March 10, 1876: The first bi-directional telephone message is sent by Alexander Graham Bell.
The message?
"Mr. Watson, come here, I want to see you."
The previous year Bell had sent a uni-directional message: "Do you understand what I say?" and Watson rushed in and announced "Yes!"
LEARN MORE ABOUT BELL.
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE PHONE.
What I want to know is: Why wasn’t the Bell Phone Company (remember that?) known colloquially as "Pa Bell"?
Author: Jimmy Akin
Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."
View all posts by Jimmy Akin
Jimmy:
In all seriousness, you really should know better.
The first telephone was invented hy an Italian, Antionio Meucci, NOT by Alexander Bell!
Bell actually rhipped off the idea from Meucci, using Meucci’s own labs.
Even our Government has acknowledged this. See:
http://hnn.us/articles/802.html
I think an apology to Italian Americans, or perhaps just a simple edit, is in order.
Thank you.
Saying that Bell stole the invention, just because they worked in the same facility, is a bit of a reach. There were lots of people that claimed to have invented the telephone. However, no one can deny that Bell got it patented first, and was also the first to turn the invention into a marketable service. If Meucci’s claim is true, he should have moved ahead and gotten it patented, as he did his other inventions, rather than just getting a caveat. Or, at the very minimum, paid the tiny fee to get the caveat extended so no one else could get a patent. But he didn’t.
Personally, I believe it was an invention whose time had come. A lot of talented people were working on it, including Bell and Meucci. But Bell got it patented and marketed, so he deserves the credit.
The only reason Meucci did not get his invention patented was because a) as an Italian immigrant who could never even learned English well, he did not understand the complex American business world, and b) he could not afford the patent.
As our House of Representatives has put it:
“Whereas Antonio Meucci, the great Italian inventor, had a career that was both extraordinary and tragic;
“Whereas, upon immigrating to New York, Meucci continued to work with ceaseless vigor on a project he had begun in Havana, Cuba, an invention he later called the `teletrofono’, involving electronic communications;
“Whereas Meucci set up a rudimentary communications link in his Staten Island home that connected the basement with the first floor, and later, when his wife began to suffer from crippling arthritis, he created a permanent link between his lab and his wife’s second floor bedroom;
“Whereas, having exhausted most of his life’s savings in pursuing his work, Meucci was unable to commercialize his invention, though he demonstrated his invention in 1860 and had a description of it published in New York’s Italian language newspaper;
“Whereas Meucci never learned English well enough to navigate the complex American business community;
“Whereas Meucci was unable to raise sufficient funds to pay his way through the patent application process, and thus had to settle for a caveat, a one year renewable notice of an impending patent, which was first filed on December 28, 1871;
“Whereas Meucci later learned that the Western Union affiliate laboratory reportedly lost his working models, and Meucci, who at this point was living on public assistance, was unable to renew the caveat after 1874;
“Whereas in March 1876, Alexander Graham Bell, who conducted experiments in the same laboratory where Meucci’s materials had been stored, was granted a patent and was thereafter credited with inventing the telephone;
“Whereas on January 13, 1887, the Government of the United States moved to annul the patent issued to Bell on the grounds of fraud and misrepresentation, a case that the Supreme Court found viable and remanded for trial;
“Whereas Meucci died in October 1889, the Bell patent expired in January 1893, and the case was discontinued as moot without ever reaching the underlying issue of the true inventor of the telephone entitled to the patent; and
“Whereas if Meucci had been able to pay the $10 fee to maintain the caveat after 1874, no patent could have been issued to Bell: Now, therefore, be it
“Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the life and achievements of Antonio Meucci should be recognized, and his work in the invention of the telephone should be acknowledged.”
See also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4434963,00.html
I think it goes back to one of those “gender in language” things. A company would be Feminine and thus “Ma Bell”. Or maybe it’s like Ships are female. “I’m givin’ er all she’s got, captain!”
But either way, it sounds a WHOLE lot better than “Ma Meucci”. Just couldn’t see myself writing a check each month to “MeucciSouth”.
An interesting conversation, my friend. But also the type of conversation that tends to go in circles. I’ll state my case and then respect Rule #2.
There is no doubt (in my mind) that:
1. Meucci’s life had its share of tragedy.
2. That he was a talented inventor.
3. That he made contributions in the invention of the telephone.
It is also true that there is no small amount of ethnic pride involved in matters such as these. Political bodies, such as the House of Representatives, are not well respected for their ability to stand fast in the face of special interest groups.
The House Resolution correctly states that Meucci’s work should be acknowledged. No reasonable person would disagree with that. However it does not say that he invented the telephone. Nor does it say that Bell stole anything, or that he should not be recognized as the inventor of the telephone.
The case against Bell’s patent never received a judgement, as Meucci passed away before it was heard. Also, Meucci was far from the only person to sue Bell over the invention. There were some 600 suits against him from people claiming he stole their work. However, in order to have done all this stealing, Bell would have had to not only steal the invention. He would have had to fabricate all his notes, journals and failed prototypes as well. He would have had to create a fake paper tail that covered a period of years. Possible? Sure. Likely? Not really.
It seems that Meucci could have developed a prototype for the telephone. But developing a prototype is not the same as inventing. We have an established set of patent procedures in place to assist people in recording the dates and circumstances of their prototypes. Between 1860 (when he supposedly demonstrated the prototype) and 1876 (when Bell received his patent), Meucci applied for and received 11 patents for other inventions. Meucci held a total of 14 patents. (source). So he certainly had sufficient opportunity to patent the telephone, if he really had a working prototype before Bell.
Going through the patent process is as much a part of invention as developing a prototype. It ensures that the person receives the credit for their work. If a person, for whatever reason, fails to go through that process then they are failing to safe guard the means by which they can document their accomplishments. Meucci knew this as well as anyone, and better than most.
Perhaps he didn’t realize the potential of the telephone, and so he chose to patent other inventions. Perhaps his prototype didn’t work very well. Did Meucci develop a prototype before Bell? Did someone else develop a prototype before Meucci? It’s really impossible for us to know at this point. What we DO KNOW is that Bell developed a prototype and then went through all the steps of documentation necessary to prove it. He completed the process of invention, and he completed them first. As icing on the cake, he also made it commercially successful.
I don’t think that we can, in good conscience, strip Bell of his accomplishments based on such sketchy information.
The first call was actually made here. Of course, you weren’t raised in Platteville like I was.
Last post was mine.
mzf
I understand that the second phone call was received only a few minutes after the first and that it was placed by a mysterious caller who inquired if Mr. Watson was happy with his current phone service provider.
The statement of general Grant using Capt beebe’s line is interesting. when my great uncle Elmer Beebe passed away he had an article which I have about Mr. Beebe selling out to Bell