Customer Reviews

The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret

5 star:		(23)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I have just finished reading "The Telephone Gambit" by Seth Schulman. This is the first book that I have sat down and read in one day since my September vacation. I know nothing about Seth's other books and can't comment on the caustic review by zzoott (River Styx, OH, USA)

I was drawn to this book by the review in the Boston Globe on New Year's Day. http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles/2008/01/02/hang_on_a_minute/

I previously worked for the "other" telephone company. I worked at GTE Labs in Waltham, MA (what remains is now Verizon Labs). In the summer time in the late `80s we usually had summer students join us, and I often gave a presentation on the history of the Telephone. . In fact one of my vugraphs (we didn't have PowerPoint then) is the same photo shown by Seth on page 61, the tangle of telegraph wires in 1870.

I bought in to the story that "Elisha Gray was an hour late filing his patent; that Bell got there first. It now is embarrassing to say that I bought in. This was a research lab and we all used scientific principals and investigative techniques to do our work. So how could I buy in to a difference in filing time being the reason? We all knew that the American patent system is "the first to discover" not "the first to file" as is most of Europe. After all, that is why we all kept Lab notebooks detailing our work, notebooks that were signed, dated and witnessed every day to prove when we had discovered.

As a result I found Seth Schulman's detailed account of the Bell patent extremely exciting. He meticulously lays out all the circumstantial evidence indicating something really smells about the process that granted the Bell patent over the Gray patent. And he presents a very convincing smoking gun that indicates there had to have been a payoff at the patent office or something like the Watergate burglers at that time.

Skeptics might say "how could 132 years go by without anyone noticing all of this?" Well the smoking gun was protected by the Bell family until 1976, and only made available to the general public in 1999. No one unrelated ever saw Bell's lab notebook until then

Some who read this of course won't be convinced; saying the evidence doesn't fit so you must acquit. But I encourage anyone who has worked with the Telephone or other means of communication, read it for yourself and make up your own mind.

Those familiar with the history of the telephone are well aware that the key patent for the telephone was filed at the US patent office independently by Elisha Gray and Alexander Graham Bell on the same day in 1877. The conventional interpretation of this remarkable coincidence is that it was indeed a remarkable coincidence, or that somehow Gray tried to steal Bell's idea. The thesis of this book is that Bell (or one of his backers) was the likely thief and that Bell's patent was awarded through what may have been the greatest patent fraud in history. These are strong charges, but as the author shows, they are not new. In the years that followed this remarkable dual filing there were ten years of litigation and a congressional investigation aimed at sorting out who had the rightful claim as the father of the telephone. The author cites several other books that claim that Gray, not Bell was the inventor of the telephone. The author's key original contribution to this investigation was an analysis of Bell's laboratory notebook (long hidden from public view by the Bell family). This notebook contains a sketch of the telephone that is very similar to the one used by Gray in his filing, but it appears in Bell's notebook only AFTER Gray's and Bell's filings. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Bell was experimenting with the successful technique described by Gray prior to a trip that Bell took to Washington, during which time both he and Gray made their filings. Now as in the 19th century, the priority of an invention under US patent law (I hold 15 US patents so this is an area with which I have some knowledge) is based on the date that the idea was conceived, not the date at which a patent is applied for. This is why patent notebooks are kept and Bell's notebook does not support the case that he developed the telephone before Gray. On the contrary, Bell's notebook points to his involvement in a monumental fraud. The author cites a clear motive for fraud and many other curious occurrences that lay behind Bell's filing, including a deposition by the patent examiner in charge of the case that states that, in violation of the law, he showed Bell Gray's filing. I will not cite the many other factors that led the author to the conclusion that Bell, not Gray was guilty of fraud (some are covered in previous reviews), but suffices to say I think that the case against Bell is rather strong, strong enough to raise real questions concerning the accepted history of the development of the telephone.

Shulman is a journalist, not a historian, and the book reflects this. Rather than just being a chronological examination of the history, the book is written from the standpoint of the author's quest to understand who, if anyone, stole what from whom. Thus, about half the book is concerned with the process by which Shulman came to his conclusions and his learning how a professional historian should approach his subject. Interspersed with this is his evocation of Bell's life, Bell's work with the deaf, Bell's scientific investigations of the telegraph and telephone, and finally the possible motivation that may have led to his involvement in a blatant fraud.

I would have given the book 5 stars instead of only 4 were it not for a curious omission. The key court case (the Dowd patent case) is mentioned in several places, but is never (in my opinion at least) sufficiently presented. Bell prevailed over Gray's backers (Western Electric Co.) and as part of the settlement Western Electric was required to publicly state that Bell was the inventor of the telephone. Why, if the evidence against Bell was strong (even without the patent notebook, which was then not available) did Western Electric agree to make such a strong statement of Bell's priority over Gray and what if anything did Western Electric get from the settlement? This statement forms the bedrock of the Bell version of history. Without a clear discussion of why this statement was given, I got the impression that I was hearing from only one side of the case.

This book will be of interest to those interested in the history of technology, 19th century history and to the life and times of Alexander Graham Bell. The writing is clear and the book is a quick read. It may, however, raise the ire of Bell partisans (see some of the one star reviews), but even they will learn something if they approach this subject with an open mind.

This book provides overwhelming evidence that Alexander Graham Bell did not invent the telephone.The inventor of the telephone was Elisha Gray.Elisha Gray was a highly regarded electrical researcher.His telephone design was based on a process he called liquid transmission(liquid transmitter).Gray was a generally recognized American expert in this approach.In contrast,Shulman's examination of ALL of Bell's lab books and notes on his research work on the telephone shows that there is NO mention of any such process involving electrical current.The sketch of Gray's invention ,which was submitted with his patent claim,is practically identical to the same sketch submitted later in Bell's patent application.There is no question that Bell did not invent the telephone.Gray did.

However,did Bell actually steal Gray's invention or was the theft committed by Bell's financier,, G.G. Hubbard,a wealthy Boston businessman who was bankrolling Bell? Shulman provides overwhelming evidence that Bell was deeply in love with Hubbard's daughter,Mabel,whom he was teaching and would later marry.
The conclusion one reaches is that Hubbard stole the diagram and attached it to Bell's patent application.Shulman himself does not consider who was the actual thief.
This type of behavior should not be at all shocking.Many other such dastardly deeds have been unearthed in the last 40 years,such as Crick and Watson's breaking into Rosalind Franklin's locked lab in order to obtain copies of her x ray photographs of the double helix structure of DNA(RNA)or Einstein refusing to acknowledge the role of his wife ,Meliva,in his four 1904 papers.

The story of Alexander Graham Bell and the invention of the "speaking telegraph" is well known. The author is a journalist who specializes in science and technology. He spent a year at MIT doing research on Bell and Thomas Alva Edison. Edison's 1,093 patents set a record that still stands for an individual (p.8). Bell wanted to invent a telegraph that would transmit tones for multiple telegraphy over one wire. Shulman noted a new idea for March 8, 1877 in Bell's journal (p.23). How did this happen? Was it connected to Bell's trip to Washington (p.25)? The Patent Office found "interference" from overlapping inventions (p.29). Why did the Patent Office swiftly grant the telephone patent to Bell (p.31)? Bell's telephone transmitter was a copy of Elisha Gray's device (p.35)! Thomas Edison's carbon button transmitter perfected the telephone (p.176).

Chapter 6 tells of Bell's association with a wealthy and politically powerful patron Gardiner Greene Hubbard. Hubbard had tried to "nationalize" the Western Union monopoly to reduce high prices (pp.67-68). A new patent would allow a more efficient competitor to Western Union. Improved municipal services created wealth in real estate (p.70). Shulman explains why Gray's patent was logged in after Bell's patent: first in, last out (pp.104-105). The date of the claim was irrelevant, it was who was first to invent. Chapter 11 explains why Elisha Gray was the first inventor of the telephone (p.137). Testimony by the Patent Office Examiner is in Chapter 12. Chapter 13 has the strongest argument that Bell's mention of variable resistance was derived from Gray's patent (p.155). Chapter 14 tells how the historical record was revised and whitewashed (pp.164-165). Science textbooks are not all reliable (pp.166-167). The story about Bell calling Watson was not told by Bell or any contemporary (p.171). It was created many years later (p.172). [It sneaks in the use of battery acid.]

Bell's telephone was demonstrated at the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia and was a success. The telephone patent was the most lucrative. Shulman presented his findings at a Dibner Institute seminar. He explains Bell's disinterest in further technical development (p.202) or the lawsuit (p.203). The judgment in the Dowd case might have been different if Bell's notebooks had been introduced as evidence (p.208). "History is messy" (p.212). The 'Acknowledgments' thank the many who helped him.

Length:: 1:47 Mins

Quick 90 second review outlining the strengths and weaknesses, and a recommendation for Seth Shulman's provocative tale of the invention of the telephone.

Who invented the telephone? Perhaps a multiple choice College Board question:

A. Alexander Graham Bell
B. Elisha Gray
C. Philipp Reis
D. Aleck Graham Bell
E. All of the above

After you read this book you will select: E. All of the above.

Seth Shulman studies the documents and reconstructs the period on and around February 14, 1876 when the patent applications for the telephone were filed in the United States patent office in Washington, D.C. This is not a trivial event since this patent for the telephone is regarded as the most valuable patent ever issued. Another surprising fact is that neither inventor envisioned the modern telephone with the transmission of speech. Rather, all were trying to invent a method for simultaneously transmitting multiple telegraph messages over a single wire.

This is a fascinating story about the protection of intellectual property and the history of scientific discovery which will appeal to a wide audience.

This well written book is satisfying on a number of levels: It's a first rate detective story; it paints a wonderful picture of America's social and economic life in the 1800s; it underlines the audacity and greed that has and always will exist when huge fortunes are being created; and last and most important it gives a final answer to the question of who really invented the telephone. I didn't know that the creator of the telephone was even a question and that's perhaps the books greatest virtue, it recreates an incredible event that might have been lost and never heard.

This is an excellent book. I bought it hoping it would give me (a retired electrical engineer with more than a dozen patents) some understanding of the telephone's genesis, which I knew to be a complicated tale with claims that Bell didn't deserve the credit. Frankly I was hoping for a good story and Shulman delivers. He lays out the twists and turns of this story in a remarkably clear narrative, but this is not just another retelling of the telephone story.

Shulman started working on this book only because he made a startling discovery in Bell's lab notebooks. He found that Bell's sketch of his first (functioning) telephone transmitter was nearly identical to a sketch drawn by Elisha Gray in his (supposedly) secret filing with patent office a month earlier. And even more suspiciously Bell had drawn the sketch in his notebook just days after returning from Washington where he had conferred with his patent lawyers and the patent examiner. Shulman has researched in depth if, how, who, and why fraud was committed in the patenting of the telephone, with close attention to how things were later explained in court depositions and testimony. The picture Shulman draws is very convincing that major hanky panky (fraud) occurred in Bell's patenting of the telephone. Shulman lays out the case that Bell had a strong motive (love first, money second) to go along with the fraud, even though he many not have initiated it, and as Shulman argues, his shame and need to conceal his use of Gray's idea nicely explains many of his later actions that have always been puzzling. It all hangs together very well. The case for patent fraud is overwhelming, and Shulman draws the appropriate conclusions.

So is Bell essentially just a crook who stole Gray's design and deserves no credit? Well it's easy to jump to this conclusion after reading this book, but there's another side to this story. For starters read the Wikipedia article: 'Elisha Gray and Alexander Bell Telephone Controversy'. It explains, based on facts fully consistent with Shulman's book, why (in their opinion) Bell did not steal Gray's invention. My opinion, after reading Bell's patents, researching the design of the first US telephones, and doing some reading of Bell's notebooks (available online from the Library of Congress) is that while it appears that Bell stole Gray's idea in the legal sense (via patent fraud), he didn't steal it in the engineering sense.

The undisputed fact is that Bell and his partners started the telephone business in the US with a Bell designed electromagnetic telephone. By modern standards it was primitive (weak, distorted, and only good for 10-20 miles or so), and it lasted in the marketplace less than two years before being replaced by a telephone much closer to modern phones with a variable resistance carbon transmitter. On the other hand the Bell design was simple (it was a combo receiver/transmitter), easy to manufacture, and most importantly it worked well enough so that thousands of people put down their money to buy or rent one.

Note Bell's electromagnetic telephone design was indisputably his own design. It had nothing to do with the famous seven (disputed) paragraphs written in the patent margin, which described the concept of a variable resistance transmitter. The variable resistance transmitter required another year of development work (by Edison, Blake and others) and was not introduced into the market (by Western Electric) until about a year after Bell's phone business began.

So did Bell 'invent' the telephone? The early phone (and associated telephone exchanges) were the work of Bell, Edison, Blake, and others, but Bell by using a simple, low performance design of his own was able to get to market a year ahead of his competitors and get the US telephone business off the ground. So if there is to be a 'single' inventor, Bell (by virtue of his being first) is the inventor of the telephone.

Does Shulman really consider himself a journalist? I don't know where to begin in the litany of offenses committed by the author. My personal favorite is his audacious claim that Bell chose his beloved Cape Breton estate to escape from the suspicious glare of colleagues in the U.S. Ridiculous! Everyone knows Bell chose Beinn Bhreagh for its ressemblance to his native land and its simple, yet stunning, beauty.

Again and again Shulman villainizes Bell, ascribing the worst possible motives to his actions while simultaneously canonizing poor Elisha Gray - hard done by til' the bitter end according to Shulman. For just one (of dozens) of examples Shulman criticizes (I'm being euphemistic here) Bell for not crediting the work of German Reis in his own work on the telephone. But Shulman never shares that burden with Gray. Did he think Gray just magically conceived of the telephone one day? Surely he was aware of Reis's work as well, but Shulman chooses to ignore this, as he ignores most of the historical facts in this case.

I've never read any of Shulman's other work but another reviewer suggests this is his typical pattern - attempt to discredit worthy inventors (see for example his attempt to tear down the wings of the Wright Brothers).

Shoddy, shoddy, shoddy!

Seth Shulman's book exploring the invention of the telephone is an eye-opener. Alexander Graham Bell was a highly respected and seemingly honorable man. But, it would seem, the drive to be rich and remembered can derail the most honorable soul. Mr. Shulman has uncovered the obvious (to history) theft of the telephone from Elisha Gray. One can only imagine the money that must have changed hands to make this happen. Mr. Shulman has created a beautiful first-rate adventure out of an historical event with a real-life winner and loser - with millions of dollars at stake. I highly recommend this book and his previous book, "Unlocking the Sky", which shows how the Wright Brothers, after making the world's first controlled airplane flight, lose their engineering instinct to the desire to control the development and marketing of the airplane - and find out that trying to put the genie back in the bottle is very much like herding cats. I'm hoping that Mr. Shulman will have the time to write a book about Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison and their parallel tracks in history. I'll be the first in line to buy it!