The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1897-05-19
THE TELEPHONE DECISION.
Not So Conclusive as Reported Re
garding the Validity of the Ber-
liner Patent
From the New York su

From the New York Sun.
Washington, May 16-An examination of
the opinion read by Mr.. Justice Brewer
in the supreme court on Monday upon the
suit of the United States government 10
cancel and annul the patent for a tele-
phone transmitter issued in 1891 to Emil
Berliner shows that the decision of The
court was not so conclusive of the validi-
~ of the patent as was believed from the
brief statement made from the bench One
of the grounds upon which the govern
ments counsel asked the court to cancel
the patent was that the invention for
which 1t was given was covered by n
patent for receiver issued to Berliner In
1880. The contention was that the two
inventions are practically II not techni-
cally Identical, and that the invention OF
the transmitter was 'unpatentable for
want Of novelty and because of previous
public use.
This claim of the government was not
passed upon by the court, and the aues-
ton of the validity Of the patent vet re-
mains open for determination In future
litigation. To have made a ruling on this
point, il Is known, would have resulted
in virtually taking away from the patent
office the jurisdiction given Il to decide
upon the merit or novelty Of an invention
and the right of the inventor or his as
signee TO a patent therefor IL would also
have rendered imperative the statute
which gives the supreme court Of the Dis
trict of Columbia jurisdiction to review
the decisions Of the commissioner of pat
ents upon the appeal Of a disappointed ap-
plicant or OF any person feeling aggrieved
by his action.
Another and possibly more important
reason for not determining the question
was that to have done so would have bur-
hs
expense Of litigation, which, under the
law as at present construed, rests upon
private persons. The Attorney General
would be exposed to the opportunities Of
defeated or unsuccessful applicants to
sue, In the name OF and at the expense OF
the United States for the cancollati ton OF
patents for Inventions claimed 10 be with
out merit or novelty. II for no other rea-
son, the court was restrained by the
knowledge OF the immense expenditure
such decision might impose on the gov
eminent. The case under consideration
has cost the government, Il Is estimated,
at least $1,000. Counsel have been en-
gagged In II for five years II has gone
through three courts. and the record, not
to mention the briefs and other literature
IN the case makes three great volumes OF
printed matter.
The validity Of the patent win doubtless
be soon tested. for until Il Is definitely de-
tcrmined. the question OF the monopoly OF
the American Bell Company will remain
IN doubt. Should Il be decided that the
transmittor and receiver are practically
the same invention. and covered by one
patent. the patent OF 1891 will fail. and the
Invention OF 1880 expiring this year. the
telephone field win be an open one. Should
70 be decided that the two are separate
and independent inventions. the patent OF
1891 Will enable the Bell Company to hold
tho field against competitors. "a least
under present conditions, until 1905.