Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Patents, I would simply state that the part I owned when I entered the service of the government in this office was orginally given me by the said Morse for services rendered him in making his invention practically effective in sending currents through long distances, &c., and that the said interest was retransferred to the said Morse for the sum of fifteen thousand dollars.

Respectfully,

Professor HENRY,

Secretary Smithsonian Institution.

L. D. GALE.

It thus appears, both from Mr. Morse's own admission down to 1848, and from the testimony of others most familiar with the facts, that Professor Henry discovered the law, or "principle," as Mr. Morse designates it, which was necessary to make the practical working of the electro-magnetic telegraph at considerable distances possible; that Mr. Morse was first informed of this discovery by Dr. Gale; that he availed himself of it at once, and that it never occurred to Mr. Morse to deny this fact until after 1848. He had steadily and fully acknowledged the merits and genius of Mr. Henry, as the discoverer of facts and laws in science of the highest importance to the success of his long-cherished invention of a magnetic telegraph. Mr. Henry was the discoverer of a principle, Mr. Morse was the inventor of a machine, the object of which was to record characters at a distance, to convey intelligence, in other words, to carry into execution the idea of an electric telegraph. But there were obstacles in the way which he could not overcome until he learned the discoveries of Professor Henry, and applied them to his machine. These facts are undeniable. They constitute a part of the history of science and invention. They were true in 1848, they were equally true in 1855, when Professor Morse's article was published. We give a passage here from the deposition of SEARS C. WALKER, in the case of French vs. Rogers, Respondent's Evidence, page 199, bearing upon this whole subject:

"In consequence of some statements made by me in my official reports relative to the invention of the receiving magnet, a question arose between Mr. Morse and myself as to the origin of this invention. It was amicably discussed by Mr. Morse, Professor Henry, Dr. Gale, and myself, with Professor Henry's article, alluded to in answer to the second question before us. The result of the interview was conclusive to my mind that Professor Henry was the sole discoverer of the law on which the intensity magnet depends for its power of sending the galvanic current through a long circuit. I was also led to conclude that Mr. Morse, in the course of his own researches and experiments before he had read Professor Henry's article, before alluded to, had encountered the same difficulty Mr. Barlow and those who preceded him had encountered, that is, the impossibility of forcing

the galvanic current through a long telegraph line. His own personal researches had not overcome this obstacle. They were made in the laboratory of the New York University. I also learned at the same time, by the conversations above stated, that he only overcame this obstacle by constructing a magnet on the principle invented by Professor Henry, and described in his article in Silliman's Journal. His attention was directed to it by Dr. Gale."

What changed Mr. Morse's opinion of Professor Henry, not only as a scientific investigator, but as a man of integrity, after the admissions of his indebtedness to his researches, and the oft repeated expressions of warm personal regard? It appears that Mr. Morse was involved in a number of lawsuits, growing out of contested claims to the right of using electricity for telegraphic purposes. The circumstances under which Professor Henry, as a well known investigator in this department of physics, was summoned by one of the parties to testify have already been stated. The testimony of Mr. Henry, while supporting the claims of Mr. Morse as the inventor of an admirable invention, denied to him the additional merit of being a discoverer of new facts or laws of nature, and to this extent, perhaps, was considered unfavorable to some part of the claim of Mr. Morse to an exclusive right to employ the electro-magnet for telegraphic purposes. Professor Henry's deposition consists of a series of answers to verbal, as well as written, interrogatories propounded to him, which were not limited to his published writings, or the subject of electricity, but extended to investigations and discoveries in general having a bearing upon the electric telegraph. He gave his testimony at a distance from his notes and manuscripts, and it would not have been surprising if inaccuracies had occurred in some parts of his statement; but all the material points in it are sustained by independent testimony, and that portion which relates directly to Mr. Morse agrees entirely with the statement of his own assistant, Dr. Gale. Had his deposition been objectionable, it ought to have been impeached before the Court; but this was not attempted; and the following tribute to Professor Henry by the judge, in delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, indicates the impression made upon the Court itself by all the testimony in the case: "It is due to him to say that no one has contributed more to enlarge the knowledge of electromagnetism, and to lay the foundations of the great invention of which we are speaking, than the Professor himself."

Professor Henry's answers to the first and second interrogatories present a condensed history of the progress of the science of electromagnetism, as connected with telegraphic communication, embracing

an account of the discoveries of Oersted, Arago, Davy, Ampère; of the investigations by Barlow and Sturgeon; of his own researches, commenced in 1828, and continued in 1829, 1830, and subsequently. The details of his experiments and their results, though brief, are very precise. There is abundant evidence to show that Professor Henry's experiments and illustrations at Albany, and subsequently at Princeton, proved, and were declared at the time by him to prove, that the electric telegraph was now practicable; that the electromagnet might be used to produce mechanical effects at a distance adequate to making signals of various kinds, such as ringing bells, which he practically illustrated. In proof of this, we quote a letter to Professor Henry, from Professor JAMES HALL, of Albany, late president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science: JANUARY 19, 1856.

DEAR SIR: While a student of the Rensselaer School, in Troy, New York, in August, 1832, I visited Albany with a friend, having a letter of introduction to you from Professor Eaton. Our principal object was to see your electro-magnetic apparatus, of which we had heard much, and at the same time the library and collections of the Albany Institute.

You showed us your laboratory in a lower story or basement of the building, and in a larger room in an upper story some electric and galvanic apparatus, with various philosophical instruments. In this room, and extending around the same, was a circuit of wire stretched along the wall, and at one termination of this, in the recess of a window, a bell was fixed, while the other extremity was connected with a galvanic apparatus.

You showed us the manner in which the bell could be made to ring by a current of electricity, transmitted through this wire, and you remarked that this method might be adopted for giving signals, by the ringing of a bell at the distance of many miles from the point of its connexion with the galvanic apparatus.

All the circumstances attending this visit to Albany are fresh in my recollection, and during the past years, while so much has been said respecting the invention of electric telegraphs, I have often had occasion to mention the exhibition of your electric telegraph in the Albany Academy, in 1832.

If at any time or under any circumstances this statement can be of service to you in substantiating your claim to such a discovery at the period named, you are at liberty to use it in any manner you please, and I shall be ready at all times to repeat and sustain what I have here stated, with many other attendant circumstances, should they prove of any importance.

I remain very sincerely and respectfully yours,

Professor JOSEPH HENRY.

JAMES HALL.

In his deposition, Prof. Henry's statements are within what he might fairly have claimed. But he is a man of science, looking for no other reward than the consciousness of having done something for its promotion, and the reputation which the successful prosecution of scientific investigations and discoveries may justly be expected to give. In his public lectures and published writings he has often pointed out incidentally the possibility of applying the facts and laws of nature discovered by him to practical purposes; he has freely communicated information to those who have sought it from him, among whom has been Mr. Morse himself, as appears by his own acknowledgments. But he has never applied his scientific discoveries to practical ends for his own pecuniary benefit. It was natural, therefore, that he should feel a repugnance to taking any part in the litigation between rival inventors, and it was inevitable that, when forced to give his testimony, he should distinctly point out what was so clear in his own mind and is so fundamental a fact in the history of human progress, the distinctive functions of the discoverer and the inventor who applies discoveries to practical purposes in the business of life.

Mr. Henry has always done full justice to the invention of Mr. Morse. While he could not sanction the claim of Mr. Morse to the exclusive use of the electro-magnet, he has given him full credit for the mechanical contrivances adapted to the application of his invention. In proof of this we refer to his deposition, and present also the following statement of Hon. CHARLES MASON, Commissioner of Patents, taken from a letter addressed by him to Prof. Henry, dated March 31, 1856: U. S. PATENT OFFICE, March 31, 1856. SIR: Agreeably to your request I now make the following state

ment:

Some two years since, when an application was made for an extension of Prof. Morse's patent, I was for some time in doubt as to the propriety of making that extension. Under these circumstances I consulted with several persons, and among others with yourself, with a view particularly to ascertain the amount of invention fairly due to Prof. Morse.

The result of my inquiries was such as to induce me to grant the extension. I will further say that this was in accordance with your express recommendation, and that I was probably more influenced by this recommendation, and the information I obtained from you, than by any other circumstance, in coming to that conclusion.

I am, sir, yours very respectfully,

Prof. J. HENRY.

CHARLES MASON.

To sum up the results of the preceding investigation in a few words.

We have shown that Mr. Morse himself has acknowledged the value of the discoveries of Prof. Henry to his electric telegraph; that his associate and scientific assistant, Dr. Gale, has distinctly affirmed that these discoveries were applied to his telegraph, and that previous to such application it was impossible for Mr. Morse to operate his instrument at a distance; that Prof. Henry's experiments were witnessed by Prof. Hall and others in 1832, and that these experiments showed the possibility of transmitting to a distance a force capable of producing mechanical effects adequate to making telegraphic signals; that Mr. Henry's deposition of 1849, which evidently furnished the motive for Mr. Morse's attack upon him, is strictly correct in all the historical details, and that, so far as it relates to Mr. Henry's own claim as a discoverer, is within what he might have claimed with entire justice; that he gave the deposition reluctantly, and in no spirit of hostility to Mr. Morse; that on that and other occasions he fully admitted the merit of Mr. Morse as an inventor; and that Mr. Morse's patent was extended through the influence of the favorable opinion expressed by Professor Henry.

Your committee come unhesitatingly to the conclusion that Mr. Morse has failed to substantiate any one of the charges he has made against Prof. Henry, although the burden of proof lay upon him; and that all the evidence, including the unbiased admissions of Mr. Morse himself, is on the other side. Mr. Morse's charges not only remain unproved but they are positively disproved.

Your committee recommend the adoption of the following resolutions:

Resolved, That Professor Morse has not succeeded in refuting the statements of Professor Henry in the deposition given by the latter in 1849; that he has not proved any one of the accusations against Prof. Henry made in the article in Shaffner's Telegraph Companion in 1855, and that he has not disproved any one of his own admissions in regard to Prof. Henry's discoveries in electro-magnetism, and their importance to his own invention of the electro-magnetic telegraph.

Resolved, That there is nothing in Professor Morse's article that diminishes, in the least, the confidence of this Board in the integrity of Prof. Henry, or in the value of those great discoveries which have placed his name among those of the most distinguished cultivators of science, and have done much to exalt the scientific reputation of the country.

Resolved, That this report, with the resolutions, be recorded in the Proceedings of the Board of Regents of the Institution.

« AnteriorContinuar »