Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.