Smith and Storrow had three main arguments that never were, and never can be electrically transmitted, previous to the patent of Mr. Bell." responsibilities he had carried for twelve years. Storrow, in a These three men were the defenders of the Bell patents. As Vail built up compared, in action, to a rapid-firing Gatling gun; while Smith was a His brain was keen and incisive; and some of his briefs will be studied confounded the mob of pretenders. The second was the historical fact as long as the art of telephony exists. He might fairly have been hundred in 1878 to eighty thousand in 1910. a sentence, he fell to the floor, overcome by sickness and the Usually, he closed the case, and he was immensely effective as he would His death, like his life, was dramatic. He was on his feet in the that the most eminent electrical scientists of Europe and America courtroom, battling against an infringer, when, in the middle of declaim, in his deep voice: "I submit, Your Honor, that the literature could be, answered. Fifty or more of the most eminent lawyers of that up the superstructure of the Bell defence. He was a master of details. in an orgy of speculative competition. Smith prepared the comprehensive Bell's clear, straightforward story of HOW HE DID IT, which rebuked and place. And he has seen the number of electrical patents grow from a few different way, was fully as indispensable as Smith. It was he who built day tried to demolish these arguments, and failed. The first was plan of defence. By his sagacity and experience he was enabled to hundred-ton cannon, and Lockwood was the maker of the ammunition. of the world does not afford a passage which states how the human voice the young telephone business, they held it from being torn to shreds mark out the general principles upon which Bell had a right to stand.