Originator of One of
the Greatest Inventions of the Century
Three Justices Dissent-A Summary
OF the Opinions.

WASHINGTON, March 2l.-The decision
at the United States Supreme Court III the
| great telephone cases was rendered yester-
| day Considering the question of the al
legged anticipation of the Bell invention by
the telephone of Refs, in Germany, the
court holds that Refs discovered a means 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 the apparatus of Refs
| in developing it. The court held that
the apparatus of Refs was not successful in
transmitting speech, and that his invention
was not in any respect an anticipation Of
the discovery which was made by Bell. a IL
the points considered in the courts op;n-
ion in the telephone cases were decided in
favor of Bell, including the points set w in
| the claims of Refs, Vanderweyde and Nc
Donough. The court held that the force of
the testimony showing that DrawbaugjI had
telephones in use before the invention of
Bell is completely broken by his own conduct
and the indifference which he manifested
weth regard to his alleged invention until
years after Bells telephones were known TO
the whole world. The Drawbaugh claim
was declared to be unsustained. Justice
Blatchford. in reviewing the charge of
fraud and collusion in the patent office,
by means of which Bell, il is alleged,
obtained surTeptitious information with
regard to the inventions of his rivals
and then amended his own specifications,
held that there was not the slightest evil
dence to support this charge, or cast the
least reflection upon the integrity of Bell
or his attorneys
The decision in favor of the Bell Tele-
phone on all points sustained these points
by majority of one, the court standing
four to three. Justices Gray and Lamar
did not sit in the case. Justices Field, Brad
ley and Harlon dissented. Their opinions
were rendered as follows:
We think that Drawbaugh did not antici-
pate the invention of Mr.. Bell We think
the evidence To that point is so overwhelm-
ing, both with regard 10 the number and
character of the witnesses, that it cannot
be overcome We also think that as early
as 1871 he did produce an instrument en-
ploying the magnetic electric instrument
tality altogether, substantially the same as
that which is claimed in Mr. Bells
patent. In regard TO the other in
strument some forty or fifty witnesses were
produced who saw it. Many of them heard
the language produced through it, and a
number of witnesses who did not hear the
language produced through these inStru-
ments, saw them or heard them talked
about SO as TO fix the time that they were
in existence, and it seems to us that on
this subject of time and result, there is
snch cloud of witnesses that il is impossi-
BILE not to give credence 10 it. Th9re is no
doubt that Mr.. Bells merits are very great
In appreciating the importance OF the dis
covery, and in bringing it before the public
in such manner as to make il appear to be
what ii is one of the most important dis
coveries of the age He was man whose
professional experience and whose scientific
attainments enabled him to see at glance
the importance of it. Drawbaugh was 4
different sort of man. He did not see it.
Had he done so he would have taken
measures to interest persons in it with him.
and have brought it out. He was a me-
chanic, plain mechanic somewhat better
instructed, perhaps, than most ordinar me-
chanics, man OF more reading, a man of
more intelligence. But he looked upon
what he made more as curiosity than
q matter of speculation, matter of finan-
cial Importance, or of Importance to the
public. That is the way we view
his condition of mind in regard TO it and
explain why he has not taken more pains
to bring il forward to the notice of the pub
lie. 1t is the tendency of the human mind
TO attach importance TO the results and in
ventions of those who have achieved EN-
inence. Watt was the idol of the British
Nation from the time of his first invention
of the steam engine until the day of his
death and until the present time; and ev-
erything that was invented about the steam
engine was attributed to him. 1t was the
glory of Watt, was the glory of England: ::
And of course every patriotic
British subject would hoot at
anything ii was claimed Watt did
not invent, or attribute it to him. That is
the principle of the human mind on which
We think a great deal may be explained
with regard to the feeling toward this i'm
portant service which Mr.. Bell has rendered
with regard to this invention. The plain
mechanic of Pennsylvania is of no account
The scientific and illustriouS-for he is
illustrious-Mr. Bell, it cannot be but that
he did invent this thing. And yet if Mr.
Bell on the l4th day OF Janu-
ary or February when he APP
piled for his patent at the patent office
had in his laboratory the things that Draw
baugh had he would have been filled with
an excitement lar exceeding that which
has animated the great inventors of the
world when they made the discoveries they
have made, and he would have explained
Eureka, Eureka" He would have ap-
preciated it, if Drawbaugh did not
What had he when he applied for
his patent? On the tenth of June, 1887.
they thought they heard something. but
were not sure; but he knew the principle and
he patented it. Up to the time of making
his application for a patent, they had not
succeeded in producing ineligible speech
more than a word or two; perhaps a word
or two. If Bell had done at that time as
much as Drawbaugh had done acc riding to
the evidence, he would have no hesitation
in claiming the greatest discovery that the
world has seen III the present century.
This is an outline of the views which we
have on this subject. We have nothing TO
say deprecatory of Mr.. Bell at all for he
has great merits; but we think that this
obscure mechanic did do the thing, and
that he is entitled TO the merit of being the
first inventor. We will take an opportunity
within few days TO write further state
ment and file it.
The opinion of the majority of the court
was written by Chief Justice Waite, but,
as he was suffering with bad cold and did
not feel able to read so long an opinion,
which occupied in its delivery an hour and
three-quarters. 1t was read by Justice
Blatchford.
Immediately after the conclusion of the
reading of the opinion in the telephone
cases, Justice Lamar began reading his
first opinion, as a member of the court:
the case being that of the Missouri River
Packet Company VS.. The Hannibal Il ST.
Joseph Roilroad Company. The question
involved was the construction to be given
to a law of Congress authorizing the build
ing of a bridge for the use of the railroad
company across the Missouri river al Kan
sas City. The judgment of the Supreme
Court of Missouri in favor OF the Hannibal
d ST. Joe road was affirmed.
A Disabled steamer.
HALIFAX, \. s, March 2l.-The steamer