The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-05-10
The Bell Telephone Company
Will Have A
Monopoly Of the Telephone Bus
iness of the Country
FOR Is YEARS LONGER
By a Decision of the U. s. Su.
preme Court
Annulling the Last Berliner
Patent.

Washington, May 1O.-The Bell TeIa
ephone company won the case brought
by the United States to annul the last
Berliner patent. This decision has the
effect of continuing the control Of the
telephone by the Bell company for sew
enteen years from the date of the last
pat-nt. which was granted in 1891.
The government asked to have the
patent OF 1891 set aside on the ground
that the delay Of thirteen years in the
patent office was fraudulent and
through the fault of the telephone com
pany and that the patent issued in
1880 covered the same ground on which
the new patent was applied for in 1891
me court IN its opinion delivered by
Justice Brewer, held that there was no
evidence OF corruption or undue influ-
ence exercised over the patent 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 dissented from the
opinion. Justices Gray and Brown, it
was announced, took no part in the
tereSted.
The court held that in order to set
aside a patent the government must
establish grounds of relief as clear and
a land patent. All other allegations
of the government besides that of de-
lay were overruled. This decision by
the supreme court sustains the lower
courts.
The case has attracted wide atten-
tiOn because of the interest involved
in it's settlement and the opinion of the
court has been anxiously awaited.
The suit, it was claimed, involved the
practical control of the art of telepaOn-
ing. It originated in charge of col
lusiOn in the patent office and was
brought to obtai nthe repeal ana can
collation. OF letters patent of the United
States No. 463, 500, dated November ~.
1891, granted to the American Bell
Telephone company as assignees of
Emil Beriiner. the alleged inventor The
repeal and cancellation Of the patent
We're sought -NPen the ground that the
application for it, while filed in l5Fis
was not issued until 1891. This delay
was charged to be unnecessary and I'M
proper on the part of the patent Office
and the Bell Telephone company, which
as Berliner's assignee controlled the
application
had acquiesced in and promoted the
delay in its own interests, thus de-
frauding the public of its rights 1t
was claimed that the Berliner patent
practically controls telephony, as 1t has
to do with both the transmission and
receipt of sound. and that the delay
thus secured until 1891 operated to pro-
long the control of this act for htteen
years beyond the time of the expiration
of the Bell patent 1t was also as
serted that the patent was granted by
the commissioner of patents without
authority of law and that it was for
the same invention for which a patent
had been granted in 1880 and that the
principal 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 ap-
peal to their circuit court of appeals for
the First circuit this decision was re-
versed and the contention of the Ber-
liner claimants upheld. From this
opinion the United States appealed to
the supreme court.