Evening journal., 1913-07-18
NEW NEWS OF YESTERDAY
The Inventor Who Did Not
Profit by Ills Ingenuity
b. uonsnd

The late Harry G. Pearson. whose
administration in the postotfce oi
New York City under Presidents Gar
field and Arthur was so admirable
that President Cleveland reappointed
him. in spite OF the fact that Pear
son was Republican, was called
upon one day. about a year before
his death in 1887. by Royal House,
who had gained a national reputation
as the inventor Of an apparatus for
printing by telegraph
"Mr House told me, said Mr..
Pearson. that he was satisfied with
a patent for improvements in the
printing telegraph apparatus really
covered the fundamental principles Of
the Bell telephone. The House pat
ent was issued, ! think. three OF -four
years before the first craveat for the
Bell telephone was filed with the pat
ent Office at Washington
II said to Mr. House that eX-Sena-
tor William Window, of Minnesota,
who had been secretary of the treas
ury in Garfield's administration hap
pened to be in town, and that /
thought he would be greatly interest
ed in whatever Mr.. House might
have to say about his patent and the
possible relation it bore TO the Bell
telephone patent.
II knew that Senator Window
would be Interested. because, when
In the Senate, he was chairman of the
important committe on patents. As
chairman his attention had been sew
eral times strongly fixed upon some
of the questions which arose because
of the claim as to the priority of the
Bell telephone patents.
"I arranged a meeting between
Senator Window, Mr. House and one
or two other gentlemen, which took
place at the office of my father-in-
law. who was then president of the
National Bank Of New York and who
was a very intimate personal friend
of Senator Window. AT that meet ng
II was disclosed that the House pat
ent had only two years more of life
10 run But It was thought worth
while to get the opinion of one of the
ablest American patent lawyers re-
specting the validity of Mr.. Houses
claim that his patent really covered
the fundamental principles of the Bell
telephone.
About a month later the opinion
was furnished by a very distinguished
patent lawyer of Philadelphia. He
stated that his examination Of the
matter satisfied him that Mr. Houses
claim was correct, and that his pat
ented apparatus did really cover the
fundamental principles of the Bell
telephone He. however. added that
It would be practically impossible TO
get a jury of twelve men together
who could he convinced by any testi-
mony that Mr.. House had really pat
ented the fundamental features of
the Bell telephone. and had been ui-
terly ignorant of the fact that he
had done So Therefore. in view OF
the short remaining life of the House
patent. he did not believe il would
he practicable 10 take the matter MP
with intent to establish the priority
Of the House invention Therefore
the matter was dropped
Yet. according to the highest pro
| fessional opinion ohtainable. House
had patented an apparatus for print
! ing by telegraph which contained one
OF the fundamental ideas Of the Bel
! Telephone Company. and never real
lied what he had done until several
years after the commercial value oi
the telephone had been established
7 think this is without precedent In
all the strange and romantic history
Of patented apparatus"
Copyright, 1918. by f. J. Edwards
All rights reserved.)
Tomorrow Mr.. Edwards will tell of
"Thoreau's Unfortunate Experience
as a Publisher"