When I filed my application I asserted that I was the first inventor of that Art. I believed so then; I know so now. In 1876 the United States appointed, to examine the electrical inventions at the Centennial Exposition, an international board of judges, who were certainly were "scientists and physicists conversant with science in so far as the same relates to electricity." At their head was Joseph Henry. I exhibited my Telephone to them on the 25th of June, 1876, and they heard speech electrically produced. They took my apparatus to their consultation room, and used it by themselves. In their official report, draw by Prof. Henry, after referring to the transmission of musical notes by current interrupters, they said (Dowd case, vol. ii, p.32 :) " The telephone of Mr. Bell aims at a still more remarkable result-that of transmitting audible speech through long telegraphic lines." * * *. To understand this wonderful result,"&c., &c., "This telephone was exhibited in operation at the Centennial Exhibition, and was considered by the judges the greatest marvel hitherto achieved by the electric telegraph. The invention is yet in its infancy, and is susceptible of great improvements." The most important of the Reis publications were in the Smithsonian library. Prof. Henry had for two years had a Reis apparatus in his cabinets there. Yet to him and his associates a speaking telephone of a feeble sort, constituted in June, 1876, "the greatest marvel hitherto achieved by the electric telegraph." Yet your District Attorney asserts that speaking telephones had long been so well known that I could not be heard to say that I was ignorant of them. For not telling to the Patent Office what Professor Henry and his associate Judges at Centennial did not know, I am accused by your Department of "Cunning concealment" and willful perjury.

Dear Mr. Bell, I have read the article of Sylvanus Thompson and I also know some of the influences to which he has been exposed. I have written to Mr. Scudder a letter, of which I enclose a copy. In the suit against Dolbear the defendants and we together have made the most thorough collection of the Reis publications which has ever yet been made. They have been carefully translated. I have had a few copies of these extracted from the ret of the testimony and put up with a cover which sufficiently expresses my views about them and I have sent you a copy. The Dolbear case is to be argued the day after to-morrow and we shall get the Reis question again Passed upon. Very truly yours, (Signed) James J. Storrow.

Dear Sir, Mr. Bell has written to me concerning your letter about S.P. Thompson's note on Reis Telephone. As Editor it is proper that you should know the following which I am informed are facts. Prof. S. P. Thompson has been retained and employed in England as expert for persons who wish to use speaking telephones without license from Mr. Bell, and as inventor of certain devices he has an interest to prove that Reis invented the speaking telephone and Mr. Bell did not. I have had occasion within the last year to make a more elaborate study of the Reis than any one had previously made and send you as a scientific curiosity a reprint of the largest collection of the Reis publications that has ever been brought together. Those whom Prof. Thompson has been associated with - particularly Prof. A. E. Dolbear and his backers - sent a man to Germany who brought home all he could find, and it is all here. If you find it suitable you can make a material and original contribution to the public knowledge on the subject by a note in substance as enclosed, though neither Mr. Bell or I wish even to suggest to "Science" its course upon any matter relating to telephones. But if opposing counsel were to say in argument that Thompson says in his article, I should stigmatize it as a dishonest misrepresentation of the Reis publications. The exact question is to be argued before Judge Lowell on Saturday morning of this week. If you wish to use the enclosed, you are at liberty to cut it up and alter it to suit yourself - indeed I rather prefer that you should do so.

American Bell Telephone Co. V Overland Telephone Co. of NJ (1883) call no: KF 3155 A56512 1883 NMAH Affidavits by William J. Green, Smithsonian Electrician and Cyrus F. Brackett, from American Bell Telephone Co. vs. Overland Telephone Co. of New Jersey in 1883, in which they describe a test performed using the Smithsonian's Reis telephone to transmit spoken words from one room to the next on or about 188 1. In Green's affidavit he states that the Reis phone was received by the Smithsonian Institute from Rudolph Koenig of Paris France, in October of 1874, two years before the Centennial Exposition where Bell's phone was introduced. I think it probable that, a properly arranged series of mechanical impulses, which may be much fewer than the air impulses in as articulate speech, however they may originate and however they may be Propagated, as for instance by separate pulses of the electric current with intervening breaks. I have read the affidavit of Professor Young agree with his statements and conclusions. The list of instruments referred to, follows: No. 1. McDonough Transmitter, large- membrane, June, 1875. No. 2. McDonough Receiver, large-membrane, June, 1875. No. 3. McDonough Metallic Diaphragm Transmitter, September, 1875. No. 4. McDonough Tin-drum Pendulum Transmitter, October, 1875. No. .5. McDonough Tin-drum. Receiver, October, 1875. No. 6. McDonough Brass-drum Telephone, No. (not tried). No. 7. McDonough Brass-drum Telephone, No. 2.1 (not tried). No. S. McDonough Pat. off. Model, Duplicate Transmitter (not used). No. 9. McDonough Pat. Off f. Model, Duplicate, Receiver (not used). No. 10. McDonough 'Pat. Off. Model, Duplicate Transmitter. No. 11. McDonough Pat. Off . Model, Duplicate Receiver. I wish to add that I have no pecuniary interest in the business of the parties in this suit, or in any-, telephone company whatever. Sworn and subscribed this 5th day of December, 1883 before me. Modill N. Y. Co. C. F. BRACKETT. P. P. POPE, Notary Public, Kings County. CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. [IN EQUITY.] THE AMERICAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, Complainant, AGAINST THE OVERLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY ET AL., Defendants. CITY AND COUNTY OF NEW YORK, SS.: CYRUS F. BRACKETT, being duly sworn, reside at Princeton, New Jersey, and am the same person who has already made affidavit in this cause respecting the McDonough telephone apparatus. I was in the City of Washington, D. C., on the eighth day of December, 1883, and on that day made and took part in the trials, as hereinafter stated, of the Reuse transmitter, the property of the Smithsonian Institution, and purporting to have been made by Koenig, of Paris. The first test was made at the Smithsonian Institution, there being present, besides myself, Messrs. 'Wm. F. Magie, George M. Keasbey, James W. McDough and William J. Greene, the Electrician of Smithsonian Institution. The said Reis transmitter was connected in circuit with an ordinary magnet o- receiver of the "butter stamp " form, three cells of Le Clanclie battery being used. The adjustment was made with very little trouble. The circuit extended from a story of the institution to a room situated vertically above. Words and irregular numerals spoken into the said Reis transmitter were clearly heard at the other end of the circuit by me, I being,, the operator there, and by me repeated back for verification. Then Mr. William F. Magie read to me portions of a number of independent advertisements from a newspaper, which were distinctly and correctly heard by me without difficulty, I repeating them back to Mr. Magie to test the accuracy with which I had received them through the circuit. I then changed places with Mr. Magie, I speaking through the said Reis transmitter and he listening at the receiver at the other station, and we carried on a short connected conversation. The articulation was good. The time at our disposal being limited, as Mr. McDonough and Mr. Greene bad arranged Dr. Myron L. Baxter's laboratory,, ranged to be we disconnected the said instruments and proceeded with the said Reis transmitter to the said laboratory of Dr. Baxter, at 125 E street, North. west, Washington, D. C., and there set up the apparatus again, using four Le Clanch`e cells, and using a circuit from an ordinary second story to a" room situated vertically above. In this circuit was placed the said Reis transmitter, a McDonough receiver, and two ordinary magneto receivers, the receivers being so arranged with switches that they could be cut out at pleasure. Almost immediately a good adjustment was secured. Many disconnected words and numerals spoken at or in the Reis trans.' transmitter being distinctly heard at the McDonough re- ceiver at the other end of the circuit, and then correctly repeated back at and through the McDonough receiver (being used as a transmitter), and thereupon distinctly and correctly heard at the end of the circuit where the Reis transmitter was situ., situated Dr. Baxter asked me while I was listening at the McDonough receiver, and lie speaking through the Reis transmitter, the question: " Who is the Governor of New York? 11 and this I correctly heard and repeated back to him. We then changed places and I asked him through said Reis transmitter: " Who is the President of the United States?" to which he replied through said circuit, Chester A. Arthur," which reply so given was distinctly' heard by me said circuit so made. I then asked same means, " When will his term of office expire?" and his answer came to me plainly: "On the fourth day of March, 1885." 1 then read certain sentences from a newspaper, which Dr. Baxter thereupon correctly repeated back to me. Then told him some nonsense to the effect that Mr. William Wannemaker bad fallen and broken his arm. No special emphasis was laid upon the Name William Wannemaker, but he was positive I had said William Wannemaker and not John Wannemaker, or used any other given name than William in connection with Wannemaker. I selected the name William purposely to mislead, supposing that lie was familiar with the name of John Wannemaker, and that if he did not distinctly hear the entire name lie would be apt to associate the name John with Wannemaker. The replies from the receiving end of the line were. sent by means of the McDonough receiver, used as a transmitter for the purpose of communication. At the transmitting end a common magneto-receiver was used in connection with the Reis transmitter, but when speak was carried on it was cut out of the circuit in when to reduce the resistance, and at the receiving the common magneto-receiver was cut out of circuit when messages were being transmitted through the McDonough receiver. The articulation was satisfactory. After this test, Mr. Keasbey, Mr. Magie, and myself returned to the Smithsonian Institution, and there made another trial of the Reis transmitter in connection with the McDonough receiver. After arranging the circuit as before, and making the adjustment Mr. Magie listening and I speaking, I asked him. "Would you like some dinner?" This he correctly repeated back to me, and then answered in the affirmative, all which I distinctly heard. I then asked, " Would you like some oysters?" He heard every word except the last, and asked me to repeat it. When I did so he repeated to me the entire sentence. I then asked, "Would you like some boiled cabbage?" He repeated back to me the question fully and correctly, and I received it distinctly. As our time was exhausted the trials ended at this point, we being perfectly satisfied that the Reis transmitter can be successfully used to transmit articulate speech, and I here repeat this statement' as my firm conviction, based on the experiments made with the same, at which I was present and assisted. We did not test the Reis receiver, it having no particular bearing in this cause. In all the experiments above mentioned the listener or operator at the one end of the circuit was unaware of what was said by the speaker or operator at the other end of the line until after the words had been spoken and passed through the circuit to the person listening at the end to which the words were sent. Cyrus F. Brackett Sworn and subscribed this 10th day of December, 1883, before me. P. P. POPE, Notary Public', Kings Co. [SEAL] Certificate filed in N. Y. Co. UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. THE AMERICAN BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, AGAINST The OVERLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY OF NEW JERSEY. Charles A. Young having been duly Sworn, duly says: nearly forty-nine years of age and Professor Astronomy in the College of New Jersey, at Princeton, and have held that chair since 1877. Before that time I was Professor of Mathematics, Natural Philosophy and Astronomy in the Western Reserve College, Ohio, from 1857 till 1865; and Appleton Professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy Dartmouth College., New Hampshire, from 1865 to 1877. 1 graduated at Dartmouth College in 1853. During my college course I was much interested in physical science. My father was Professor of Natural Philosophy at Dartmouth, and from boyhood I graduated I continually assisted him in his lectures and experiments. I am familiar with the principles of electricity and acoustics, having given instruction in those subjects for more than twenty and I have considerable practical acquaintance with electrical apparatus and instruments. Though I do not now teach the subject of electricity except in lectures at Mount Holyoke Seminary, Massachusetts, I have retained my interest in it, and I endeavor to keep up with its progress and development. In connection with my colleague, Professor Brackett, I have carefully examined and test certain instruments submitted to us by Mr. J.W, McDonough. These instruments are referred then asked, " Would you like some oysters?" He heard every word except the last, and asked me to repeat it. When I did so he repeated to me the entire sentence. I then asked, "Would you like some boiled cabbage?" He repeated back to me the question fully and correctly, and I received it distinctly. As our time was exhausted the trials ended at this point, we being perfectly satisfied that the Reis transmitter can be successfully used to transmit articulate speech, and I here repeat this statement' as my firm conviction, based on the experiments made with the same, at which I was present and assisted. We did not test the Reis receiver, it having no particular bearing in this cause. In all the experiments above mentioned the listener or operator at the one end of the circuit was unaware of what was said by the speaker or operator at the other end of the line until after the words had been spoken and passed through the circuit to the person listening at the end to which the words were sent. Cyrus F. Brackett Sworn and subscribed this 10th day of December, 1883, before me. P. P. POPE, Notary Public', Kings Co. [SEAL] Certificate filed in N. Y. Co.

Smithsonian Institution Archives
Record Unit 7001

Smithsonian Institution Archives Record Unit 7001 Joseph Henry Collection, 1808, 1825-1878 and related papers to circa 1903 Box 12, Folder 12 Transcript, document Paris October 12, 1874: Prof. Henry and Sir: I have the honor to enclose herewith an invoice of the instruments, which according to your order I delivered to Mr. Bossange, October 9. You will find in the box of tuning forks in Nr. 30c (or 218a) a screw on which is a little disc of platinum and a small piece with a platinum wire. The first is intended to be substituted for the cup of mercury and the latter to be put in place of the circuit breaker on the tine of the tuning fork when it is desired to break the electric circuits by dry contact. I have also a remark to make in regard to the 8 rectangular pipes in Nr. 99. After making them with extreme accuracy, I found that they like all organ pipes exactly follow the law according to which the theoretical half-wave of its fundamental is equal to the length of the pipe plus twice its depth and that the pretended law according to which "rectangular slotted pipes have the same sound whatever their breadth, if the product of the height by the depth is the same" is erroneous. In fact the 8 pipes of the series made so that the products of the length by the depth should be the same, have the lengths 4' 4,5" 5,14 6' 7,2" 9 12 18 the depths 9' 8' 7' 6' 5' 4 3 2 or 2x9+4=22, 2x8+4,5=20,5", 2x6+6=18, 2x4+9= 17, 2x2+18=22, 2x7+5,14=19,14, 2x5'+7,2=17,2, 2x3+12=18 and the sounds of the pipes correspond to the wave lengths and are not in unison. You see that the wave lengths for the 4 pipes which have the depths 6' 5' 4' and 3' are not very different, these pipes almost sound in unison and it was evidently that fact which deceived Savait who did not know the general law. Acceptet R. König

Bell
Further answering in support of his plea, I say as to the first of said patents, No. 174,456, dated March 7, 1876, as follows:

5. Before I applied for my patent 174,465, I had seen a "Reis telephone," and believe that I understood its described mode of operation. My method, of transmitting speech electrically, which is an adequate method, consists in causing electrical undulations corresponding or similar in form to the air vibrations accompanying the sounds to be transmitted; neither that method nor any capable of transmitting speech is substantially stated or indicated or suggested in any Reis publications which I then knew of, or have since known of or heard of or in any publication or patent before the date of my patent which I have ever known or heard of. The method which is specifically described by Reis, and attributed to him by all publications that I have known of or heard of as made before 1877, consists in breaking the current once at each complete or principal vibration corresponding to the pitch of sound. That method is incapable of transmitting speech, and all who experimented with that method whom I have ever heard of failed for that reason. I did not practice, nor seek to practice, any concealment on that subject. In fact the complainant and its officers knew of the Reis telephone before my said patent issued. Many well-known printed publications described it and its mode of operation and method as I have herein stated them, and declared its incapacity to transmit speech; and those matters were notorious. After my speaking telephone became known, it was also universally declared that the method of Reis was incapable of speech; and no one suggested to the contrary until it was so alleged in 1881 by infringes of my said patent. The courts in this country and in England and the patent office in this country have often decided that the Reis method is incapable of speech, and no court has ever decided to the contrary. No description of the Reis telephone or of his method ever did, in fact, teach the public how to transmit speech. Some of the most important of them were then possessed by complainant. Jahresbericht des Physikalischen Vereins, Frankfurt-am-Main, for the years 1860-1, pp. 56-64, which contained the description prepared and published by Reis himself, was in the library of the Smithsonian Institution, afterwards transferred to the Congressional Library. The following, which are named in the schedules annexed to the complainant's bill, and which contain descriptions of Reis telephone and of its mode of operation, were, before the year 1876, owned by the complainant and its Patent Office Library (a library which is provided by law for the examination and instruction of the examiners in its patent office), to wit: Expose' des Applications de l' Electricile, by Du Moncel. Die Fortschritte'de Physik, vol.XVII,for 1861, pp 171-3. Dinglers's Polytechnisches Journal, vol. 168, p. 185. Polytechnisches Centralblatt, 1863, pp. 857-9. The Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal, vol. 26, p. 307-8, 1863 Dingler's Polytechnisches Journal, vol. 169, p. 23. Dinglers's Polytechnisches Journal, vol. 169, p.399. Die Fortschritte der Physik, 1863, p. 96. Cosmos, December 25, 1863. Zeitschrift des Architectur und Ingenieur Vereins, vol. 12. Cosmos, vol. 24, pp. 349, 352, March 22, 1864. Portefeuille Economique des Machines, 1864, vol. 9, p. 101. Proceedings of the Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester 1865. Annalen du Chemieund Pharmacie, 1864-65. Pisko, Die neueren Apparate der Akustik, Vienna, 1865, pp. 94, et seq. Pisko, Die neueren Apparate der Akustik, Vienna, 1865, p. 241, containing the pospectus and advertisement of Philip Reis. Hessler's Lehrburch der technischen Physik, Vienna, 1866, vol. 1, p. 648. Electricity, by Ferguson, 1867, p. 257. The Manufacturer and Builder, May, 1869, vol. 1, No. 5, pp. 129, 130. The Telegrapher, vol. 5 No. 39, 1869, The Scientific American, a weekly newspaper of large circulation, published in New York, regularly taken by the Patent Office library and also regularly furnished to the examiners, and habitually read by the examiners, had a description of it in its issue dated March 4, 1876, three days before the date of my said patent, but which I am informed and believe was published, according to its practice, and received in the Patent Office several days before March 4, 1876. 7. Before the year 1875 the Smithsonian Institution had on public exhibition at its exhibition hall in Washington DC a complete Reis apparatus. In Febuary or March, of 1875, at the Smithsonian Institution I described to Professor Joseph Henry, its Secretary, some experiments I had made in the production of sounds by means electricity. At the same interview I also described to him the plan I had conceived of for the transmission of vocal sounds, which was the plan afterwards described in claim 5 of my patent 175,465, but which I had not then reduced to practice. At that interview he showed me the Reis Apparatus. He believed that Reis did not Know how to transmit speech, and he told me that my conception was the germ of a great invention, and encouraged me to persevered in overcoming the difficulties which attended a reduction to practice. By his official report on the transmission of speech by my telephone on June 25, 1876, at the Centennial Exhibition, he, well knowing of the Reis telephone, reasserted that the transmission of speech was entirely novel with me. 8. I am informed, believe and aver that before the allowance of my patent 174,465, said examiner knew of the Reis telephone, the said description in Hessler, and the description in said Scientific American, and knew that a Reis Apparatus had been on public exhibition at the Smithsonian Institute for some years. That information and belief is, in part, from an official letter of April 28, 1876, written by said examiner to James W. McDonough, in which he informed said McDonough that a certain transmitter described by McDonough "does not differ substantially from the old Reis telephone shown and illustrated in Lehrbuch der Technischen Physik, Vienna, 1866, 3rd edition," which book had long been in the Patent Office Library ; that " a view and description of such may be seen also in the Scientific American for March 4, 1876, " and that "an actual Reis apparatus has also been in possession of the Smithsonian Institute and on public exhibition there for some years"

Mr. J. B. Church, Examiner of Interferences in the U.S. Patent Office, on "The Speaking Telephone Interferences."

July 21, 1883

(Concerning REIS and BOURSEUL). 1. Excerpt from the official report dated July 21, 1883, of Mr. J. B. Church, Examiner of Interferences in the U.S. Patent Office, on "The Speaking Telephone Interferences." "Experience demonstrates that inventions and discoveries involving novel principles of construction and operation are, as a rule, developed and enlarged upon in the hands of skilled operators, and unless overestimated by unskilled or incompetent judges, their first performances are improved upon, or at least equalled, the capacity of the apparatus enlarged, and the range of application increased; and this in proportion as they become better known and understood. With Reis’ invention the contrary appears to be the case. The best results are accredited to the first and crudest instruments; later improvements added by the inventor himself, diminished its capacity, until finally, after years of experience and trial, it had so far degenerated as to be incapable of more than approximating its traditional performances. Is it not much more probable that time developed and demonstrated its weakness, and that the later rather than the earlier observations are the more reliable?… It was at the outset given a fictitious value, as possessing qualities now sought to be established, but which fifteen years of trial failed to develop or make known… The testimony respecting what can now be accomplished with the Reis’ instruments is regarded as of little value in ascertaining their known action and capacity prior to the discoveries which led to the introduction of the modern telephone. The instruments were known and used at home and abroad for years, and why, it may be asked, did they never rise beyond the sphere of mere scientific toys?… The instruments sufficiently exhibited the method,but the latter was inadequate for accomplishing the desired object…" 2. Excerpt from the decision of Judge Lowell of the "Circuit Court of the United States, for the District of Massachusetts," delivered June 27, 1881." "… An apparatus made by Reis, of Germany, in 1860, and described in several publications before 1876, is relied on to limit the scope of Bell’s invention. Reis appears to have been a man of learning and ingenuity. He used a membrane and electrodes for transmitting sounds, and his apparatus was well known to curious inquirers. The regret of all its admirers was, that articulate speech could not be sent and received by it. The deficiency was inherent in the principle of the machine. It can transmit electrical waves along a wire, under very favorable circumstances, not in the mode intended by the inventor, but one suggested by Bell’s discovery; but it cannot transmute them into articulate sounds at the other end, because it is constructed on a false theory, and the delicacy of use required to make it perform part of the operation is fatal to its possible performance of the other part. A Bell receiver must be used to gather up the sound before the instrument can even now be adapted to a limited practical use. It is like those deaf and dumb pupils of Professor Bell, who could be taught to speak, but not to hear. That was all, but it was enough. A century of Reis would never have produced a speaking telephone by mere improvement in construction." 3. Excerpt from the decision of Judge Wallace of the "Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York" delivered June 24, 1885. "Additional testimony has been introduced by the defendants to show that the Reis apparatus is a speaking telephone, although the inventor never supposed it to be capable of transmitting articulate speech, and although it has always been conceded by the most eminent authorities to be incapable of doing so, until some of the experts in the present case have brought themselves to a different opinion. Reis himself undoubtedly believed that the transmitter in his apparatus acted by making and breaking the electric circuit, and it is conceded that an apparatus operating upon this principle is capable of the transmission of musical sounds… As early as in 1854 Bourseul described essentially the apparatus made by Reis in 1861…after Bell has pointed out the way, it may now seem to be a simple thing to introduce his method into the Reis apparatus. Some of the experts have doubtless convinced themselves that these modifications of the Reis apparatus do not involve any difference in the principle of the apparatus. It is too late to accept this theory after the lapse of so many years of fruitless experiment with the method of Reis, as originally suggested by Bourseul, and with the apparatus of Reis, as modified by various experimentalists down to the time of the promulgation of Bell’s method. It seems impossible to escape the conviction that had the speaking telephone been left where it was left by Reis, and by those who endeavored to develop and perfect his theory, it would only have realized the speculations of Bourseul." 4. Excerpt from the "Opinion of the Court," in the application for the injunction from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Hon. Don A. Pardee, Circuit Judge, and Hon. Edward C. Billings, District Judge." " We will next consider the second ground of defence, which is,that the invention of Bell lacked novelty, because it had been anticipated by Phillip Reis. That Reis made great strides toward the discovery of the great fact or law, subsequently announced in the fifth claim of Bell, does not admit of doubt. That he failed to research it is equally beyond question… His apparatus appears to have been devised in the attempt to transmit speech by electricity; but the attempt was an acknowledged failure… Reis’s result was that sound could be sent through the electric current like a missile through the air; Bell’s result was that the electric current was a continuing connection between voice and ear, like the air itself… The various reproductions of Reis, and his methods, all were based upon the same defective electrical means — anintermittent circuiting-breaking current — and all were practical failures for the transmission of speech until Bell’s method was discovered." 5. Excerpt from the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in the "appealed telephone cases." Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Waite, March 18, 1888. "…We come now to consider the alleged anticipation of Phillip Reis. And here it is to be always kept in mind that the question is, not whether the apparatus devised by Reis to give affect to his theory can be made, with our present knowledge, to transmit speech, but whether Reis had in his time found out the way of using it successfully for that purpose; not as to the character of the apparatus, but as to the mode of treating the current of electricity on which the apparatus is to act, so as to make that current a medium for receiving the vibrations of air created by the human voice in articulate speech at one place, and in effect delivering them at the ear of a listener in another place. Bell’s patent is not alone for the particular apparatus he describes, but for the process that apparatus was designed to bring into use. His patent would be quite as good if he had actually used Reis’s apparatus in developing the process for which it was granted. That Reis knew what had to be done in order to transmit speech by electricity is very apparent… Bourseul also knew it before Reis… Reis discovered how to produce musical tones; but he did no more. He could sing through his apparatus, but he could not talk. From the beginning to the end he has conceded this… Although his first paper was published in 1861, and Bell did not appear as a worker in the same field of scientific research until nearly fifteen years afterwards, no advance had been made, by the use of what he had contrived or of his method, towards the great end to be accomplished… With the help of Bell’slater discoveries in 1875 we now know why he failed… We have not had our attention called to a single item of evidence which tends in any way to show that Reis or anyone who wrote about him had it in mind that anything else than the intermittent current caused by the opening and closing of the circuit could be used to do what was wanted. No one seems to have thought that there could be another way… It was left for Bell to discover that the failure was due not to workmanship butto the principle which was adopted as the basis of what had to be done…Such was his discovery, and it was new. Reis never thought of it, and he failed to transmit speech telegraphically. Bell did, and he succeeded. Under such circumstances it is impossible to hold that what Reis did was on anticipation of the discovery of Bell. To follow Reis is to fail, but to follow Bell is to succeed. The difference between the two is just the difference between failure and success." Invention of Telephon Is claimed for German Berlin Nov. 29-Not Doctor Alexander Graham Bell, but Professor Philip Reis, German teacher was the inventor of the telephone, according to claims advanced in the Die Umshau on the fiftieth anniversary of the telephone. Documents have been produced to show Reis advertised instruments to reproduce the voice at distant stations." He called the instrument the telephone Reis never claimed to reproduce speech; that claim was made by others. With Bell’s receiver and Bell’s method, it is now possible to transmit speech by a Reis, but not otherwise. FRED DELAND. Dec. 2, 1925

Abstract of an address on "The Telephone" delivered by Alexander Graham Bell at the Physical Society in London, on December 1, 1877. Abstract copied from The Athenaeum of December 8, 1877.

Prof. G. C. Foster, President, in the chair. – Prof. G. Bell exhibited and described the telephone, prefacing his account by a sketch of progress of electric telephony. Reiss was the first to employ the human voice in his experiments. Prof. Bell examined the phenomena which take place when sounds are transmitted through the air. It is, of course, not the motion of the vocal organs themselves that is received in the ear, but that of the air set in motion by their means, and all peculiarities in the sound must be peculiarities in the motion of that air. If the rapidity of motion varies, it occasions a variation in the pitch, and the loudness is changed by changing the amplitude. The shape of the vibration produces timbre. If by moving the air in certain specified ways certain vowel sounds are given out, then those same sounds will be emitted if an identical movement be occasioned by any mechanical means whatever, and Prof. Bell has found that such a motion may really be given to the air in various ways. Three classes of electrical currents have been employed for transmitting sounds to a distance, and these he denominates intermittent, pulsatory, and undulatory. The first form is obtained when a current passes for a brief interval, is then followed by an interval during which no current passes, and this by a current of the same or opposite sign. In the second class a current is continually passing, but its intensity increases and decreases instantaneously, and, finally, in the third class, this variation takes place gradually, and may, therefore, be represented by a sinuous line. In his experiments on the nature of the movement of air, Prof. Bell employed a human ear, a hay style attached to the incus recording the movement communicated to it on a moving sheet of smoked glass. A very interesting series of curves produced by this means was shown upon the screen, and he explained how his experiments in this direction led him to the present form of telephone. Since the very small membrane of the ear was capable of setting in motion comparatively large bones, it seemed probable that it could cause a light piece of iron to vibrate. In the earlier form of apparatus a piece of steel spring was therefore attached to a stretched membrane of goldbeater’s skin, and placed in front of the pole of the magnet, but he found on increasing the area of metal that the action of the instrument was improved, and thus was led to do away with the membrane itself. Another branch of the investigation referred to the strength of the magnet employed, and this was modified by varying the strength of current. The battery was gradually reduced from fifty cells to none at all, and still effects were observed, in a much less marked degree; the action was in this latter case doubtless due to residual magnetism, hence in the present form of apparatus a permanent magnet is employed. Lastly, the effect of varying the dimensions of the coil of wire was studied, when it was found that the sounds became louder as its length was diminished. A certain length was, however, ultimately reached, beyond which no improvement was effected, and it was found to be only necessary to enclose one end of the magnet in the coil of wire. A number of diagrams were projected on to the screen, which showed the various forms the apparatus has taken from the time of Page to the present day. An air sung in a distant part of the building was distinctly heard in the room by the aid of an improved form of Reiss’ telephone, lent by Prof. Barrett, and made by Mr. Yates of Dublin. Prof. Bell, Prof. Foster, and Dr.Gladstone then carried on a conversation with a gentleman at a distance, and utterances were shown to be audible when the trans-mitting instrument was held about a foot from the mouth. In replying to various questions, Prof. Bell stated that his attempts to determine the amplitude of the vibrations had not been successful, and he is coming to the conclusion that the movement must be molecular. Very distinct sounds are emitted when a considerable mass of iron is employed, and, further, if the iron be glued to a piece of wood an inch thick, and this be interposed between it and the magnet, the action still continues. Conversation has been carried on through a distance of 258 miles, but a resistance of 60,000 ohms has been interposed without preventing the action. There is a very marked difference in the manner in which letters are reproduced by the telephone. Vowel sounds are more acceptable than consonants, and, as a rule, those letters are best transmitted which involve a large oral aperture in their utterance. Finally, he finds that high sounds are produced more fully than low ones, but this question has not yet received sufficient attention. Prof. G. C. Foster, President, in the chair. – Prof. G. Bell exhibited and described the telephone, prefacing his account by a sketch of progress of electric telephony. Reiss was the first to employ the human voice in his experiments. Prof. Bell examined the phenomena which take place when sounds are transmitted through the air. It is, of course, not the motion of the vocal organs themselves that is received in the ear, but that of the air set in motion by their means, and all peculiarities in the sound must be peculiarities in the motion of that air. If the rapidity of motion varies, it occasions a variation in the pitch, and the loudness is changed by changing the amplitude. The shape of the vibration produces timbre. If by moving the air in certain specified ways certain vowel sounds are given out, then those same sounds will be emitted if an identical movement be occasioned by any mechanical means whatever, and Prof. Bell has found that such a motion may really be given to the air in various ways. Three classes of electrical currents have been employed for transmitting sounds to a distance, and these he denominates intermittent, pulsatory, and undulatory. The first form is obtained when a current passes for a brief interval, is then followed by an interval during which no current passes, and this by a current of the same or opposite sign. In the second class a current is continually passing, but its intensity increases and decreases instantaneously, and, finally, in the third class, this variation takes place gradually, and may, therefore, be represented by a sinuous line. In his experiments on the nature of the movement of air, Prof. Bell employed a human ear,a hay style attached to the incus recording the movement communicated to it on a moving sheet of smoked glass. A very interesting series of curves produced by this means was shown upon the screen, and he explained how his experiments in this direction led him to the present form of telephone. Since the very small membrane of the ear was capable of setting in motion comparatively large bones, it seemed probable that it could cause a light piece of iron to vibrate. In the earlier form of apparatus a piece of steel spring was therefore attached to a stretched membrane of goldbeater’s skin, and placed in front of the pole of the magnet, but he found on increasing the area of metal that the action of the instrument was improved, and thus was led to do away with the membrane itself. Another branch of the investigation referred to the strength of the magnet employed, and this was modified by varying the strength of current. The battery was gradually reduced from fifty cells to none at all, and still effects were observed, in a much less marked degree; the action was in this latter case doubtless due to residual magnetism, hence in the present form of apparatus a permanent magnet is employed. Lastly, the effect of varying the dimensions of the coil of wire was studied, when it was found that the sounds became louder as its length was diminished. A certain length was, however, ultimately reached, beyond which no improvement was effected, and it was found to be only necessary to enclose one end of the magnet in the coil of wire. A number of diagrams were projected on to the screen, which showed the various forms the apparatus has taken from the time of Page to the present day. An air sung in a distant part of the building was distinctly heard in the room by the aid of an improved form of Reiss’ telephone, lent by Prof. Barrett, and made by Mr. Yates of Dublin. Prof. Bell, Prof. Foster, and Dr.Gladstone then carried on a conversation with a gentleman at a distance, and utterances were shown to be audible when the trans-mitting instrument was held about a foot from the mouth. In replying to various questions, Prof. Bell stated that his attempts to determine the amplitude of the vibrations had not been successful, and he is coming to the conclusion that the movement must be molecular. Very distinct sounds are emitted when a considerable mass of iron is employed, and, further, if the iron be glued to a piece of wood an inch thick, and this be interposed between it and the magnet, the action still continues. Conversation has been carried on through a distance of 258 miles, but a resistance of 60,000 ohms has been interposed without preventing the action. There is a very marked difference in the manner in which letters are reproduced by the telephone. Vowel sounds are more acceptable than consonants, and, as a rule, those letters are best transmitted which involve a large oral aperture in their utterance. Finally, he finds that high sounds are produced more fully than low ones, but this question has not yet received sufficient attention.

Letter from Gardiner Greene Hubbard to Alexander Graham Bell. Washington, D. C. November 30, 1877. Dear Alec: Your two "scribbles" arrived yesterday. Mr. Pollok says do not take out any patents abroad before applying for one here, for by so doing you make this patent dependent on the life of the English patent, and shorten its life three years. Our patents run for seventeen years – English for only fourteen. Do not take out a joint patent with Varley, because you cannot be joint inventors on two sides of the Atlantic, but it can be issued in the joint names of you and Varley, The object is to prevent Varley from using the patent except with your consent. I also send-by this mail a number of petitions for patens. You can fill out this petition then write whatever specification you please. This can be filed, amended and taken out whenever you are ready. You must swear to the petition before the American Counsel. Mr. Pollok gave me the name of his correspondent in London but I have forgotten. I think it was Johnson Lincolns ? Field, he says he is the best in England, but that you can draw a specification better than any patent agent. We are doing very well with telephones. New orders coming in every day. I have written by this Steamer to Col Fahland, Military Inspector Telegraphs, Berlin, in answer to an application and have sent him some telephones. I have also written to James Pond, 8 Bismarck Platz, Dresden, asking him to act temporarily As our agent in Germany. He is highly recommended by Mr. Landenand Judge Home. We sent him four Telephones two weeks ago. Please correspond with him. I have asked him to go to Berlin and see Siemens, find out what they are doing, and if they want to act as our agents. Please do not be in too much of a hurry, if you do you will make a great mistake. Wants money to put up a Telephone line, and neither Siemens nor anyone else of means will do very much that will render them liable in damages to you. Do profit by our experience here, and your own in England. How much have you accomplished in selling or leasing Telephones with everything in your favor. Mr. Roosevelt sails tomorrow. I hope you have done nothing in France, I think you will like Mr. Roosevelt very much, and that the arrangement will please you. It is made to depend on your approval. With best love to you and Mabel. I am ever yours, Gardiner G. Hubbard.