The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1897-05-15
BELL COMPANY WINS.
Supreme Court ID, ,c.siOn in u
Notable Case.

Washington, May 1.-THE Be
Telephone company Monday won
( the case brought against it by the
United States to annul the last
Berliner patent. This decisi on has
the effect of continuing the control
of the telephone by the Bell company
for seventeen years from the date of
the last patent, which was granted
in 1891.
The government asked to- have the
patent of 1898 set aside on the
ground that the delay Of thirteen
years in the patent Office was fraudu-
lent and through the fault of the
telephone company and that the
patent issued in 1880 covered the
same ground ON which the new
patent was applied for in 1891.
NO EVIDENCE or CORRUPTION.
The court in its opinion, delivered
by Justice Brewer, held that there
was no evidence of corruption or un-
due influence exercised over the pat
ent Office by the telephone company
and that there was no evidence that
the delay in granting the patent had
been brought about by the company.
1t held that whatever delay there
had been was through the fault Of
the patent Office and by no fault of
the company. Justice Harlan dis
scntcd from the opinion. Justices
Gray and Brown, it was announced,
took no part in the case, presumably
because they were interested. The
court held that in order to set aside
a patent the government must es
tablish grounds OF belief as clear and
satisfactory as it would to set aside
"a land patent, All other allegations
Of the government besides that OF
delay were overruled.
HAS ATTRACTED WIDE ATTENTION.
This decision by the supreme court
sustanS the lower courts. The case
has attracted wide attention because
Of the extensive interests involved
in the settlement and the opinion of
the court has been anxiously awaited.
The suit, it was claimed involved
the practical control of the art oe
teiephoning. 1t originated in IL
charge of collusion in the patent Of
flee and was brought to obtain the
repeal and cancellation Of letters
patent of the United States No.
463, 500, dated Nov II, 1891. granted
to the American Bell Telephone
company as assignee of Emile
Bcrliner, the alleged inventor The
repeal and cancellation Of the patent
were sought upon the ground that
the application for it, while filed in
1877. was not issued until 1891 This
delay was charged to be unnecessary
on the part OF the patent Office and
the Bell Telephone company, which
as Berliner assignee, controlled
the application. II was asserted
that the company had acquicsccd in
and promoted the delay and for,their
own interest, thus dafrauding the.
public of its rights,
PRACTICALLY CONTROLS Telephony.
1t was claimed that the Berlinar
patent practically controls tele-
phOnyNaS 1t hrs TO do with both the
transmission and receipt Of sound,
and that the delay thus secured un-
til 1871, operated to prolong the
control OF this act for fifteen years
beyond the time of the expiration of
the Bell patent. 1t was also assert
ed that the patent was granted by
the commissioner of patents with
out authority Of law and that it was
for the same invention for which
patent had been granted in 1880 and
that the principle was therefore not
new. the suit originated in the
United States circuit court for the
district of Massachusetts, where it
was decided in favor of the United
States. Upon appeal to their cir
cult court of appeals for the first
circuit this decision was reversed
and the contentious of the Berliner
claimants upheld From this opin-
ion the United States appealed to
the supreme court.