The Edison phonograph monthly (Dec 1914-Dec 1915)

EDISON PHONOGRAPH MONTHLY, SEPTEMBER, 1915 11 the Victor Co. or with any one else that they would sell these goods only at certain prices. The Court, therefore, found that this case came squarely within the principles of the Sanatogen case as determined by the Supreme Court and dismissed the suit. A recent case of much interest to our dealers, although perhaps of not much relevance since it relates to an unpatented article, is that of Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. vs. Cream of Wheat Co., decided by Judge Hough of the U. S. District Court, New York, on July 20, 1915. In this case the Cream of Wheat Co. did not enter into any contracts with its jobbers or dealers but it had requested them to maintain the retail price of its packages of Cream of Wheat at 14 cents. The Tea Co. at first had maintained this price but it afterwards cut the price to 12 cents. The Cream of Wheat Co. thereupon declined to sell any more of its goods to the Tea Co. and also requested its jobbers to refuse to fill orders from the Tea Co. A suit was thereupon brought by the Tea Co. under the new Clayton Act to restrain the Cream of Wheat Co. from carrying on its system, or in other words, to compel them to sell to the Tea Co. at carload price, but the Court after careful consideration of the entire situation concluded that there had been no unreasonable restraint of trade by the defendant, and that in refusing to sell to the plaintiff and requesting its customers not to deal with the plaintiff, it was well within its rights. In support of the statement that the Sanatogen case does not decide that a manufacturer cannot enter into a valid agreement with his jobbers in which the price at which they shall dispose of patented articles is provided for, reference should be made to the latest decision upon this subject, which is the case of United States vs. Keystone Watchcase Co., decided by Judges Buffington, Hunt and McPherson, U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, on jaiiurry 2, 1915, 218 Fed. 502. This case was a suit in equity brought by the United States praying for an injunction against the defendant under the Sherman Act. One of the acts complained of was the manner in which the defendant had marketed the Howard watch, a patented article. These watches were sold by the Watchcase Co. to its jobbers under a license agreement in which the resale price was specified. There were no agreements made with the retailers. Under these circumstances, the court made the following ruling: "Certain material parts of the Howard watch were covered by bona fide patents taken out and used for a lawful purpose, and as the owner of these patents the Company had the right to make a direct agreement with the jobbers whereby a minimum price was fixed at which the jobber might sell. F>ement v. Harrow Co., 186 U. S. 70. 22 Sup. Ct. 747, 46 L. Ed. 10S8; Henry v. Dick Co., 224 U. S. 1, 32 Sup. Ct. 364, 56 L. 'Ed. 645, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 880." Since agreements with the jobbers are entirely lawful, it would seem that similar agreements with the retail dealers are also proper, the jobber being merely an instrumentality through which the manufacturer supplies the retailer, and existing only for such purpose, and this is particularly true where, as under the Edison system, the jobber is required to strictly confine his dealings to regularly licensed dealers. Therefore our dealers, as patent licensees, are well within their rights in entering into agreements in which the retail prices of our goods are specified, the same being patented, and our system being the same in principle as those approved in the National Harrow and Keystone Watchcase Co. cases, the latter of which is subsequent to the Peruna and Sanatogen cases. THE BIRTH OF THE PHONOGRAPH AND A COMPARISON OF EDISON AND BERLINER METHODS Synopsis of an Address by A. M. Kennedy at the Dealers' Convention Delivered on Aug. gth. SOME years ago a magazine published an alleged account of Mr. Edison's invention of the phonograph in which he was supposed to be sitting idly with a chisel in one hand. Having drawn the edge of this across a brass plate he heard a sound; then he noticed the equi-distant marks on the plate, and so conceived the idea that it would be possible to record and reproduce sound. This story was, of course, only the product of an ingenious mind. While a newsboy on a Michigan railroad, Mr. Edison saved the life of a child of one of the railroad telegraph operators, who, from gratitude, taught Edison telegraphy. It was but natural that Edison's first invention should be in the telegraphic line. Among these was a telegraph-relay for sending messages rapidly, having two plates carrying paper discs arranged to revolve, one at low and the other at high speed. The message was engraved on the low speed disc, which was transferred to the high speed plate, from which the dots and dashes were sent over the line at an augumented speed. While experimenting with this Mr. Edison found that if the Morse signal for a letter were repeated a number of times on the paper disc and revolved rapidly under the sending stylus, a musical note would be obtained. From this he got the idea that it would be possible to record and reproduce sounds. He drew a sketch of his first phonograph as a cylinder machine because this would give uniform velocity to the surface. The first model was made in 1877. and in contrast with most of his other