Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-07-08
ELECTRIC SUITS FL LYING.
WESTINGHOUSE STRIKES BACK AT
THE THOMSON. HOUSTON CO.,

And Files n Number OF Bills Against That
Ceucern-The second Avenue Railway
Company and the Williamsburg Z. C. VIII
suffer-The Cause Of the Trouble.
The Westinghouse Electric Company has
returned the action of the Thomson Houston
Electric Company in the matter Of bringing
suits for infringement of patents, with In
terest.
Suits have been filed against the Second
Avenue Street Railway Company, a licensee
of the Thomson Houston Company, for an
Infringement of the Finney patent and
Forbes patent, which are both owned by the
Westinghouse Company. The Finney pat
ent involved the overhead wire system,
which establishes the fact that Finney was
the first to propose the operation OF electric
street railways by means of an overhead
wire, and suitable regulating device inter-
posed between the wire and the motor for
regulating the speed of the car. It is said
the Thomson Houston Company recognising
the validity of this patent have frequently
negotiated to secure license under the
same, and have offered to pay considerable
sum per car for the use of the invention.
The Forbes patent covers the use of the
carbon brush, an appliance which has be-
come essential in the operation of street
railways and which is now used by all CON-
panies supplying electric street railway
apparatus.
In addition to these suits, the Union
Switch and Signal Company has sued the
Second Avenue Railway Company for the
use of the metallic connections from rail to
rail, which are now used for all street rail-
ways. Formerly the Thomson-Houston
Company bought this from the Union
Switch aud Signal Company, but the West
inghouse people state that they have of late
infringed the patent and this action has
been brought to restrain further wrongful
use of a very important invention.
At last the Westinghouse Electric Com
pany has also brought suit against the Will
kinsburg Electric Company, another hcensee
of the Thomson Houston Company, for in
fringing patents No. 342, 552, for converters
and reissue No. 11,031, for multiple-arc
distribution of alternate currents by con-
verters.
When a call was made upon the Westing
house Electric Company for an explanation
of the litigation, it was stated by one Of the
officials:
"The Westinghouse Electric Company
has always refrained from pressing suits
against the Thomson Houston Company,
largely because of the great expense in
volved in litigation, but now that we have
been attacked in Pitfsburg, where litigation
can be carried on with less expense and more
convenience for the Westinghouse concern,
we have determined to put the Thomson
Houston Company on the defensive. This
suit last Saturday was only brought by the
Brush Company (Which is controlled by the
Thomson-HoustonC Company, the latter hav-
ing bought it at great expense last winter),
on account Of the meeting of our company
tomorrow. The Themson- Houston people
intended by their action to create prejudice
among our stockholders against our pro-
posed actions at the meeting. Apart from
that, the Thomson-Houston Company is we'll
aware that we are now manufacturing q
single carbon arc lamp, the advantages of
which are so apparent that the value of the
double carbon patent has been effectually
destroyed.
st is true that the Duquesne Traction
Company proposes to utilize some of the
power from its power stations tor lighting
purposes, but number of the leading men
connected with that company have unquali-
fedly said to the officials OF the Westing-
house Company that they have no intention
to commit themselves to any foreign corpora
tion while the Westinghouse Company can
furnish them the apparatus they desire, it
being to their interest to promote home in
dustries. In view of the fact that they can
not use the Thomson Houston apparatus
without becoming involved in expensive liti-
cation, there is no reason to expect that
more than trial apparatus will be bought
from that company.