Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-11-10
An IMPORTANT CASE.
nearing on the Suit Involving the
beriincr Telephone Patents

Inc case of the United States against
the American Bell Telephone ComDany MAJ
argued In the United States Supreme Court
ses'eroaS- IN some respects the case is
regarded as among the most important be-
ioie the court, as IL involves the validity
OF The Berllner patents, owned by the R..lI
Company. Attorney General Harmon So
lcltor General Conrad and a number of
attorneys representing special interests ap-
peared in connection with the suit of the
United States. while the Bell Company
nae nae heavy array of counsel, including
Messrs James ]. Storrow. James IL
Shoate and Frederick 4. Fish
The Standard Telephone Company WAS
represented by General James McNaught
ana Myron Francis Hill, who filed brief
on two points in behalf of the government
The Standard Company has no direct in
terest in the litigation except as IL affects
The general use of telephones. Ii is said
that decision in favor of the government
would tend 10 open the telephone TO public
use.
Owing to the Importance of the interests
involved the court granted nine hours for
argument which will continue the case
for about three days. Judge X. s. Taylor
OF Indianapolis opened the argument yes
terday in behalf of the United States.
The suit began February .. ls.3. when
the attorney general filed bill in equity
against the American Bell Telephone Com
pany and Emile BerliEer asking for the
dhnuliileht Oh It's patent An alternat We
prayer was made that IL the patent was
not declared wholly null and void II should
be repealed IN part. as the court deemed
proper. The Berliner application for pat
ent was filed June 4. 1877, but the patent
was rot issued until fourteen years there
after The main points raised by the United
States are: First, that TIE patent is VOID
for Illegal delay in its issue, second, that
IL is also void on the ground that prior
patent was granted upon the same appn-
cation to the same applicant for the same
invention. The patent covers what is
known the microphone The attorney
general will SIT up that the Bell Telephone
Company ''Gesignedly and with intent to
thereby prclong its monopoly, delayed ana
prolonged the tendency of the application
for more han thirteen years after its con-
troll of the patent"
The Bell Telephone Company in its an
swer points out that the United States
officials from the first have had entire
an express denial is made that there was
any fraud accident or mistake. The COM
pany maintained that IL had not designed
ly delayed the issue OF the patent with
view to extending its rights. 1t alleged
that il there was any slowness il was the
act of the plaintiff itself. the United States
TIL case was tried in the United States
circuit court for the district of MassacEu-
sets, where the contentious of the United
States were sustained. The Bell Company
appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals
where the preceding decision was reversed
on the ground that there was TO evidence
of dereliction of duty in the patent office.
and the bill in equity of the United States
was dismissed.
The case now comes before the Supreme
Court on an appeal by the United States
from the decision of the Court of Appeals.
The same points first presented. as 10 de-
lay, are still foremost and the arguments
of counsel yesterday were directed mainly
TO these points.