New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-02-24
THE BELL COMPANY SUSTAINED
IMPORTANT DECISION BY THE COMMISSION
Err OF PATENTS.
REFUSING TO GRANT THE PETITIONS OF GRAY
AND MeDoNoUGH TO REOPEN THE INTER
FERENcEs AVID REAFFIRMING THE
AWARD OF PRIORITY

- ,,.nonyor,ct, no REOPEN THE INTER
vrprNcrs AVID REAFFIRMING THE
AWARD OF PRIORITY
TO BELL
r., 90 penton j. Hall, Commits
- 80 po,er,s TO-DAY rendered an important do
cts,an IN the matter of the petitions OF Gray ana
Mcnononoh IN reopen the Boil Telephone in'er-
to,encos and To set aside the decision OF COMMITS
s,orer prt,orwortb rendered March ., 1900, award
ing priority Of invention to Beh' iHV 80,
views the whole Department history Vi "io .o'op'o"o
contests Tho Commissioner refuses '" 1871 o, '.o
interferenoes, and readirms the a"@iN "a p'0'' W
Bell. -. q. :. H.,
The bIstory. Of tho case briefly stated Is as ioi
-. rhe part,es who were originally involved were
nall MoDonoucb. Edison, Richmond Gray, poloear'
uo,combe Chinook Randall, BiaBo h"in rhelPs
and Voelker when these severai n'on s.'oieo
upon the field of invention, with resPo.' ~ .n1
mission of speech, all the elements VI uo ".p"On'
were old and well known. None oi 'no uoi"'o''
could bc broadly claimed. but oniy u"o - 'o oe
struction into which they entered n '"'" ~
1s7e various interferences were deciaieu'
- 4ahtno 90 evtdepce was concluded and HE'D
800 tbo Pyaminer of Interferenccs IN May 1851,
and the cases were argued before nun III Iliu
so,,on,h.r 1ss, On July 81, 1853, he rendered MS
decision awarding priority TO ben ~ 49,. y "a
Ell ] and IL priority to Euison =" 80. -
No l. and priority to hcDohousn IN, -,
Anpeal was taken to the Examncrsl WV ~
october g. 1894. affirmed the ue0,s'O" ~ 49,,
ori,cr ~ Interferences as 10 All 'ho i'su.9 ~
1T ,hev reversed him and awarded priority
-. nh NcDonough and Gray appealeu d W iSsuo
- March a 1885, Commissioner bu.eI"'eh al
armed the decision OF the ExamincrS-'n-0"ei
- on 1887. Commissioner Montgomery rem
aoc,s,on holding that, as to the hrst pettioh
~ Mcponough, IT was concluded os "o us 90"
.,,,ssIoner Butterworth of January TO- 1000. AS
n the second. he held that Mr. Mci'Ono"sh Luz 'n0
r,oht IN he heard McDonough's case anu gray p,o
posed amendment were finally sci uo"H .O'
on February /, 1888, on when u'S '"' '
peared. IAN N. case. the Com
80. q, h,s decision to-day, held substantially as
@a,,aa 1bat this pettlon Z" Is OF no Nah ior any
o,,.nose whatever; that Cray proposes no p.~
r,Soo - IN dates nature, or the ohaFDV0' Vi "H
80 ,nvent,on: that II was couclusivey SHOWN III inc
- ,hh, GRAY al the time OF hling ms cANea',
,rhne having a conception OF the 'e'opnono' 'uu ~.
understand tho invention, and was unapie "
~. rode OF is operation; thai he sun Sne.e' " "o
,1.. thai artcnlac speech must DC
,bs multiple telegraph principle 'nM no p,s' :,
.as.adod that he did not reduce his ihVehuon "
coneouoN - time after the issuance
a,,, ,h.+ he regarded the invention As Trivial
-, 1T attention to other Inventions ha'
80 s,,a..,,y omitted 70 file his application ior
En- t,vo wears after the grant OF neFs paient'
"a ros tbcn stImulated 10 do so only Dy o'hcr pa'
g. ara ia, he cannot prevail against another ana
,ndopendent inventor who was hligent ana ma nin'
.as,,coa N nractjceT BcTs deic of conception was
,,rr,-, On. 1876. his application was hled feor'ary
"A. and his patent issued March ~
On october 60, 1857, Gray was induced py MS
ass,enees who agreed to pay all expenses 10 ho MS
affr
value of Bells invention beginning to DC achho"
edrcd. When he changed his belief as to Eel being
the pr,or inventor does not appear, but II clear a'
n, was Induced to file his applications BY COMPANIES
controlling his intentions and those OF Edison AMI Dol
bear who apprchcnded and foresAw litigation Win 'no
Reu people Before the close Of 1879 these com
panes had more than 10000 instruments In CONNER
cial use.
Inf4neement suits followed between the Dell Com
many and the American Speaking Telephone Company
and Western Union Telegraph Company tihe latter
controlling the inventions above mentioned in the
United states Circuit Court for the Dstrc, OF Mass
achisetts; IN which suits. the court sustained INC
Bell patent nut valuable improvements RAD been
made IN the spcab g telephone and the Western union
Telegraph Company and associates, with defeat I'M
pending proceeded upon the basis OF these improve
ments and opened negotiations with the Ben Oompan!
TO compromise the litigation and unite all patents
agreed upon This agreement was finally erected
and went In force November l, 1870. holding fot
seventeen years.
In pursuance TO this contract decree was entered
on April A. 1881, adiudgng BelPs patent TO be valid,
aud perpeually enIoInlng the infringement Of the
same The effect Of the agreement was To invest tho
Bell Company with this ownership Of all OF tho tcio'
phone Inventions which at that time were supposed
and believed to include Grays inventions. The evil
denee taken in these suits was By stipulation trans
orrcd aud introduced In the Interference cases pending
Relative 10 the assertions In Grays petition, at
lacking the procedure In the Patent Onee, thar Bel
had fraadulenty secured access 20 HIS oaVeai
alleging collision on tho part u BelrS assignecs
that Cray misled by Improper adNiee or hiS
counsel IN admissions and concessions OF priority
70 Bal, and in neglccting TO take an appeal iom INC
decision OF tho Examiner Of incrferences, IN certain
ksues, etc, etc, the Commissioner hhds each aud
every egatlOn 10 be unsupported by tho evidence
In the Office and tho records made up In the various
The Commissioner therefore denies the petition OF Gray
b. reopen the Interference and 10 grant new trial
petition by holding that he cannot amend, but says
that tho situation Is suggestive, rs patent now Issued
10 McDonough, after a contest with Bell, would dom
mate the entire telephone Inventions and Is seff
Gus question whether applicant who has volun-
tarly cancelled his claims and apparently abandoned
them should DO permitted after tho invention has boon
publicly introduced and made commercially valuable,
10 return after eleven years ana amend and claim an
Interference with patent 50 long outstanding
Both petitions OF McDonough are Denied the motions
and showing filed In support thereof being deemed
aside former decisions and DEGREES and reopening tho
ntefercnccs since he Is fully convinced that another
trial on the question OF priority would necessarily
result In the conclusion reached By Commissioner
Butterworth awarding priority Of invention to Bell
YFsSFrs FOR CO1ufgRCT or WAR