Comments on: The Telephone Gambit: Did Bell Steal His Legendary Invention? (Part Two)

By: Edouard

Edouard — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:11:17 +0000

is this website reliable because i’m looking for real informations for a project

By: Janet Gray

Janet Gray — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 13:40:42 +0000

Thank you for this site.
My family was always under the assumption our Grandfather Heber Mason invented the pay telephone. My Grandmother (Heber’s daughter) told me that Heber sold his pay phone invention for $2,000 dollars which was a lot back then. We are suprised to see that they claim William Gray invented the phone. It’s not true.
Please contact me if you have futher questions.

By: Seth Shulman

Seth Shulman — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 16:44:11 +0000

Bell’s patent attorneys in Washington, DC filed his application on his behalf. As you can read in the book, this is a very interesting piece of the mystery I unravel. There was absolutely no expection in 1876 that an inventor had to file a patent in person. Hope that helps!

By: Marcelo Valentim Silva

Marcelo Valentim Silva — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:42:21 +0000

Seth,

Thanks a lot for your quick reply. So, as I understood, Bell filed for the patent WITHOUT going to Washington on Feb 14. He just went there on Feb 24. Is this correct ?
At the time the person who wanted to apply for a patent didn´t need to go to Washington ?
Or did he go twice to DC ?
Thanks a lot,
Marcelo, in Brasilia, Brazil.

By: Seth Shulman

Seth Shulman — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:12:37 +0000

Marcelo–
I’m glad for your interest. It’s a twisted tale so, for all the details, you’ll just have to read the book! I’ll try to answer at least a bit, though. Bell did file for a patent on February 14, 1876. But the key thing to remember is that what Bell and so many other inventors were working on at the time was NOT a telephone, but a telegraph capable of sending multiple messages at the same time. Bell kept working away until leaving for Washington on February 24. What is really notable, though, is that he did not have success calling to Watson over a telephone until March 10, 1876–AFTER he already had the patent we now consider “the telephone patent” in hand! I try to lay the whole story out best I can in the book but, as I said, it’s a twisted tale indeed.

By: Marcelo Valentim Silva

Marcelo Valentim Silva — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:10:50 +0000

Dear Seth,

I found your discovery amazing. I really searched all I could about it on the web. But I still have some doubts I´d love to understand. So, Graham Bell went to Washington on Feb 14, 1876 to obtain his patent, Right ? And when did he return ? You say that “Bell left his experiments on February 24 and didn’t resume them for nearly two weeks”, so, what happened between Feb 14 and 24 ? How did he keep on experimenting ? Wasn´t he in Washington ? Did he go there only in Feb 24 ? This puzzles me…
Thanks for any info,
Marcelo, from Brazil.

By: Seth Shulman

Seth Shulman — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 19:33:34 +0000

Thanks for the feedback! Antonio Meucci’s story is indeed an interesting one and I had intended to write more about him than I ultimately did–I wound up having my hands pretty full just with the shenanigans between Bell and Gray. As for the suggestion that he may have passed the info to Gray, I’m pretty sure the two didn’t meet until long after Gray’s initial liquid transmitter design had been filed at the patent office. More likely, it was one of those many times in the history of technology in which multiple inventors were working along parallel lines.

By: Randy

Randy — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:33:31 +0000

I don’t know if you explore this in your book, but there was one Antonio Meucci, who is said to be 1st to create a working phone, and subsequently became involved with Elisha Gray. Thus the working knowledge may have transferred at least twice. Meucci pursued the rights for years in court, until the $ ran out. See the following:

http://www.italianhistorical.org/MeucciStory.htm#top

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:34:15 +0000

Dumbfounded…. This reminds me of Tesla and how he has been shafted by American history. I can’t help but wonder if similar political forces (if not the same forces) were at work. It seems to me that things back then are the same as they are now- the best ideas and hardest work count for nothing, and who you know and what you pay trumps all. And the winner of the popularity contest gets to write the history.