New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-05-19
BERLINER PATENT VALID.
THE BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY WINS
ON APPEAL.
A DECISION BY THE UNITED STATES CIRCUIT
COURT OF APPEALS. WHICH REVEhsEs
JUDGE CARPENTERS FINDING-IT PRO-
LONGS THE TELEPHONE MONOPOLY
THE CASE TO GO TO THE

JtrDGE CARPENTERS FINDING-IT PRO-
LONGS THE TELEPHONE MONOPOLY
THE CASE TO GO TO THE
SUPREME COURT.
Boston, May 1s-The United States Circuit court
of Appeals to-day handed down decision III 'he
Bell Telephone case. declaring the Beriner patent
valid Justices Colt. Putnam and Nelson were SIT
ting The title of the is THE American Bell
Telephon. Company ct al. appellant. agt. United
States OF America. appellee The Court inns al
ternoon sent down this order:
The decision Of the Circuit Court is reversed, and
the case Is remanded to taat court, Win nnees
have leave to file their motion as 10 the form OF
judgment on clerks ' ef a@s an, 1s0 18th fei ns
The appellants TO brief In reply on OF 'e'o'' '"'
3lst inst. ,-,., 49,.
The opinion giving the reasons Tor the decision mas
not vet taken shape 1t viii have 10 DE written
out This is a decisive victory for the Bell COM
many Judge Carpenter. on December III, isi. de-
cded that the Berliner patent was 'nVhhd' anu or
dered Il 10 be delivered up Tor concentrations no
company appealed. and the result OF the appear 10
favorable 10 them . - j.,
IN, Ieriiner patent II No. iG3bSo. and u was IN
sued an Noyernber H. 1891. Tho inventor II Emile
uerliner The inhtfumcn, covered by " N "'V'''
commonly known m ~ telephone tfanHmt'ot' Nv"
,a,cn, bclng held 10 be valid. the United states has
conceded that the He'll Company virtually nave I"
monopoly Of the mlcrophonc I'll h'"S'
rho United states relied upon two grounds to show
that the patent was void. The nrst was that there
was illegal delay In ita Issue. The second was mat
N pr,or patept was granted upon the same npphca-
,ion 10 the same applicant for the same ihVehuon'
This prior patent referred to was one gran'eu 10
Berliner In 1880. The application for the patent III
sult was filed on June 4. 1871. and patent was Is
sued November II. 1891. The proposition OF the GOV
eminent was that the Bell Company Intentionally
della we'd the prosecution Of the Berlner Application
md the issue OF their Berliner patent Tor the pur
nose of proongng their control Of the art OF te'e-
phoning which would otherwise cease with the eNpi-
ration OF the Bell patents In 1893. ana that 'hey Wv,
this by submitting 10 delays on the part Oh Tue o''
GERS of the Patent Office. which delays the Bell
Company had 1t in its power TO prevent ana re-
Trained from preventing for an unlawful purpose
This conduct was alleged to have constituted Il
fraud. practised on the public through ne ncaimed
that the patents so obtained should De ah"u"e' ~
The decision OF Judge Carpenter in the lower court
sustained the two grounds OF attack mar Vy ns
against he patent M To be Cancelled but
his finding has been reversed ,,,.r, :, tho
The counsel were among the most eminen, ~ me me
country' Causten Browne of Boston. and JUDGE
Robert s. Taylor, OF Indiana. acted Tor me t ~
msp' and ISr ,sa e co%paH The
was argued before Judge Carpenter lor SIX a 10 a.
June 1874 and FOR d fSrr Of 9a XSpe sd"s Np'
The Government has on se mo odIon To io the
the BILL as TO alege that III auu'a nmnIicatio
Tor a patent the Bell company had tacit uhusa t
standing with the officials Of the Patent oce mo-
20 issue the Berlner patent. pending the detcr
lion OF the suits then pending over the prawpauSn
natent which was said to be an interie,en,Ce ,r
10 in view of this motion TO amend that me Iou =,
~ Appeals gives the Government leave 10 NE ,rs
motion to the form OF Judgmst,ur -, andeavor to
ticujar case The United States VIII ehusa W, ~
have the Judgment In this case so frame, ma mnder
will debar the company from soins rt "v y1ii, prob-
H. natent The opinion OF the court VIII P'''
ably not be ready until about Ju June ,o 70 every
rho decision came great surprise -. ~ 90,
hodv AZ II was not expected for long UNI y nra
The three judges-Cot. Putnam ana Neiso ',es,er
said to have been in consultation Do '"''
Causten Browne leading counsel ior .n ~ sav is
,bat The case Will be carried to the supreme ''''
OF the United States