New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-04-13
BELL TELEPHONE WINS.
THE SUPREME COURTS DECISION IN
THE STOCK TICKER CASE.
PETITION By THE WESTERN UNION FOR a VIVA
or cERTIoRARI DENIED - OTHER

,,,,,,r,o> nv THE WESTERN UNION FOR A WHIT
or cEnrroRAn1 DENIED - OTHER
DECISIONS ANNOUNCED.
vash,ne,on AprIl 1.-THE Supreme Court OF tne
Tinted States to-day denied the petition Tor WIN
-, oor,,o,or +, tho case Of the American Ben lelc-
,bone company against the Western union ie'e
graph Company TO compel the Circuit Court " o.
peals for the First Circuit to certify 'he Gaze ~ -
supreme Court. The case Involves the ques"o'
royalties claimed from the Bell company W W.
Western Union company and was origiha"y
.aht IN rho Circuit Court for the District OF Mas
sacbusetts 10 secure an account Of these royaites'
7, "a understood that about t500o,0W Is Involved IL
appears that after instituting the SUIT the "e'e'
Union sought to have 1t dismissed. and aier II was
dismissed the Bell company appealed 20 inc c'eu'.
Court of Appeals, when the decision or the oloui'
Court was reversed The Western Union company
sought 70 have the case reviewed by the supreme
Court but the opinion rendered to-day denies 'his
petiton This has the effect Of taking the case pdch
10 the Circuit Court for further proceedings IN ac-
cordance with the decision Of the Circuit Court Oh
Appeals The case is known the stock ticker
case.
A motion TO advance entered In the Supreme
Court to-day in the case of Thomas Phillips Bryant
by Lorenzo Semple The case Is an appear rom
the decision of the Circuit Court for the southern
District Of New-york dlsmssing wrlts OF ceruorari
and habeas corpus for the purpose or securing
charges of forgery. embczzement and larceny filed
nv the 6'onsul-C;encral of Great Britain In New
York and warrant has been Issued by the Secre-
tary State for his extraditon In the motion nied
to-day It Is asserted that the Circuit Court had no
legal Jurisdiction and that its proceedings were IN
violation of tho Constitution of the United States
and the treaties OF extradtion between the United
States and Great Britain. The Court took the mat
ter under advsement.
Chief Justice Fuller announced the opinion OF the
Court in the of Philip Hen. involving the ques-
ton whether the Circuit Court OF Appeals or the
District of Columbia had authority to promulsate
a rule limiting the time OF taking appeals from the
decisions Of the Commissioner OF Patents. 1t was
held that the Court possessed such authority and
that It's power was not limited by subsequent legs-
lation. c
Court of Washington in the from the State
brought 10 enjon the State and county authorities
from evyng upon the safes. time locks and other
personal properly OF the banks for the purpose OF
collecting upon the capital stock OF the banks
the law was in conflict with Section 5.2l9 OF the Re
vlsed Statutes Of the United States. but the Court
held that such not the case.
Justice Gray delivered The opinion Of the Gourt IN
preme Court The involved the validity OF the
on sst raroads TO stop ct County seats which are
railroad stations which to,day's opinion aftirms
the DOCKET to be heard on the second Monday Of
the next term The law in controversy defines
rests were made under It. but the prisoners were
released by the Federal Court motion for habeas
corpus The State authorities appeal 10 the SUI
preme Court
George II. Fearons, attorney for the Western
Union Telegraph Company said In reference to the
United States Supreme Court decision against his
company and in favor Of the American Bell Tele-
phone Company: This is the old suit hrough: about
twelve years ago against the American Bell Tele-
phone Company under tho contract of July TO- 1879,
for a percentage Of the royalties received by the
Bell company from its lesser companies for the
privilege Of doing telephone business. The case
decided against the plaintiffs, of whom there
were several. including the Western Union. The
Western Union Telegraph Company moved TO dis
miss the action. but the Court refused 10 do and
the plaintiffs carried the to the United States
Supreme Court The decision Is relatively unim
portant, and virtually decided about eight years
ago" .
Western Union, through the American Speaking
Telephone Company, had been engaged in telephone
business On the date named the Western Union
and the Bell companies made contract by which
the Western Union confined Itself to the Geographic
field and the Bell company restricted Itself to the
telephone business. Under this contract the West
ern Union. through the American Speaking Tele-
phone Company, received 20 per cent of the tele
phone rentals OF local concerns. In 1884 claim was
made that this agreement gave 10 the Western
Union % per cent OF the stock of the various local
companies 1t Is this claim that has been decided
In favor OF the Bell Telephone Company.