New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-12-19
BERLINER PATENT ANNULLED
DECISION AGAINST THE BELL TELE-
PHONE COMPANY.
ATTORNEYS FOR THE CORPORATION SAY 1T is
SIMPLY A PRELIMINARY DEFEAT AND THAT
AN APPEAL WILL BE TAKEN-SUD-
DEN FALL IN BELL STOCK.
'BY 1EL1oRArH 10 THE TRIBrxHl

'BY 1ELEGRArH 70 THE TRIBrNHl
Boston, Dec. 1S.-JudEe Carpenter. in the United
States Court to-day declared the Berliner telephone
patent void and ordered that 1t be given up and
cancelled This decision is in favor Of the Govern
ment as against the American Bell Telephone Com
pany. He entered a rescrpt as follows
Let there be a decree issued that letters patent
1850 issued November II. 1891 to Emil BerIiner
void and shall be delivered up 10 De cahceNeu
prayed for. and costs.
The Governments against the Bell Telephone
Company contained two counts, and the Judge sus-
tained the Government In both. The first count
was effect that the issuance OF the patent to Ber
liner was unnecessarily delayed. and the second In
substance that a former patent issued TO Berliner
covered substantially the claims as made In
the patent issued in 1891. The costs in the case are
enormous the record alone fills two large printed
volumes and cost over 5000 BY the Courts de-
cree the costs to fsll on the telephone COM
pany An appeal will undoubtedly be taken
Frederick +. Fish. OF counsel for the Bel COM
pany. says:
The decision by Judge Carpenter Is Simply a pre-
lininary defeat. The case will now go 10 the Gnitsd
States Court OF Appeals and decision VIII pe
rendered possibly next spring. after the case mas mas
been argued anew. as though me Circul' our, our,
us in the United states Court OF Appears u WI VII
probably 20 10 the United states supreme ,ourIt,
but We believe the Court OF Appeals Wi" n''lue
In favor.
Bell Telephone responded sharply to the adverse
decision in the Berner case, and in that way con
stitutcd about the on feature OF Tue StO'N '''''-
II cannot be said that the decision CONES 10 the
Street As n full surprise FOR sa,es OF the stock Rave
been frequent within the month, under the pehei
that II could be got back at lower prices on an
unfavorabie decision OF this point. Nor 'ah IL De
said that the decision is likely be received by the
general public anything but the Just ana proper
outcome of the case As Il stands now, the patents
covering the fundamental principles or the t'ie-
phone receiver and one general class oi Udls"'''-
ters are now void. To Bell stockholders the pu'S-
ton OF first importance Of course Is the eHert "iS
decision will have upon the earning capacity OF ther
propertv in case II is sustained The freeing OF the
receivers a few months ago has done nothing eN-
cent TO encourage the establishment OF certain kinds
OF private lines, department "hich NieIpS 'e h'''
company little. The freeing OF the iransmi''efs
would enable rival companies to oner the ubhc pct
ter service than they have been able to DO thus ia
But the fact remains that telephone Is OF no scr
vice 10 a business man unless II anorhs nm
means OF communication with other business men
Lower telephone rates are no inducement I" nun V'-
less all the other people with whom he Is likely 10
wish 10 talk are connected With the same wire.
The Rel company has all these connections. and II
will be a long time before It's cNchan;e business
can be weakened by any rival That being the case
and with a year or so OF delay. which VIII ensue ~
q result OF an appeal 10 higher cour'' il VIII prop
ably be some time yet before the bei -o"Pi'' "''
have any formidable competition
Nevertheless considerable stock was thrown ont
on the announcement. 81 or go shares IN ALL III ="
or % share lots The price broke sharply from 3"'s
70 1911 whence Il recovered 10 1914. The subscrip-
,ion rights OF course. lost all their value some
we're OF the opinion that this decision would COM
nIcate subscriptions to the new stock Win the
nr,sent decline the new stock stands at less than
,ao 40 that those who had bought rights might be
,oa.s "a avail iLcrrse!yos 90 them fut hr"Her'
generally do not look for any complications. ~ they
do no, regard the Investment value OF the stock
as injured as yet.
Washington. Dec. R-With reference To he d"-
cslon by Judge Carpenter In Boston to-day 'e-
carny the Berilner telephone patent nun ana Noid'
Mr. Seymour the Commissioner Of Patents s"H
that his positiOn was not such as would authorNe
him 10 give an opinion on judicial verdict review
ing q patent granted hy his predecessor tn once.
and he therefore declined 10 talk
Mr. Freeman. OF the firm OF Foster q Freeman
attorneys for the Bell Telephone Company tn WASH
inpton also said that he was Unauthorized TO give
any oplnlon on the decision Il was his private pc
iirf however that the decision would not hnr't me
J,eli COMPANY financially. in the way OF husln'rs
r as 10 stock The Rerliner patent. said Mr.. Free
COMPANY had hundreds OF other patents FOR ne
same thing He believed that the decision wouId
MOI omen the way for other companies 10 compel"
,ih The Rel Telephone Company.
patent attorneys IN Washington VINO are CON
versant with telephone affairs are or the opinion
maj the decision OF Judge Carpenter Is extremely
far reaching