4. First case study – the subdivision of the light - HM Treasury

F05 Ch4 Subdivision of the light.doc 

05/04/2006 19:34:00 

Technological roulette – a multi-disciplinary study of the dynamics of innovation in electrical, electronic 

and communications engineering. 

4. First case study – the subdivision of the light 

4. First case study – 

the subdivision of the light 

“The subdivision of the electric light is impossible of attainment, and the disintegration of 

carbon when made incandescent rules it out of consideration for small burners.” 

Hippolyte Fontaine 

Electric Lighting 1877 

“It is however easily shown (and that is by the application of perfectly definite and wellknown 

scientific laws) that in a circuit where the electromotive force is constant, and we insert 

additional lamps, then, when these lamps are joined up in one circuit, i.e., in series, the light 

varies inversely as the square of the number of lamps in circuit, and that joined up in multiple 

arc the light diminishes as the cube of the number inserted’. Hence a sub-division of the 

electric light is an absoluteignis fatuus.” 

William H. Preece 

Lecture to the Royal Institution 

15 February 1879 

“The electric light is only economical when one machine is used to produce a single 

light.” 

William H. Preece 

Evidence to the Playfair Committee 1879 

“I ...... bought all the transactions of the gas engineering societies, etc., all the back volumes 

of the gas journals. Having obtained the data and investigated the gas-jet distribution in New 

York by actual observations, I made up my mind that the problem of the sub-division of the 

electric current could be solved and made commercial.” 

Thomas A. Edison 

1878 

“Electric lighting is no great boon to anyone who has money enough to buy a sufficient 

number of candles and to pay servants to attend to them. It is the cheap cloth, the cheap 

cotton and rayon fabric, boots, motorcars and so on that are the typical achievements of 

capitalist production, and not as a rule improvements that would mean much to the rich 

man. Queen Elizabeth owned silk stockings. The capitalist achievement does not typically 

consist in providing more silk stockings for queens but in bringing them within the reach of 

factory girls in return for steadily decreasing amounts of effort.” 

Joseph Schumpeter 

Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, 1950 

60


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.1 Introduction 

To test the hypothesis that the factors which underpin and control the progress of 

innovation have an hierarchical structure and an influence which depends on the 

temporal context, the first case study considers the humble light bulb, the invention 

which laid the foundation for the explosive development of the electricity industry in the 

last two decades of the nineteenth century. Following a broadly chronological path, it 

surveys the evolution of the incandescent filament lamp, which was to become the 

dominant artificial light source for the next hundred years. Using the knowledge-base at 

the beginning of the nineteenth century as a starting point, it examines milestones along 

the way to the “subdivision of the light”, a problem which was, in the 1870s, considered 

by established scientific experts of the time, to be insoluble. 

A chronology of key events Appendix 2 is expanded in the following description 

which is then analysed, paradigm by paradigm, to determine the relative significance of 

the factors which contributed to the success of this major innovation. Because many of 

the components are common, the sister industries of communications and electronics are 

also included in the chronology and will be considered later. 

In order to lay the technological foundations, the narrative looks at early sources 

of artificial light – those based on a chemically-generated flame and the electrically- 

powered precursors of the incandescent filament. This is important because it sets out 

the technological context and economic motivation for the key inventions which set the 

paradigm changes in train and subsequently ensured their success. 

Brief biographies of the inventors are presented to draw out factors which may 

have contributed to their achievements. Amongst this cohort are two (Göbel and Swan) 

who made the invention before conditions were apposite, two (Swan, on his second 

attempt, and Edison) who brought the innovation to a successful conclusion and five 

(Farmer, Maxim, Lane Fox, Sawyer and Man) who were capable of similar 

achievement, but either arrived too late on the scene or lacked one or more of the 

attributes necessary to drive the innovation onwards. 

A description of the creation of the industrial infrastructure provides an indication 

of latent technical, financial, social and legislative problems associated with the 

development of the innovation. Subsequent technological developments are also 

61


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




considered, to illustrate how physical properties of materials were responsible for 

success and failure in carrying the paradigm forward to the ultimate substitution of 

refractory metals for carbon in the fabrication of the lamp filament. 

The case study also investigates the role played by secondary vectors in changing 

the structure of the market from free competition, first into a monopoly, and 

subsequently into an oligopoly which persisted for the next hundred years or so. 

Amongst these influences were the divergence of national patent laws and key litigation 

which the innovators used as part of their commercial strategies. 

The play and counter-play of cartels, competition law and physical regulation are 

interwoven as are the various aspects of finance, including raising of capital and use of 

intellectual property rights as collateral, marketing strategies and advertising techniques. 

A description of communications shows how knowledge was diffused at the relevant 

time. Finally, the key steps in the evolution of the technological paradigms are extracted 

to complete the picture. 

62


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.2 Electrical science in the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries 

Prior to the beginning of the nineteenth 

century, knowledge of electricity and 

magnetism was based mainly on observation of 

natural phenomena. The ancients were familiar 

with the electrostatic properties of insulating 

materials such as sulphur and amber and the 

north-seeking ability of lodestone. William 

Gilbert, physician to Queen Elizabeth1, 

published an early treatise, De Magnete, in 

1600. In 1672, Otto von Güricke generated a 

static charge by means of frictional machine 

consisting of a sulphur ball and a rotating 

mechanism. In 1745 Muschenbroek and 

Cunæus invented the Leyden jar as a means of 

storing such charges. 

Fig. 4.1 An electrician’s laboratory, about 1782 

from the Complete Treatise of Electricity by T. Cavallo 

Fig. 1 Cylindrical influence machine Fig. 5 Henley’s universal discharger 

Fig. 2 Prime conductor with Henley’s quadrant Fig. 7 Henley’s quadrant electrometer 

electrometer Fig. 10 Battery of Leyden jars 

Fig. 4 Stand of electrometers of various types Fig. 11 Simple Leyden jar, with discharger 

63 

Jarvis 1955 a 

Jarvis 1955a 

Fig. 4.2 Magnetising a bar lying on the 

meridian from William Gilbert’s De 

Magnete 

JJehl 1937 

Fig. 4.3 Von Güricke’s sulphur ball 

(1692)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The empirical nature of the observations is apparent from reports of experiments 

carried out by researchers. Typical of these is a description by Prof. Allemand of a 

Leyden phial made from an ordinary beer glass 

“There is an experiment that Mr. l’Allemand has tried; he electrified a tin tube, by 

means of a glass globe ; he then took in his left hand a glass full of water, in which was 

dipped the end of a wire; the other end of this wire touched the electrified tin tube: He then 

touched, with a finger of his right hand, the electrified tube, and drew a spark from it, when 

at the same instant he felt a most violent shock all over his body. The pain has not been 

always equally sharp, but he says, that the first time he lost the use of his breath for some 

moments ; and he then felt so intense a pain all along his right arm, that he at first 

apprehended ill consequences from it; tho’ it soon went off without inconvenience.” 

“It is to be remarked, that in this experiment he stood simply upon the floor, and not 

upon the cakes of resin. It does not succeed with all glasses, and tho’ he has tried several, 

he has had perfect success with none but those of Bohemia. He has tried English glasses 

without any effect. That glass with which it best succeeded was a beer glass.” 

Philosophical Transactions vol. X p 321 

Benjamin Franklin’s experiments, in June 1752, on attempting to draw down 

“electrical fire” from the clouds by means of a kite are well documented, but the hazards 

of the combination of a high voltage and a low source impedance were not foreseen. Later 

in the same year, Professor Richman of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences connected 

an iron rod on the roof of his house to a Leyden jar and an electrometer which showed the 

strength of charge by means of a small plummet. During a thunderstorm, this indicated 

signs of electrical disturbance. Following a tremendous clap of thunder, he bent forward 

to read the gnomon, whereupon an electrical discharge struck his body, killing him in an 

Munro1890, p63 

instant. 

Fig. 4.4 The experiments of Galvani (1771) 

from his book De Viribus Electricitatis 

Jarvis 1955a 

64 

The physiological effect of 

an electrical voltage on muscular 

action laid the basis for the science 

of electrodynamics, following 

Galvani’s famous experiments on 

frog’s legs in 1771. The 

apocryphal tale relates 

Munro1890, p93 how, during the 

preparation of a nourishing frog-leg 

soup for Signora Galvani, an 

assistant noticed a convulsion


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




when one of the limbs was touched with a scalpel. Galvani later observed a similar 

reaction in legs which were hung by copper skewers from an iron rail. It fell to 

Allessandro Volta to give the correct 

explanation for this phenomenon, viz. 

that the contact between dissimilar 

metals gave rise to an electrical 

potential which acted as a stimulus for 

the muscular action. 

Volta went on to devise a 

practical means of utilising this effect – 

his couronne des tasses, a battery 

consisting of a number of cups 

containing a saline solution into which 

were dipped plates of zinc and silver. 

The silver plate of one cup was 

connected to the zinc plate of the next 

cup, the terminal zinc and silver plates 

of the battery serving as a source from 

which a continuous electrical current 

could be drawn. He subsequently 

constructed his pile consisting of 

alternating plates of dissimilar metals separated by discs of moistened material. 

The results of Volta’s research were communicated in a letter to Sir Joseph Banks, 

President of the Royal Society of London and read by him to the Society on 26th June 

1800, Houston 1894,p107 stimulating a host of inventions and discoveries in the field of 

electrochemistry. 

In 1801, Humphry Davy was appointed as the director of the laboratory of the Royal 

Institution which had been founded by Count Rumford two years earlier. He used a 

Voltaic pile to perform electrolysis on a wide variety of chemical compounds. 

Davy’s brother noted Davy 1836, p446 that among these early experiments were several 

investigations of luminous properties of the electric current. These were recorded in a 

65 

Fig. 4.5 Volta’sCouronne des tasses 

Fig. 4.6 Volta’s pile 

from Phil Trans Roy Soc (1800) 

Fleming1921 

Jarvis 1955a


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Fig. 4.7 Sir Humphry Davy demonstrates the electric arc at the Royal Institution 

From Scientific American 29 March 1884 

paper entitled “An Account of Some Experiments on Galvanic Electricity made in the 

Theatre of the Royal Institution.” 

“The apparatus employed in these experiments was composed of 150 series of plates of 

copper and zinc of 4 inches square, and 50 of zinc and silver of the same size. The metals 

were carefully cemented into four boxes of wood in regular order, after the manner adopted 

by Mr. Cruickshank, and the fluid made use of was water combined with about 1/100 part of 

its weight of nitric acid.” 

“The shock taken from the batteries in combination by the moistened hands, was not so 

powerful but that it could be received without any permanently disagreeable effects. 

Charges were readily communicated by means of them to coated jars, and to a battery; but 

in this case the effects produced by the electricity were much less distinct than in the case of 

immediate application.” 

“When the circuit in the batteries was completed by means of small knobs of brass, the 

spark perceived was of a dazzling brightness, and in apparent diameter at least 1/8 of an 

inch. It was perceived only at the moment of the contact of the metals, and it was 

accompanied by a noise or snap.” 

“When instead of the metals, pieces of well-burned charcoal were employed, the spark 

was still larger and of a vivid whiteness, an evident combustion was produced, the charcoal 

remained red hot for some time after the contact and threw off bright corruscations.” 

“Four inches of steel wire 1/170 of an inch in diameter, on being placed in the circuit 

became intensely white hot at the point of connection, and burnt with great vividness being 

at the same time red throughout the whole of their extent.” 

Collected Works of Sir Humphry Davy Vol. 11 p211 

Davy was not satisfied with his results and persuaded patrons of the Royal 

Institution to subscribe for a huge battery made of 2000 individual cells. This was 

66 

Jehl 1937


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




completed by 1809. With this high-voltage source, he obtained more intensive effects. 

Davy 1836, p446 

“When the communication between the points positively and negatively electrified was 

made in air, rarefied in the receiver of the air-pump, the distance at which the discharge took 

place increased as the exhaustion was made; and when the atmosphere in the vessel supported 

only one-fourth of an inch of mercury in the barometrical gauge, the sparks passed through a 

space of nearly half an inch; and, by withdrawing the points from each other, the discharge was 

made through six or seven inches, producing a most beautiful corruscation of purple light.” 

Thus Davy’s original investigations laid the foundations for the arc, incandescent 

and gas discharge lamps. His results were widely disseminated to other chemists and 

physicists, but the work did not progress beyond the laboratory for another quarter 

Houston 1894, p120 

century. 

4.3 The nineteenth century environment 

“The days of my youth extend backwards to the dark ages, for I was born when the 

rushlight, the tallow dip or the solitary blaze of the hearth were the common means of 

indoor lighting. In the chambers of the great, the wax candle, or exceptionally a multiplicity 

of them, relieved the gloom on state occasions; but as a rule, the common people, wanting 

the inducement of indoor brightness such as we enjoy, went to bed soon after sunset.” 

Joseph Swan 

In the nineteenth century, national rather than international influences were 

dominant. The balance of power was significantly different from that of the present day. 

Britain, supported by its empire, led the world; the USA was engaged in the travail of 

carving a nation from the individual states; Bismarck was in process of welding 

Germany into a federation; revolutionary change was taking place in France and Japan 

had not yet emerged from centuries of isolation. 

Communications were slow. Sir Rowland Hill founded the Penny Post in 1840, 

but a general tariff was not adopted in France until 1849 and USA until 1863. Whilst a 

local letter posted in London would be delivered the same day, one from New York 

might take two weeks or more. The electric telegraph had supplanted the semaphore as 

a means of long distance communication, but the telephone was not developed until 

after 1870. Although railways had almost reached their peak in terms of track-mileage 

by the last quarter of the century, the sailing ship was still the principal means of long 

haul travel and the horse provided the motive power for short-distance hops. In finance, 

67


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




capital markets were developing and limitation of liability made its début with the 

Companies Act, 1862. 

Britain established a unitary patent system in place of the separate regimes for 

England, Ireland and Scotland by means of the Patent Law Reform Act, 1852, 

incorporating many principles which would be recognised by the modern practitioner, 

but universal rights of priority for overseas filings did not come into force until the Paris 

Convention in 1883, although there were some reciprocal arrangements between 

individual states. Johnson 1866 Patent systems were well established in USA, France and 

the German States, although, in the latter a strong anti-monopolistic attitude prevailed, 

and eighty per cent of patent applications failed to be granted. In Holland and 

Switzerland, however, there was a strong reaction against monopoly characterised by an 

absence of patent laws, which, in the Netherlands, were suspended from 1869 to 1912. 

In industry, the most usual market structure was that of imperfect free 

competition. Cartels had not acquired the influence which they were to exert at the 

beginning of the twentieth century and, in consequence, competition laws were non- 

existent. Government procurement was not yet a factor in guiding the path of 

technological development and the influence of authority remained confined to the 

physical and financial regulation of the means of supply. 

Then, as now, access to the remedies of the law was the prerogative of the rich. 

At the commencement of the last quarter of the nineteenth century, a successful barrister 

Hibbert 1974 , p19 

could earn £15,000 per annum, equivalent to £600,000 today. 

4.4 The luminous flame 

We have received the following communication from Mr. Henry Willmott:- 

“Having 30 years of experience of billiard life, I venture to give my opinion as regards 

lighting billiard rooms by electricity in preference to gas. It was thought some years ago an 

impossible feat to light a room satisfactorily in this way, and I also shared that opinion; but this 

system has lately been adopted in a new room, The Belgrave, Spur-street, Leicester-square, 

and is in every way advantageous on the score of cleanliness and cost, and what is more 

important, health. The flickering so often observed with gas is entirely removed. Had this 

great invention been known and acted on sooner it might have prevented the loss of many lives 

of those players who are fond of the game, and also spared many markers who have 

succumbed in consequence of the foul atmosphere arising from burnt gas, more particularly in 

the winter months. Under the new system my room is as cool at the end of the evening as it is 

at the commencement, and gentlemen customers who frequent the room speak in the highest 

terms of its comfort. Any gentlemen who would like to visit it can have ocular demonstration 

of these facts. I may further add that the whole establishment is lit up in a similar manner.” 

Electrician 11 May 1888, p4 

68


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




In the early days of the nineteenth century, the individual was dependent on his 

own resources rather than public utilities for power supplies. The tallow dip and the 

wax candle were the principal artificial sources of light. Gas began to acquire 

significance with the establishment of watch committees and the responsibility of 

parishes for public lighting. Where gas was available, it was the “bats-wing” and the 

“fish-tail” burner which acted as a light source. 

Coal gas was obtained by the distillation of hydrogen-rich 

bituminous coals. The distillates comprised light hydrocarbons, such 

as methane, acetylene and ethylene, other combustible gases – 

hydrogen and carbon monoxide – non-combustibles – nitrogen and 

carbon dioxide – and impurities, such as hydrogen sulphide, ammonia, 

carbon disulphide and other organic sulphur compounds, which were 

extracted by the purification process. 

Burners for lighting purposes created a carbon-rich flame in which glowing 

particles of soot became incandescent and generated radiation. Indeed, the first quality- 

control criteria for gas were based on luminous efficiency and not calorific value. 

The discovery of oil in Pennsylvania in 1859 and the development of large-scale 

Fürst 1926 

Fig 4.9 Paraffin lamp with 

adjustable wick 

petroleum production and refining, led to a new and 

economical source of light, the kerosene lamp, which, for a 

while during the 1860s, arrested the expansion of gas. 

The gas industry responded by devising practical 

processes for making water gas by blowing steam through 

red-hot coke, which was a by-product of coal-gas 

manufacture and of little value. 

Water gas had the advantage of lower marginal costs. 

It could be enriched by adding oil vapours to give a high 

illuminating power. Mixed with coal gas, this gave a high 

quality, low-cost illuminant and it became common to 

integrate water-gas facilities with coal gas plants. 

The introduction of the arc lamp had little effect on 

69 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.8 Fishtail 

burner


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




the gas companies since it was largely used for public lighting and did not compete with 

the major portion of a gas company’s business. Street lighting, the major application for 

arc lights, often was unprofitable for the gas companies and was undertaken because local 

authorities demanded it as a pre-condition to granting a franchise. In many instances, the 

supply of gas for street lighting was used as a loss leader to obtain access to the more 

lucrative private consumer market. Incandescent electric lighting, on the other hand, 

threatened the gas industry’s major source of revenue and, to meet this threat, companies 

were forced to lower prices. 

The measures taken by the gas companies provided only a short respite. The 

development of the electrical industry would eventually completely take over this market 

so the only salvation was for the gas suppliers to develop alternative markets. They also 

added electric lighting to their offering in many instances. 

4.4.1 Gas lighting practice as a model for incandescent lamp installations 

“Object, Edison to effect exact 

imitation of all done by gas so as to 

replace lighting by gas by lighting by 

electricity... Edison’s great effort not 

to make a large light or a blinding 

light but a small light having the 

mildness of gas..” 

Passer1953. p82 

Edison had been stimulated to work 

on the electric light by a demonstration of a 

Wallace-Farmer arc-light installation but he 

set his sights on the domestic market which 

was currently served by the gas industry. 

Before starting on the development of the 

incandescent lamps, he made a detailed 

study of the gas industry. In order to 

apprise himself about the production and 

distribution of gas, he acquired all of the 

available literature relating to gas- 

engineering. 

70 

Friedel 1986 

Fig. 4.10 Edison’s calculations on gas v. electricity 

(March 1879)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“His notebooks relating specifically to “electricity vs. gas as general illuminant” covered an 

astounding range of inquiry and comment, They show that he sought to develop an electrical 

system which in simplicity would imitate gas and in addition would meet all requirements of 

natural, artificial and commercial conditions. He recognised that, ‘a general system of 

distribution was the only possible means of economical illumination,’ and dismissed isolated 

plant operation as being outside consideration. Luther Stieringer, an expert gas engineer, said 

that Edison knew more about gas than any other man he ever met. ” 

71 

Jehl 1937, p215 

Edison’s objective was to develop a close analogue of the gas system of 

illumination, since, by adopting a product-substitution strategy, he would face minimal 

consumer resistance. 

He had planned to set up a central power station in New York City as a 

demonstration facility using the Edison Electric Light Company as the vehicle for the 

exercise. However, in order to comply with regulations controlling use of the streets for 

laying the cables underground, it was necessary for the corporation to be organised under 

the gas statutes. He therefore established the Edison Electric Illuminating Company of 

New York which was incorporated on December 17, 1880. Passer1953, p90 In April 1881, the 

city authorities granted a franchise to this company, giving it permission to lay cables in 

New York streets. 

Edison chose to place his first commercial central station on Pearl Street in lower 

Manhattan so that it could serve the Wall Street district and prove to the financial 

community that his lighting system was practical, economical, and superior to gas. The 

generating capacity of the Pearl Street station, measured by the number of lights it could 

serve, was determined on the basis of a survey which had been carried out to ascertain the 

number of gas jets in operation, hour-by-hour, up to 3 o’clock in the morning. A further 

census provided information on the number of gas jets in each building. The transmission 

network was then designed by constructing a miniature analogue network of conductors, 

with a battery simulating the central station and resistors, the lights. 

Edison’s pricing policy was constrained by the selling price of gas and had been 

determined on the basis of answers to a questionnaire in which gas consumers almost 

universally stated they would use electric light in preference to gas if its price were the


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




same. To verify his calculations, Edison collected twenty-four books of gas bills paid by 

consumers in the district. 

72


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Edison took three steps to facilitate the changeover for potential customers. He first 

obtained an undertaking from the New York Board of Fire Underwriters that insurance 

rates would be unaffected if a Board inspector examined the wiring before connection was 

made to the street main. Secondly, the Illuminating company made it known every 

household in the district that the company would bear the cost of making the connection 

between the street main and the house wiring and the expense incurred in wiring the 

building until the consumer had decided whether or not he wanted the electric light 

permanently. Any consumer who, after a period of trial, decided not to continue with the 

Edison light would not be charged for the wiring or the connection. Finally, in order to 

prove the reliability of the system, there was to be a three-month moratorium after 

connection before charging commenced. 

The output of the Edison lamp was 16-candle power, matching that of the ordinary 

gas jet. The Illuminating Company billed on a monthly basis, like the gas companies and 

the lamps were usually referred to as burners. The customer was billed for light-hours 

consumed instead of for electric energy to avoid introducing terminology with which the 

consumer would not be familiar. 

Some years later, when electric lighting was well established, it had a reciprocal 

influence on the gas-distribution system as gas engineers adopted the electric feeder-main 

principle in order to equalise gas pressure at the jets without incurring the expense of 

larger pipes. 

4.5 Sources based on refractory oxides 

4.5.1 Limelight 

In June 1824, at the instigation of 

a Select Committee of the House of 

Commons, a survey of Ireland was 

undertaken by the Royal Engineers. A 

high-intensity source of illumination 

was required to pinpoint observation 

Rees 1978 

Fig. 4.11 Oxy-hydrogen limelight lamp (1830) 

posts and, after a series of experiments, Lieutenant Thomas Drummond built a device in 

which a ball of quicklime 3 /8 inch in diameter was heated in a stream of oxygen directed 

73


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




through the flame of a spirit lamp. With hydrogen substituted for alcohol, the light 

source was widely adopted for use in theatres and for magic lanterns. 

74 

Rees 1978, p42 

In 1839 Alexander Cruikshanks developed the technique by making a platinum- 

basket mantle covered with lime. J.J.W. Watson (1853) patented a lamp in which 

hydrogen and oxygen, obtained by electrolysis of water, were ignited in contact with an 

incombustible substance such as spongy platinum or a mixture of lime, graphite, and 

pipe clay, heating it until it emitted visible radiation. The light from the radiator could 

be increased by surrounding it with a coil of fine platinum wire. Colour was produced 

by steeping the carrier in strontium nitrate or other salts. Tessie du Motay (1867) tried 

to increase the light output by substituting zirconia for lime. 

In 1878 St. George Lane-Fox attempted to extend the principle to electric lighting 

by coating the surface of platinum-iridium alloy with various materials, including lime 

and magnesia, to produce greater luminosity. GB Pat 4043/1878 However, such devices were 

doomed to failure because the metal filaments would not survive the high temperatures 

required to raise the coating to white heat. 

4.5.2 The Welsbach mantle 

The Austrian, Carl Auer von Welsbach, working in R.W. Bunsen’s laboratory in 

1883, used a gas heat source, in conjunction with a cotton mantle which he impregnated 

with a mixture of thorium oxide and other rare earth compounds, including cerium 

oxide. [1900] RPC 141, 237 He employed a different mixture of gas 

from the high-hydrocarbon ratio customarily employed to 

produce a bright flame. When placed near a gas flame, the 

mantle became incandescent and gave off a steady, white light. 

This light was not only vastly superior in quality to that from 

an open gas flame but also much more economical as the 

mantle increased the light that could be obtained from a given 

quantity of gas about sixfold. By increasing the proportion of 

air in the mixture, a much hotter flame was obtained. The 

successful introduction of the gas mantle reduced the cost of 

gas lighting by about two-thirds and slowed down the 

Fürst 1926 

Fig.4.12 Pendant gas 

mantle


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Bright 1949, p127 

advance of electric lighting. 

In 1900, there were ten million Welsbach mantles in use in the United States, 

compared with about 20m incandescent electric lamps. The gas mantle persisted until the 

middle of the twentieth century before it finally was completelysuperseded. 

4.5.3 The Nernst lamp 

In 1897, Walter Nernst, the chemistry professor at the University of Göttingen, 

while he was investigating the theory of light emission from the Welsbach mantle, 

devised a novel lamp in which rare earth oxides were heated electrically, achieving a 

specific efficiency of 2 watt and an operating life of 400 hours. Fürst 1926 The Nernst 

radiator was a small rod about 25mm long and 0.75mm in diameter. As in the Auer 

mantle, it was a mixture of oxides of metals such as magnesium, calcium, and the rare 

earths. Many combinations were possible. One early mixture was composed of 

85 per cent zirconia and 15 per cent yttria. They were powdered, made into a paste with 

an organic binder, extruded through dies, and dried. 

Later a mixture of the oxides of thorium, zirconium, 

yttrium, and cerium was used. These materials, 

which are insulators at room temperature, have a high 

negative temperature coefficient of resistance. As 

they have a high melting point and are also heat- 

resistant in free air, they can be raised to white heat 

and thus possess ideal properties as radiation sources. 

The radiator rod was connected between the 

ends of the current supply electrodes and did not need 

to be placed in an air-free enclosure, which greatly 

simplified manufacture. In operation, however, the 

lamp suffered the drawback that the radiator rod needed to be warmed to around 700°C 

before it would permit a current to pass. With the earliest Nernst lamps this pre-heating 

was performed with matches or specially-constructed spirit burners. This was a major 

drawback for the users, the majority of whom knew nothing of its economic advantages 

and thus reacted with surprise at a lamp which required ignition like an oil lamp. 

75 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.13 Construction of 

Nernst’s lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Allgemeine Elektrizitäts Gesellschaft (AEG), which acquired rights to 

Nernst’s invention, circumvented this problem by providing the radiator rod with an 

auxiliary heater winding. They also connected a ballast resistor in series with the rod to 

limit current flow to a safe level. This ballast resistor was formed from fine iron wire in 

an evacuated enclosure. As iron has a positive temperature coefficient, its resistance 

rose as it warmed up and thus it could serve as a buffer against current variations. 

The schematic view (Fig. 4.13) illustrates a Nernst lamp with the heater winding 

and ballast resistor. The glass sphere was open to the outer atmosphere as it had only to 

protect the illuminating rod against mechanical shock. The illuminating rod could be 

positioned horizontally or vertically. The socket had the customary Edison screw and 

the lamps could therefore be used as a plug-in replacement for all carbon filament 

lamps. 

Supply current was fed to the contact plate of the socket which was connected to 

the iron yoke of a relay. The current path was divided. One path went by way of the 

armature of the electromagnet and contact A to a horizontally-positioned heating coil 

and from there to the mains return lead by way of the socket screw. The heating coil, 

which was wound round the magnesia radiator rod, was made of heat-resistant material 

enclosing a platinum wire. A second current path led by way of the solenoid winding 

and a ballast resistor to a contact on one end of the magnesia radiator rod and thence 

through the rod to the socket screw and the return supply main. 

On switch-on, the current flowed only by the first path as the rod had too high a 

resistance. During the pre-heating cycle, the radiator resistance fell due to the negative 

temperature coefficient of the material, causing a current to flow in the solenoid, and 

cutting off current flow to the heater element. At this stage the resistance of the radiator 

rod had fallen to a sufficiently low value for the self-heating effect of the current 

flowing through it to continue to raise the temperature to the working value, at which 

stage the ballast resistor effectively prevented further increase. 

76


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Lamps of this type took at least a minute to reach operating conditions and, under 

critical conditions, were provided with one or more carbon filament lamps which were 

coupled to the heating coil circuit and extinguished when the solenoid operated. 

The Nernst lamp was manufactured in ratings of 16 to 250 candles. It was 

positioned between the arc lamp and the ordinary incandescent lamp and could perform 

certain lighting tasks more effectively than either. Its efficiency advantage over carbon 

lamps led to a fairly wide take-up, both in Europe and the United States. When the 

Nernst lamp was first introduced and promoted, central-station operators were uneasy 

about the effect of its greater efficiency on their revenues. They feared that their 

customers would simply substitute Nernst lamps for carbon lamps completely and that 

the sale of energy would decline. In practice this did not happen because the Nernst 

lamp could not satisfactorily replace all carbon lamps, and, in those applications in 

which it could, users took advantage of its greater efficiency and economy to provide 

higher levels of illumination rather than to reduce lighting expenditure. By 1912, 

however, the ductile tungsten filament lamp gave further improvements in efficiency for 

general lighting purposes and the Nernst lamp was, in turn, superseded, although it was 

still in use as late as 1926 for specialist applications such as a powerful point light 

source for instrumentation. 

Fürst 1926 

Nernst applied for German, British, and other patents on his invention in 1897, 

and patents on a number of improvements issued in 1899. He withdrew from active 

participation in the final development and commercialisation of his invention and sold 

the patents to Allgemeine Elektrizitäts Gesellschaft. AEG retained for itself sole selling 

rights for Germany and some other European countries, but disposed of the patents 

elsewhere. George Westinghouse obtained the rights for the United States and Canada 

and set up the Nernst Lamp Company to make the new lamp. This was the only major 

new incandescent lamp introduced in the United States between 1897 and 1912 that was 

not controlled by General Electric. Ganz & Company secured the rights for Austria, 

Hungary, and Italy. The Nernst Electric Light Company, Ltd., was formed in England to 

acquire the rights for Australia, Africa, Asia, South America, and Central America, 

whilst the rights for Britain itself were sold to GEC. The validity of the Nernst patents 

77


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




was upheld in Germany but was not seriously challenged outside that territory. 

Bright 1949, p171 

4.6 The arc lamp 

4.6.1 Early developments 

In its simplest form, the electric arc consists of a pair of electrodes 

connected to an electric power supply. In operation, the tips of the 

electrodes are brought into contact, completing the circuit and causing a 

current to flow. The tips which are then separated slightly so that 

current continues to flow. This maintains the electrodes at white heat. 

In the form first developed by Davy, the arc was impracticable as 

a source of illumination. The electrodes were fabricated from wood 

charcoal and were rapidly consumed by combustion. They had to be 

repositioned by hand, which often could not be achieved with sufficient 

precision, with the consequence that the arc was extinguished after a 

short time. Furthermore, the voltaic pile was not a viable source of 

current when a durable supply was required. 

Towards the end of the 1830s, Daniell, Grove and Bunsen developed forms of 

primary cell and this attracted renewed attention to the possibilities of electric lighting. In 

1841, Deleuil attempted to illuminate the Place de la 

Concorde in Paris by means of charcoal electrode arc 

lamps. Consumption of the carbons was inhibited by 

placing them in air-free glass bells, but the proposal 

was only moderately successful. In 1844, Foucault, 

who later used a pendulum to demonstrate the 

rotation of the Earth, effected a considerable 

improvement by constructing the electrodes from 

harder retort carbon, which was manufactured from 

coke, a by-product of the preparation of gas from 

coal. British patents for the purification of carbon 

were granted to Church in 1845 and to Greener and 

78 

Fürst1926 

Fig. 4.14 

Basic electric 

arc 

Furst 1926 

Fig. 4.15 Dubosq’s sunrise effect 

(1849)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Jarvis 1955b, p149 

Staite in 1846. 

Attention turned to the adjustment of the position of the carbons, and a succession of 

workers devised ever more complex arrangements based around clockwork, gravity and 

solenoid actuators. One of the first commercial uses of these was as a light source in the 

French theatre by Dubosq during a performance of Meyerbeer’s opera The Prophet in the 

Paris Opera House in 1849. Rees1978, p77 Sunrise was simulated by means of an arc lamp 

focused by a mirror on to a projection screen. Supply was from a battery of Bunsen cells 

which were more powerful than the voltaic cells which Davy 

used. Dubosq’s arc consisted of two carbon rods connected 

to a clockwork mechanism. The current which made the arc 

also passed though a solenoid. When the gap between the 

electrodes became too great, the solenoid released the 

escapement, permitting the clockwork mechanism to 

advance the carbons until the arc was restored. 

Archerau simplified Dubosq’s construction. 

Fürst 1926, p61 In his arrangement, the positive carbon was held 

on a cross member which was supported on two pillars. The 

negative carbon was positioned on the upper end of a rod 

which slid within a hole in a wooden cylinder. The carrier 

for the negative carbon was in its lower part copper and its 

upper part iron. Around the wooden cylinder was wound a 

conductive wire. The carrier rod for the negative carbon 

ended in a wheel which was balanced on a wire, tensioned 

by a counterweight. This weight was just sufficient to 

force the negative carbon into contact with the positive 

carbon. The iron portion of the carrier rod acted as a 

solenoid. When the current flowed, it created a magnetic 

field which attracted the iron part of the carrier, striking the 

arc. 

Meanwhile, parallel developments were taking place 

in England. Jarvis 1955b, p150 In 1846, Staite, working with a 

79 

Jarvis 1955b 

Fig. 4.17 Staite and Petrie’s 

clockwork mechanism 

(1848) 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.16 Archerau’s selfregulating 

arc (1848)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Sunderland clock- and watch-maker, Carland, produced a lamp with a fixed-rate 

clockwork mechanism for advancing the carbons. This was not successful as it did not 

take account of the variability of the rate of consumption of the electrodes. His 1847 

model compensated for this by utilising the radiation of heat from the arc to control the 

positioning mechanism. In this year, Staite formed an alliance with Petrie, a consulting 

engineer who had been retained by Staite’s financial backers to report on his work. Petrie 

designed a solenoid control which regulated the carbon advancement and improved the 

accuracyof their positioning. 

Contemporary workers were much exercised about the cost of primary batteries as 

a power source. Grove calculated that the expenditure on consumables was of the order 

of two shillings an hour. He carried out photometric tests which showed that light 

sources supplied in this way were probably impracticable for street lighting, but might 

be viable for specialist applications such as lighthouses and signalling. 

In order to produce current by the voltaic pile it was necessary to dissolve zinc in 

an acid. Calculation demonstrated the efficient power of three generally-used forms of 

batteries would be equal, when 100 pairs of Smee’s, 55 pairs of Daniell’s, or 33 pairs of 

Grove’s cells were used, and that the expense of working such batteries using a standard 

of 60 grains of zinc in each cell per hour, would be about 6d., 7½d., and 8d., 

respectively. Since the number of heat units produced by the combustion of a pound of 

zinc is much smaller than the number produced by the combustion of a pound of carbon, 

in about the ratio of 1,300 to 8,000, unless zinc became cheaper than coal in a 

corresponding ratio, and sulphuric acid cheaper than ordinary air, an electric motor 

driven by such means would be priced out of contention. 

80 

Houston 1894, p123 

As a result of the increase in activity relating to the arc, a committee was set up to 

consider its suitability for general purposes, including navigation. They reported 

adversely, on the basis of the cost of battery supply. This led to a loss of confidence, with 

a consequent abandonment of many schemes. Staite lost the bulk of his capital when the 

Patent Electric Light Company, a supplier of chemical batteries in which he had a large 

Jarvis 1955b, p152 

investment, failed.


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




With the death of Staite, initiative in the development of the arc lamp passed to 

France. Improvements by V.L.M. Serrin and J. Dubosq concentrated on the clockwork 

feed mechanism for the electrodes. In 1873, Serrin lamps were installed in the Paris 

factory which manufactured Gramme dynamos, electromechanical generators which were 

Jarvis 1957, p314 

underpinning the expansion of the use of electricity. 

4.6.2 Jablochkoff Candle 

The Russian officer-engineer Paul Jablochkoff, who 

lived in Paris, was the first to construct an arc lamp in such a 

form that a number could be connected together in a direct 

current circuit. His arc lamp burner, introduced in 1876, had 

the appearance of a candle. The two carbons, 4mm in 

diameter, were no longer positioned opposite one another, but 

arranged in parallel fashion, separated by a layer of kaolin and 

with brass electrodes attached to their lower ends. The points 

of the electrodes were bridged with a layer of graphite to 

permit an initial current to flow to strike the arc. 

When the arc was lit, the separating mass in the vicinity 

of the points melted and evaporated, the incandescent gases increasing 

the light radiation. After striking, the equi-spaced carbons burned 

evenly so that a mechanical feed was not required. 

Although the Jablochkoff Candle had the advantage of absence 

of moving parts, it only burned for about twenty minutes before the 

carbons had to be replaced. Frequently, also the arc was extinguished 

prematurely and, as there was no means of re-striking it, this 

increased the operating costs. 

The Jablochkoff Candle achieved great publicity when it was 

used for public lighting in Paris at the time of the 1881 Electricity 

Exhibition, but, due to its lack of reliability and high running costs, it 

soon fell into disuse. 

81 

Fleming1921 

Fig. 4.19 Jablochkoff 

Candle lamp fitting 

Fürst 1926 


Jablochkoff Candle 

(1876)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.6.3 Enclosed arc 

The dominant drawback of the arc lamp was the attrition of the electrodes and most 

improvements were concerned either with compensating for wear by re-positioning the 

tips or with the substitution of more durable materials to reduce the rate of erosion. With 

the enclosed arc GB Pat 15499/1893 the electrodes were enclosed in a glass cylinder which was 

made as small as possible and hermetically sealed so that the oxygen within the envelope 

was rapidly consumed and could not be replenished. This combination of features greatly 

[1905] RPC 277 

increased the life of the carbons. 

Fig. 4.20 Jandus enclosed arc lamps (1893) 

82 

[1910]RPC 209


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.6.4 Flaming arc 

With carbon electrodes, great attention had to be paid to uniformity of the material, 

so that the arc would burn evenly and give a steady light. It was found that impregnating 

the carbon electrodes with metallic salts, particularly fluorides and chlorides, enhanced the 

illuminating power of the arc due to the spectral emission of the heated salts. 

83 

[1910]RPC 209 

These lamps were known as flaming arcs. They suffered from the drawback that the 

positioning of the electrodes was extremely critical, which led to a need for special control 

mechanisms 

GB Pat 7649/1895 

downward and horizontal feed arrangements. 

4.6.5 Tungsten arc 

Following the introduction of 

metallic filaments for incandescent 

lamps, the arc lamp declined in 

popularity and was retained only for 

specialist applications, such as 

searchlights and cinema projection 

featuring downward-pointing electrodes with combined 

Fig. 4.21 Westinghouse flaming arc lamp mechanism (1902) 

Fleming 1921 

Fig. 4.23 Pointolite 

tungsten electrode arc 

lamp 

Fleming 1921 

Fig. 4.22 Gaumont handregulated 

arc lamp used for 

projection lanterns 

[1905] RPC277


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




lanterns which, for optical reasons, required an intensive point source. 

There was one further manifestation of the arc lamp, which drew on the materials 

technology recently developed for the incandescent lamp. This was the tungsten electrode 

arc lamp (the Pointolite), which had tungsten ball electrodes in a sealed glass envelope. It 

required special control circuitry which, when the arc was struck, passed a current which 

caused the tungsten balls to become incandescent. These lamps continue to find 

application in geometrically-critical applications such as the illumination of specimens for 

observation through a microscope. 

4.7 The incandescent filament lamp 

“If credit is due to any one for the introduction of the incandescent lamp it is to Swan, 

Lane-Fox and Stearn for doing the work, and to Edison for making a noise about it. There are, 

no doubt, many subordinates who have done good work, but whose names naturally do not 

come before the public; such for instance, are Mr. F. Topham, Mr. Stearn’s ingenious assistant. 

Incandescent lamp makers are also indirectly indebted to Mr. W. Crookes for work on high 

vacua. It is probable that incandescent lamp makers, though they may not be able to tell 

scientific men much about very high vacua, may be able to show them how to make very much 

simpler and better pumps than those used in the laboratory; yet this is but slight return to 

Sprengel, Geissler and Crookes.” 

J. Swinburne 

Incandescent Lamp Manufacture 

Electrician 26.10.1886 pp60-61 

As with the arc lamp, the origins of 

the incandescent lamp lie with the lectures 

and demonstrations of Sir Humphry Davy at 

the Royal Institution in London. Using the 

voltaic batteries provided by his patrons, he 

passed large currents through metallic wires 

and thin rods of carbon, causing them to 

glow white hot. He performed his 

experiment in air which oxidised the materials he used, causing their failure – after a 

very short time in the case of the soft charcoal which was available to him. A 

contemporary, de la Rue, enclosed a coil of platinum wire in glass tubing from which 

part of the air had been exhausted. 

84 

JJehl 1937 

Fig. 4.24 Grove’s platinum coiled-wire 

lamp (1840)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The technique was essentially a scientific curiosity until viable batteries became 

available with the work of Daniell, Grove and Bunsen. Jobard, in 1838, and Grove, in 

1840, gave demonstrations of incandescence, but did not produce a practical lighting 

system. 

An English patent was granted to Frederick De Moleyns in 1841 for a lamp which 

consisted of an exhausted spherical glass globe containing two coils of platinum wire 

contacted by powdered charcoal. 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.25 De Moleyn’s lamp 

(1841) 

J.W. Starr, a young American from 

Cincinnati, gained an English patent 

EN Pat 10919/1845 which disclosed two forms of 

incandescent lamp. One embodiment 

comprised a carbon rod in a Torricellian 

vacuum whilst the other had a burner 

formed from a strip of leaf-platinum. 

Reports of this lamp provided Swan with 

his initial stimulus to investigate the 

possibilities of electric lighting. 

Staite and Petrie, who were pioneers 

of the arc, constructed glow lamps in the period 1848-9 using platinum 

and iridium as the burner materials. Swan encountered these 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.27 Lodyguine’s 

graphite burner lamp 

manifestations at a demonstration of a 

platino-iridium alloy-based lamp given by Staite at the 

Sunderland Athenaeum and by Richardson during 

subsequent lectures at the same place. 

During the 1850s and 1860s, various workers 

performed sporadic experiments on the incandescent lamp 

using mainly platinum, iridium or carbon as their burner. 

No viable lamp was produced, firstly because they all 

suffered the problem encountered during the development 

of the arc lamp, that no economic source of electricity was 

available, and, secondly, it was not possible to create a high 

85 

Fürst 1926 


Starr’s carbon 

rod lamp 

(1845)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




enough vacuum with the equipment then available, with the result that the burner was 

rapidly consumed by residual oxygen in the enclosure. 

The invention of an improved mercury vacuum pump by Herman Sprengel, a 

German working in England in 1865, and the development of a practical dynamo 

GB Pat 917/1870 by Z.T. Gramme, a Belgian working in Paris, were the foundations of 

increased activity on the incandescent lamp during the 1870s. In 1875, Sir William 

Crookes, during experiments with the radiometer, used the Sprengel pump to exhaust 

glass bulbs, a technique which would spill over into lighting practice. 

There was a flurry of activity in Russia by Lodyguine, Kosloff, Konn and 

Bouliguine and Fontaine in France, who worked with differing forms of carbon burner, 

but, again, no viable lighting system emerged. 

4.7.1 The incandescent-arc lamp 

Contemporaneously with the increased activity on the incandescent lamp, a hybrid 

technology emerged. This was the incandescent-arc lamp in which an electric current 

was passed through a rod of carbon of small diameter pressing against a disc or block of 

carbon burning in the open air. Due to the increased resistance at the point of contact, 

the end of the carbon rod became incandescent. Different variants were constructed and 

they exhibited greater efficiency than the enclosed incandescent lamp at that time, but 

activity fell away after Swan and Edison announced their carbon filament lamps at the 

end of the decade. 

Fürst 1926, p87 

Fürst1926 

Fig. 4.28 Konn’s demountable rod lamp 

86 

Fürst 1926] 

Fig. 4.29 Rennier’s and Ducretet’s semiincandescent 

lamps


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.2 The first inventor of the carbon filament lamp – Heinrich Göbel 

Heinrich Göbel was born on 20 April 1818 at Springe near Hannover, where his 

father had a small chocolate factory. Fürst 1926, p117 After his schooling in Springe, the son 

worked in the family business, but, as this occupation did not give him much 

satisfaction, he sought to occupy himself with scientific things and mechanical 

apparatus. After this he became, in short order, a pharmacist’s apprentice, clockmaker 

and optician and practised these professions on his own account in Springe. His skills 

brought him the opportunity to construct apparatus for the technical high school and this 

engendered in him a great passion for physics. 

His interest in scientific investigations was encouraged by Professor 

Mönighausen, who worked as a private tutor in the neighbourhood. Göbel set up his 

physical apparatus and acquired knowledge by undertaking experiments and discussing 

questions with his tutor. Mönighausen initiated him in the construction of the mercury 

barometer and showed him how an incandescent electric lamp would operate in the 

partial vacuum. This stimulation subsequently guided Göbel to the fabrication of a 

practical glow lamp. He also learned from Mönighausen how to make galvanic batteries 

and electromagnetic equipment. 

87


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Fig. 4.30 Göbel’s carbon filament lamps 

Göbel utilised the technical knowledge, which he had acquired, by building 

optical apparatus, barometers and clocks which found a good market in Hannover. 

Eventually, though, in 1848, at the age of thirty, he decided to seek his fortune in the 

USA and emigrated to New York with his wife and two children. He landed after a 

horrendous journey in a sailing ship which took more than three months and set up a 

small shop in the poor district of Monroe Street, where he remained for twenty years. 

Three or four years after his arrival in USA, Göbel constructed an eighty-cell zinc- 

carbon battery. Using a pair of carbon electrodes, he set up an arc lamp on the roof of 

his house, an experiment which brought a most unfortunate consequence – he was 

apprehended as an arsonist and brought before the justices. 

Possibly this discouraged Göbel from persisting with the arc lamp. He changed 

course and resumed experiments with the incandescent lamp using the skills which he 

had acquired from his tutor Mönighausen. After various experiments using split hairs, 

he then had a stroke of fortune when he discovered that a carbonised splinter of bamboo 

wood from his walking stick, which he found in the yard attached to his house, served as 

88 

Fürst1926


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




a good conductor of electricity. A carbonised fibre separated from this splinter could be 

made to glow when an electric current flowed through it. He found that by placing such 

fibres in a Torricellian vacuum, which he was easily able to create by means of a 

barometer, he could make a long-lasting light source. 

By this act, Göbel, in 1854, anticipated the practical carbon fibre lamp which 

Edison constructed fifteen years later. In 1855, Göbel set out to construct a number of 

incandescent lamps, mounting the fibres on a frame having a shape between that of a 

meat saw and a hairpin. 

At first, Göbel utilised eau-de-Cologne bottles for the envelope of his glow lamp; 

later he made them from a wide glass tube, which he blew to the required shape. The 

wires which carried current to the bamboo fibre were usually constructed from copper or 

iron. He also used platinum, which he knew made a good seal to glass because of its 

matching expansivity. However, due to the high price he sought to substitute iron for 

the platinum. The lead wires were attached the carbon fibres using a special cement 

derived from black lead and, in order to make good electrical connections, Göbel 

electroplated the contact areas with copper. 

Göbel used the lamps, which he constructed in this way, to illuminate his shop 

display window in Monroe Street. He also mounted one lamp on a wall clock and, using 

special contacts, illuminated it hourly. Later, in court proceedings, many people 

remembered having seen this glow lamp display. 

The lamps had another claim to fame. Using the skills which he had acquired 

before leaving Germany, Göbel built a large telescope with an aperture of 300mm and a 

length of 4.5-6m. This he transported around the New York streets on a small four- 

wheeled cart to study the stars. As part of the attraction, he mounted glow lamps on the 

cart. The current for these lamps was supplied from sixty cells which were carried on 

the cart in two large wooden chests. So long as the batteries were fresh, two or three 

lamps could be left illuminated, whilst a single lamp would burn for around half an 

hour. 

Göbel put on these shows for several years and, in 1881, they attracted the attention 

of a business which was planning to set up the manufacture of glow lamps. The delegates 

were astonished to find a large number of completed lamps, together with a mercury pump 

89


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




and all of the apparatus necessaryfor production. Göbel spent some time in setting up the 

manufacture of carbon fibre lamps, but the company fell into financial difficulties and 

ceased operation. 

Göbel did not utilise his invention further, and, what is more significant, did not 

attempt to patent it. He had a poor command of English, especially written English, and 

did not take much interest in matters which did not concern his small business, although 

he did unsuccessfully attempt to sell his inventions to the Edison Electric Light 

Company in 1882 

Early in 1893 the Beacon Vacuum Pump & Electrical Company of Boston was 

sued by Edison and attempted to avoid an injunction by claiming priority of invention 

for Göbel’s lamps. Bright 1949, p89 During this litigation, the original lamps were produced in 

court, but they were no longer in working order, which is not surprising since it was 

almost forty years from the time of their manufacture. One of the lamps was cracked and 

could no longer hold a vacuum, and, whilst a good vacuum remained in the other lamps, 

the filaments had broken with the passage of several decades. 

In the course of the proceedings all aspects of the manufacture of the lamps were 

diligently investigated. This was a consequence of the antipathy of the expert witnesses, 

the physicist Pope and Professor Cross who both had a negative view of what Göbel had 

achieved. Pope argued that, fifty years previously, Göbel would not have had the technical 

means to create an adequate vacuum to manufacture viable lamps. Professor Elihu 

Thomson was also of this opinion. 

Göbel proved, however, that he was able to pump out the lamps using the same 

technique as he had used for evacuating barometer tubes. A wide glass tube of appropriate 

length, into the end of which was sealed a carbon fibre, was filled completely with 

mercury and then inverted so that the mercury column had a height of 760mm. By this 

simple method, which he learned from the teachings of Mönighausen, he created a 

Torricellian vacuum above the mercury. 

This explanation of the fabrication of the vacuum drew from Pope the further 

objection, that if freshly copper-plated contacts, such as were deposited on the leads of the 

lamp, were allowed to come into contact with mercury for quite a short time, they would 

form an amalgam. He found that there was no trace of mercury in the copper sediment. 

90


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Göbel, on the other hand, was aware that it was necessaryto use chemicallypure mercury 

obtained by multiple distillation and that the evacuation must be performed only in dry 

weather, not when the air was damp. Under these conditions mercury would not form an 

amalgam with copper. 

The other consultant, Professor Cross who was as negative as Pope, concerned 

himself with the construction and thickness of the fibres. Edison had laid claim that he 

was the first to propose the use of carbon in thread-like form, instead of a thin rod as 

hitherto. Cross and Pope remained firm, even with this hindsight, that Göbel’s lamps did 

not anticipate this claim. However, as the fibres which Göbel used, had a diameter of 0.2- 

0.28mm, and in lamps on sale, the fibre thickness varied between 0.38 and 0.127mm, 

whilst the early lamps of Sawyer and Man used carbon rods which varied between around 

1.5 and 1.75mm, the Göbel bamboo fibres might fall within the ambit of the designation 

‘carbonfilaments’ which was used in the claim of the Edison patent. 

Elihu Thomson also made an attack on Göbel’s lamps on the ground that their 

design had a fundamental flaw. Göbel had, with three of his early lamps, utilised thin 

copper or iron wires in place of the platinum which was used for the glass seal on later 

lamps. Thomson’s view was that this made it impossible to achieve a good vacuum and 

thus obtain a satisfactory operating life in the lamps. 

To answer these and similar objections, Göbel was required by the court to 

demonstrate that all of his suggestions were feasible. As a result, a number of lamps were 

made, precisely according to Göbel’s directions, by an expert witness. These lamps then 

underwent life tests and gave burning times of 190 to 245 hours. Although the success of 

these experiments provided a measure of vindication for Göbel, Judge Colt of the United 

States Circuit Court at Boston ruled that the evidence presented was not sufficient to 

invalidate Edison’s patent, and he granted the injunction against the Beacon company on 

February 18, 1893. Göbel died of pneumonia in New York on the 16th December 1893, 

shortly after the proceedings. 

91


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.3 The second inventor of the carbon filament lamp – Joseph Wilson Swan 

Joseph Wilson Swan was born on Halloween in the year 1828. Swan 1929, p9 His 

formal education was limited, but he acquired many practical skills by observation of 

craftsmen, such as tailors, cobblers, glass-blowers and rope-makers, plying their trade. 

As a boy he attended a dame school, and, at this time he first encountered electrical 

phenomena. A family friend was possessor of a Wimshurst machine and its then 

customary accompaniments for performing experiments, an insulating stool, the Leyden 

jar, discharging rods and a brass chain. This aroused an overwhelming interest and 

fostered in Swan a desire to possess electrical apparatus of his own. 

Among his school books was a rudimentary chemistry textbook, written by Hugo 

Reid at an eventful period of chemical history, which had a great influence on him. It set 

out clearly an account of recent investigations which established Dalton’s atomic theory, 

and was illustrated with drawings of apparatus necessary to perform the experiments 

described. It acquainted him with the manipulation of laboratory apparatus and induced 

him to explore the field of chemistry, and pyrotechnics, in particular. 

After leaving school Joseph Swan was articled as an apprentice to a Sunderland firm 

of druggists, Hudson and Osbaldiston. His indentures were for a period of six years, but, 

as both the principals in the firm died within the first three years, he became free, and took 

advantage of the opportunity to join his friend and future brother-in-law John Mawson in 

his business of chemist and druggist at Newcastle. 

During his apprenticeship, Swan took advantage of the educational opportunities 

which came his way. He became a member of the Sunderland Athenaeum and gained 

access to a good library which contained some scientific books and the scientific journals 

of the day, among which were The Electrical Magazine, edited by C. V. Walker and the 

Repertory of Patent Inventions. In the latter he read an account of J.W. Starr’s 

incandescent electric lamp, which was patented in England in 1845. Eng Pat 10919/1845 The 

lamp consisted of a short carbon pencil operating in a vacuum above a column of mercury. 

Samples had been exhibited in London, but were not a commercial success as they 

blackened very rapidly. 

He attended occasional lectures on scientific subjects, chiefly relating to electricity 

and chemistry. One of these was by W.E. Staite who had invented a “regulator lamp”, by 

92


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




means of which he obtained some approach to constancy of the arc light, produced 

between rods of carbon, and he had employed a member of the Carland family (a well- 

known Sunderland family of clock- and watch-makers) to construct his lamp. 

These lectures exerted a strong influence on the youthful Swan who left a 

Swan 1929, p23 

fragmentary record of them. 

“ I heard him lecture several times at Sunderland, and saw all his apparatus. I also heard 

him, in later years, lecture at Newcastle and Carlisle. I remember that in addition to showing 

his lamp, which it was the principal object of his lecture to exhibit and which he proposed 

should be utilised immediately for lighthouse purposes, he also on one occasion, in the 

Athenaeum at Sunderland, illustrated the principle of electric lighting by means of a piece of 

iridio-platinum wire. Besides this, I saw this principle very well illustrated at Richardson’s 

lectures at the same place. This arrested my attention and led me to ponder the question, even 

at this early period, how to produce electric light on this principle, but so as to avoid the use of 

a fusible wire. It was something like a seed sown in my mind, which germinated.” 

“During these three years all my spare time was spent in chemical and electrical 

experiments, carried out for the most part by means of home-made apparatus and appliances. I 

do not know whether it is a general experience or happy chance helping me, but somehow I 

have always been able to utilise, in my experimental work, things that happened to be well 

within my reach and that seemed to offer themselves to me.” 

Swan was often stimulated by chance encounters. One day a wood turner, who had 

a workshop in the neighbourhood, came into Swan’s shop to purchase some copper 

sulphate and showed him an electrotype of a medallion of Napoleon which he had made. 

On hearing an explanation of how the process was carried out, Swan was filled with 

enthusiasm and started to experiment with voltaic cells which had recentlybeen developed 

by a variety of inventors. 

Similarly, a serendipitous sight of a daguerreotype portrait in an engraver’s window 

led to the pursuit of interests in the field of photography. Swan was not content merely to 

follow the lead of others, but made substantial contributions to the developing arts. 

Mawson allowed Swan freedom to pursue his interests. Swan rapidly established 

himself as a consultant in scientific subjects such as photography and, through contacts 

with chemical manufacturers who required technical advice, gradually expanded the 

business activities of the firm. 

At Newcastle Swan struck up friendships with young men of similar interests. They 

met regularly and engaged in debates on scientific questions. The subjects discussed at 

their meetings were chiefly connected with the chemical work which was incidental to 

their employment. On holidays they would visit chemical works together. In his leisure 

93


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




time Swan engaged in experimental work both in connection with electricity and 

photography. 

“........ I discussed with my colleagues the subject of electric lighting, and exhibited to 

them the results of my experiments in the production of carbon filaments made with a view to 

incandescent electric lighting. These chiefly consisted of narrow strips of paper of various 

kinds, which I had carbonised in such a way as entirely to prevent the oxidising action of the 

air upon them, by surrounding them completely in a sufficiently thick wall of charcoal powder 

and heating them to a very high temperature in the biscuit kiln of a pottery. The smaller 

experiments were made in crucibles and the larger in saggars.” 

Swan 1929, p28 

Amongst the techniques he tried for making carbons was a process, well known in 

connection with the manufacture of carbon pencils for arc lamps and for Bunsen cells, of 

saturating the paper or card, and the carbon produced from it, with syrup, treacle, tar, and 

other liquids, which, on being heated, leave a large residue of carbon. Swan 1929, p59 These 

experiments extended over some years, and successful results, as regards the production of 

flexible and strong carbon spirals, had been achieved by 1855. In the course of his 

experiments he noted that the carbon produced from parchmentised paper was 

exceptionally solid in texture, highly elastic and strong. Straight strips could be bent into 

an arch and when dropped on to a hard surface, emitted a metallic ring. 

With these carbons, Swan constructed a lamp using a glass bottle with a wide neck, 

closed with an india-rubber stopper or a bell jar inverted over a sole-plate. From these 

containers the air was exhausted as completely as possible by means of an ordinary 

air-pump with pistons and barrels. By means of a battery of fifty Callan cells he succeeded 

in rendering incandescent a carbon strip about ¼ inch wide, shaped in the form of an arch, 

1½ inches high to the top of the arch. The battery power was not sufficient to make the 

longer strips and spirals incandescent. Due partly to residual air within the container, and 

partly to distortion of the carbon under the action of uneven heating, his strips soon failed. 

Although he had obtained a measure of success, around 1860, Swan abandoned his 

work on electric lighting due to the lack of a sufficiently cheap source of electricity. 

Towards the end of 1858 Swan had commenced to experiment on producing 

photographic prints which were free from the defect of fading Swan 1929, p30 and, in 1864, he 

invented the process of photographic printing that later became known as the “carbon 

process.” 

94


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Swan’s partner, John Mawson, was killed in an industrial accident in 1867, throwing 

the responsibility for all of the activities of the firm on to him and, for the next few years, 

he was left with little freedom for his research activities. What little time he had was spent 

mainly on improvements in photography. 

The business of Mawson & Swan continued to expand, but Swan coped with this by 

delegating management of the various interests to trusted employees. This permitted him 

to devote his attention once again to the development of the electric lamp. 

In the years 1877-8 the daily press, notably the Times Times, 3.6.1878, 26.10.1878 began to 

publish articles on the subject of electric lighting and to discuss the comparative merits of 

the various systems which were becoming available. All of the systems involved the 

principle of lighting by electric arc, a form of illumination well adapted for providing large 

centres of light, but not inherently suited for furnishing a number of small independent 

points of light. No one at this date had succeeded in supplying a practical solution for “the 

subdivision of the electric light,” an over-riding problem in those days of series dynamos 

and arc lighting. Electricians were busily engaged in devising apparatus and systems of 

distribution to overcome this difficulty, which was the principal obstacle to the general 

adoption of electricity for domestic illumination. 

Swan was convinced that the solution of the problem lay in the incandescence in 

vacuo of a thin continuous high-resistance carbon conductor of the type with which he had 

been experimenting intermittently for the past thirty years. Nevertheless, he was still able 

to devote only a small proportion of his time to this matter, due to the demands of the 

business of Mawson and Swan. 

In the autumn of 1878 Swan visited Paris for an International Exhibition of Industry. 

His firm was exhibiting chemicals, including pharmaceutical opium purified by a special 

process which he and Barnard Proctor had recently invented GB Pat 4765/1877 and he also 

wished to further his interest in electric lighting. On this visit he was impressed by a 

display of electric lighting at the Gaiety Theatre. He wrote “The effect is good, but not by 

any means what is wanted for practical use. I am strongly inclined to give my plan for 

dividing the current to the public through the Times.” Swan 1929,p56 Both inside the 

Exhibition, and at the Place and Avenue de l’Opéra, were brilliant displays of arc lights, 

whilst the Magasin du Louvre was illuminated with seventy Jablochkoff candles. 

95


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The invention of the mercury vacuum pump by Hermann Sprengel, in 1865, 

provided a breakthrough in the creation of a vacuum. Following upon this invention, 

William Crookes had, in 1875, exhibited a radiometer, the construction of which required 

a near perfect vacuum. The publication of Crookes’ researches prompted Swan to resume 

his attempts to produce a satisfactory electric lamp by means of an incandescent carbon 

conductor in an evacuated glass container. Swan 1929,p62 Through a chance advertisement 

concerning Crookes’ radiometers, Swan made contact with a young bank clerk in 

Birkenhead, Charles H. Stearn, who had been pursuing investigations which required high 

vacua. 

Ediswan 1949 

Fig. 4.31 Swan carbon filament lamp (1878) 

96 

Swan wished to test his theory that 

strips of carbonised paper made 

incandescent in a very perfect vacuum 

would be indefinitely durable and wrote, 

asking Stearn if he would carry out the 

necessary experiments to establish this 

point. Stearn acceded and commenced to 

investigate a variety of carbon conductors, 

beginning with strips and spirals of 

carbonised paper and cardboard similar to 

those used in Swan’s 1860 experiments. 

Great difficulty was at first experienced in 

making contact to the ends of the carbon 

strip and lead wires. To avoid these manipulative difficulties, other forms of carbon 

conductor were tried. Amongst the variants used were carbon wires, both straight and 

bent in an arch, made of the plastic material commonly used in manufacturing the thicker 

forms of carbon rod used in electric arc lamps. These carbon wires were fitted into small 

platinum sockets. 

One trouble was the rapid erosion and consequent fracture of the incandescent 

carbon; another was the blackening of the lamp bulb by a carbon deposit. The consistency 

of these effects suggested that the carbon of the filament was volatilised under the action 

of the heat. Further investigation showed that, at higher vacua, there was less blackening


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




of the glass. Swan interpreted this observation as indicating that the blackeningwas due to 

the mechanical transport of the carbon particles by the residual air within the container and 

he believed that if the air could be completelyexhausted, this trouble would be overcome. 

Eliminating the final trace of air proved very difficult. Even when the bulb had been 

very completely evacuated, as soon as the current was turned on, and the carbon began to 

glow, the vacuum rapidly deteriorated owing to the release of occluded gases from the 

carbon. Swan and Stearn solved this problem by the expedient of “running on the pumps” 

– the lamp bulb was initially evacuated while the carbon was cold or only heated by a 

flame applied to the bulb from the outside, and then, when a good vacuum had been 

achieved, the filament was gradually raised to operating temperature by passing a strong 

current. The vacuum pump remained connected until all the occluded gases were 

expelled, at which point the bulb was sealed. The vacuum that was created in this way 

was not destroyed when the lamp was put into service; it was also found that the carbon in 

a lamp did not waste away. This important discovery was made before the close of 1878, 

GB Pat 8/1880 

although it was not patented until 1880. 

At a meeting of the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Chemical Society held on 18 December 

1878, Swan exhibited an incandescent carbon lamp, which consisted wholly of a glass 

bulb, pierced with two platinum wires, supporting between them a straight thin carbon 

conductor, 1 /25th inch in diameter. This lamp, after burning for some minutes in his 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.32 Early Swan 

filament lamp with 

connector (1880) 

laboratory, had failed through current overload. The lecture 

was repeated in Sunderland on 17 January 1879 and reported 

in the Sunderland Echo on the following day: “The lecture 

was illustrated by an exhibition of the electric light, electric 

lamps, etc.” 

Swan also made his findings known on 3 February 

1879 during a lecture on electric lighting to an audience of 

over 700 people, presided over by Sir William Armstrong, in 

the lecture theatre of the Literary and Philosophical Society of 

Newcastle. At this lecture he demonstrated a lamp in 

operation. The lecture and demonstration were repeated 

before an audience of about 500 at the Town Hall in 

97


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Gateshead on 12 March 1879. Swan continued to pursue his experiments, directing his 

efforts particularly to the improvement of the carbon conductors, which he obtained from 

Carré of Paris. [1889] RPC 243 at 268 Straight carbons held between two fixed points tended to 

bow at high temperatures, leading him to investigate a hairpin shape which proved 

successful. Eventually he hit upon a process in which cotton was converted by the action 

of sulphuric acid into a plastic, semi-dissolved state. By this treatment, cotton yarn of an 

open texture (such as lamp cotton) became agglutinated, compacted and non-fibrous. On 

drying, it became hard and transparent like catgut, and could be scraped or planed down, 

by drawing through dies, to a wire of circular cross-section which could be bent into 

spirals and arches, and would retain this shape during carbonisation. He called this 

GB Pat 4933/1879 

material “parchmentised thread.” 

The filaments made in this way were formed with enlarged ends, mounted in tiny 

silver or copper sockets and secured with a slip-ring. Later Swan and Charles H. 

Gimingham devised an improved method of making electrical contact between the carbon 

filament and the conducting wires by tubulating the ends of the platinum wires and 

depositing carbon at the point of the junction of the filament and tube. 

By the summer of 1880 Swan was satisfied that lamps made with parchmentised 

cotton filaments were now sufficiently uniform and durable that their manufacture on an 

industrial scale could be contemplated. 

Amongst those whose advice he sought at this juncture was a young electrical 

engineer, R.E.B. Crompton, who was already involved in the devising and manufacture of 

electric arc lamps. Crompton and Swan had not previously met up to that time, but Swan 

had already purchased some arc lamps from Crompton and had corresponded with him on 

the subject of electrical distribution. Swan sent one of his sales representatives to call on 

Crompton who has left the following record in his autobiography. 

“No considerable progress had been made, however, when, early in the year 1880, a 

gentleman called at my office in Mansion House Buildings to say that Mr. Swan of Mawson 

and Swan, the well-known chemists of Newcastle, to whom I had supplied some arc lighting 

plant and dynamos, urgently desired my presence in Newcastle. The matter, he said, was so 

important that he wished me to telegraph to my wife, so that I might leave with him by the 

next train for the north. I accordingly went to Newcastle, where Swan took me into his 

laboratory and showed me twenty small incandescent lamps, which burned very brightly and 

steadily, each having a carbon filament enclosed in a globe, exhausted to a very perfect 

vacuum. He claimed, and I agreed with him, that he had solved the problem of electric light 

for internal illumination. He explained to me that, whereas Edison had been experimenting 

98


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




with various materials – first with incandescent 

platinum wire, and then with carbonized 

filaments, derived from bamboo, enclosed in an 

exhausted bulb – he, Swan, had used cotton 

threads, which he treated by immersion in 

sulphuric acid, so as to turn it partly into 

cellulose, before carbonization. These threads 

or filaments were then enclosed in glass bulbs 

from which the air was thoroughly exhausted by 

a Sprengel pump. This part of the invention, 

he told me, had been worked out for him by 

Stearn, a Liverpool banker, who had for years 

specialized in designing and improving the 

Sprengel vacuum pumps. 

Up to this time I had not supposed that 

the new idea of incandescent lighting was 

likely to pass from the experimental to the 

practical stage, and, in the pamphlet which I 

had written and published a short time before 

my visit to Newcastle on Electric Light for 

Industrial Uses, had confined myself to 

pointing out the various purposes to which 

lighting by small arc could be profitably 

applied. For Edison’s experiments, of which I 

had heard, with incandescent platinum wire, 

and later with thin horseshoes of carbonized 

paper, enclosed in vacuum bulbs, were still at 

that time only in the laboratory stage. But 

now I saw at once that Swan’s invention 

would open a new chapter in the history of 

electric lighting.” 

99 

Crompton 1928, p93 

Crompton was subsequently appointed Chief Engineer of the first Swan Electric 

Lamp Company was formed in Newcastle, and he played an important part in the 

negotiations which shortly afterwards led to the formation of a larger company in London. 

Over the next few years, in addition to the problems of establishing the manufacture 

of electric lamps, a project which occupied Swan’s attention was the use of the 

incandescent light bulb as a miner’s safety lamp. His first example consisted of a strong 

glass bell, protected by a cage of wires enclosing a small incandescent lamp. The lamp 

was connected by a flexible conductor directly with the main source of supply at the top of 

the mine shaft, or with an intermediate storage battery carried on a trolley near where the 

miner was working. This lamp, however, was not a practical substitute for lamps 

generally used in the pits at that time. 

Crompton1928 

Fig. 4.33 Alternative views of the 

Crompton portable generating machine


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




As a result of experiments extending over a period of five years, he succeeded in 

designing a miner’s portable electric safety lamp, of similar weight to that of a then 

conventional miner’s lamp, which gave an average light output of two candle-power for a 

period of ten hours. This was two or three times as much as the best safety lamp gave at 

that date. One of the features of this lamp was a secondary cell incorporating a fibrous 

form of lead which held sulphuric acid like a sponge, and so prevented its being spilled if 

the battery was tilted. It was also provided with a methane indicator, a spiral of platinum 

wire enclosed in a tube to which outside air could be admitted. In the presence of 

methane, the platinum spiral glowed with abnormal brightness when current passed. 

Although the lamp was a technological success, it proved too costly for universal 

Swan 1929, p84 

adoption. 

Swan’s visit to Paris also stimulated him to work on the improvement of Planté’s 

lead-acid storage battery. By October 1879 Swan had devised a variant in which the lead 

surface was increased by the use of frills of lead foil. He subsequently deposited spongy 

GB Pat 2272/1881 

lead electrolytically in the interstices of the frills. 

Towards the end of 1883, Swan devised a new technique for manufacturing the 

carbon filament. In this method GB Pat 5978/1883 nitro-cellulose dissolved in acetic acid was 

extruded through a die or small orifice into a coagulating fluid, such as methylated spirit, 

to form a continuous homogeneous thread. This thread, after being washed and denitrated 

with ammonium sulphide, was then cut to the desired length and carbonised. 

The extruded filaments were much more uniform and finer than those made by the 

earlier process and, as a result, it became possible to produce lamps of comparatively low 

candle-power for higher voltages. 

Shortly after Swan had developed his extrusion process, Legh S. Powell 

independently devised an alternative process in which cellulose dissolved in zinc chloride 

was similarly extruded and carbonised. In 1888 Powell demonstrated his process to Swan 

who invited him to collaborate on this 

technique. 

During his early experiments on the 

extrusion process Swan realised that the 

thread-like material, designed for 

100 

Fig. 4.34 Swan bayonet connector 

(virtually unchanged up to the present day) 

Fürst 1926


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




filaments, was also capable of being used for the manufacture of textiles. Fine cellulose 

threads produced in this way were crocheted by his wife into lace and used to make the 

border of small mats and doyleys and a few of these articles were exhibited at the 

Inventions Exhibition of 1885, under the description “artificial silk.” 

Following his work on extruded cellulose, Swan interested himself in the electro- 

deposition of metals. He developed improved methods of depositing copper and 

discovered a way of bright plating nickel by adding organic material to the electrolyte. In 

1894 Swan was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, following publication of the results 

of the research on the electrolytic deposition of copper which he had carried out with the 

assistance of John Rhodin. 

Swan maintained a personal laboratory where he kept abreast of developments in 

technology relevant to the lighting business. He was, however, a firm believer in the 

philosophy of “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” – he refrained from suggesting small 

improvements which would upset manufacture. His policy was not to introduce a 

variation in manufacture until he had evolved an improvement substantial enough to make 

it worth while to make a general change. 

Although Swan did not press for the adoption of improvements, he was insistent on 

the importance of a well-equipped R&D operation. The important patents which gave the 

company a monopoly in incandescent lamp manufacture had expired by 1897, and Swan 

saw clearly that it was only by innovation and improvement of the lamp that the company 

could maintain its leading position. 

“I am very much preoccupied with devices for the improvement of the electric lamp. For 

18 years there has been no radical change in it, only such changes as arise from practice in 

manufacture. Now there are signs of radical and far-reaching change, and I am naturally 

anxious that these changes, if they do come, as I expect they will, may not find us unprepared 

for them, nor wholly unconnected with them. I am busy considering a patent specification.” 

In retirement, Swan 1929,p166 he resumed his scientific endeavours, investigating 

materials for the construction of a gaseous fuel cell. But although these researches 

continued to within a few weeks of his death, he failed to achieve the construction of a 

practical realisation of his objective. 

4.7.4 The third inventor of the carbon filament lamp – Thomas Alva Edison 

101


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“Edison is not a humbug. He is a type of man common to this country – a smart, 

persevering, sanguine, ignorant, show-off American. He can do a great deal and he thinks 

he can do everything.” 

Quotation from Puck – Telegraphic Journal 15 July 1880 

102


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“Orton told me in England of him. ‘That young man has a vacuum where his conscience 

ought to be and he is known here as Professor Duplicity.’ The evidence that I heard implicated 

officials in a way that, thank Heaven, is impossible in England. I would not for £50,000 have 

my name bespattered as Prescott’s was. The patent is taken out in the joint name of Prescott 

and Edison. Edison was asked if Prescott invented any part of the apparatus. ‘None, sir.’ 

‘Did he invent anything?’ ‘Never, sir.’ ‘Then what has Mr. Prescott to do with it?’ ‘I never 

could have got it tried if I had not associated with Prescott as joint inventor,’ and so on and so 

on.” 

William Preece, diary entry 

Edison’s views were ambivalent. “His [J.P. Morgan’s] conscience seemed to be 

atrophied,” he once said, “but that may be due to the fact that he was contending with men who 

never had any to be atrophied.” However, this mild rebuke was counterbalanced by his 

statement that he never had any grudge against Gould, “because he was so able in his line, and 

as long as my part was successful, the money with me was a secondary consideration.” 

“Everybody steals in commerce and industry,” he once said to a young industrial recruit. 

“I’ve stolen a lot myself. But I knew how to steal. They don’t know how to steal – that’s all 

that’s the matter with them.” 

M. A. Rosanoff Harper’s Magazine, Sept 1932 

“I came in one night and there sat Edison with a pile of chemistries and chemical books 

that were five feet high when they were stood on the floor and laid upon one another. He 

had ordered them from New York, London and Paris. He studied them day and night, He 

ate at his desk and slept in his chair. In six weeks he had gone through the books, written a 

volume of abstracts, made 2,000 experiments on the formulas and had produced a solution – 

the only one in the world – that would do the very thing he wanted done, record over 200 

words a minute on a wire 250 miles long.” 

E.B. Johnson 

McLure1879, p17 

“I have let the other inventors get the start of me in his matter, somewhat, because I have 

not given much attention to electric lights; but I believe I can catch up to them now. I have 

an idea that I can make the electric light available for all common uses, and supply it at a 

trifling cost, compared with that of gas. There is no difficulty about dividing up the electric 

currents and using small quantities at different points. The trouble is in finding a candle that 

will give a pleasant light, not too intense, which can be turned on or off as easily as gas. 

Such a candle cannot be made from carbon points, which waste away and must be 

readjusted constantly while they do last. Some composition must be discovered which will 

be luminous when charged with electricity, and that will not waste away. A platinum wire 

gives a good light when a certain quantity of electricity is passed through it. If the current is 

made too strong, however, the wire will melt. I want to get something better.” 

Thomas Edison 

4.7.4.1 An Edison chronology 

December 1868 Edison resigns from Western Union to devote his time to inventing, designs universal gold printer 

October 1869 Pope, Ashley, and Edison partnership to produce stock ticker and private telegraphy equipment 

April 1870 Pope, Ashley, and Edison partnership firm merged with Gold & Stock Company 

April 1870 Edison and Unger partnership to manufacture telegraphy equipment 

August 1870 Edison signs agreement with Daniel Craig and George Harrington to provide auxiliary equipment for 

Automatic Telegraph, forms American Telegraph Works 

October 1870 Edison signs new agreement with Marshall Lefferts of Gold & Stock Company to furnish stock printers 

January 1871 Edison approached by Western Union to develop duplex telegraph 

Spring 1871 Edison modifies faulty White automatic printer for Automatic Telegraph Company 

April 1871 Edison signs new contract with Harrington and commences developing his own automatic telegraphy 

system 

June 1872 Edison buys out Unger, assumes heavy financial burden, and later takes in Joseph T. Murray as partner 

February 1873 Edison experiments on duplex for Western Union 

October 1873 Agreement for development of British automatic telegraph system 

103


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




January 1874 Edison starts designing quadruplex telegraph 

March 1874 Formation of Domestic Telegraph Co. (police- and fire-alarm system) 

July 1874 Edison signs agreement with Western Union on quadruplex 

July 1874 Edison obtains loan from Automatic Telegraph Co. associate to stave off bankruptcy 

January 1875 Edison sells patents to Jay Gould, and is named Electrician of Atlantic & Pacific Telegraph Co. 

January 1875 Electromotograph patent granted 

May 1875 Dissolution of Edison and Murray partnership 

June 1875 Development of mimeograph and electric pen 

August 1875 Edison returns to work for Western Union, starts experiments on acoustic telegraph 

22 November 1875 Edison observes “etheric force” while working on acoustic telegraph 

January-March 1876 Edison constructs Menlo Park laboratory 

1876 Edison sells interest in Domestic Telegraph system 

April 1876 Edison initiates work on water telephone 

Spring-Autumn 1876 Edison and Batchelor experiment with electrical properties of carbon, devise pressure relay 

April 1877 Exhibition of electromotograph musical telephone 

Edison files his basic patent application for the carbon button telephone transmitter 

July-August, l877 Edison discovers principle of sound recording while experimenting with telephone and telegraph repeater 

December 1877 Edison designs prototype phonograph 

December 1877 Western Union forms American Speaking Telegraph Company which signs contract with Gold and Stock 

Telegraph Company for manufacture of telephones 

1877-1878 Edison and Batchelor develop carbon telephone transmitter 

January 1878 Edison forms the Edison Speaking Phonograph Company and sells rights in the machine to it for $10,000 

cash plus a substantial royalty. 

June 1878 Edison builds tasimeter, based on electrical properties of carbon to measure minute changes of 

temperature 

September 1878 Edison initiates work on incandescent illumination 

Autumn 1878 Tinfoil phonograph proves commercially impractical 

November 1878 Incorporation of Edison Electric Light Co. 

January 1879 Development of electromotograph speaking telephone receiver 

June-July 1879 Upton and Edison design commercial dynamo 

Oct-Nov 1879 Evolution of the carbon incandescent lamp 

November 1879 Bell and Edison inventions combined to establish basis of modern telephone 

December 1879 Formation of Edison Magnetic Ore Milling Co. 

Early 1880 Henry Villard gives Edison first order for commercial installation of an electric plant on the S.S. Columbia 

April 1880 Formation of Lamp Manufacturing Co. 

May 1880 Testing of electric railway 

8 June 1880 Edison and Bell merge British telephone interests to form United Telephone Company 

Summer-Autumn 1880 Development of system of electrical distribution 

December 1880 Incorporation of Electric Illuminating Co. of New York 

20 December 1880 Edison entertains New York aldermen at Menlo Park for demonstration of electric light 

January 1881 Incorporation of Edison Electrical Tube Company 

1881 Awarded Diploma of Honour at Paris Electrical Exposition 

1881 Edison moves operations from Menlo Park to Manhattan 

September 1882 Pearl Street station commences operation 

October 1882 Observation of Edison effect lays the basis for the thermionic valve 

Autumn 1882 Ore Milling Co. lapses into dormancy after unsuccessful trials 

Autumn 1882 Improved electric railway fails commercial tests 

Spring 1883 Merger of Edison and Field electric railroad companies 

July 1884 Incorporation of Edison Shafting Company 

October 1884 Edison obtains control of Edison Electric Light Co. in corporate battle 

1885 Tests of wireless telegraph at Menlo Park 

1885 Edison electric railway fails test on Manhattan Elevated 

1855 Gilliland, Smith and Edison form United States Railway Telegraph and Telephone Company 

February 1886 Test of Grasshopper (induction) telegraph 

July 1886 Edison Machine Works, Edison Lamp Works and Bergmann & Company merged to form Edison United 

Manufacturing Company 

December 1886 Edison Machine Works moved to Schenectady 

Spring 1887 Commencement of work on wax phonograph 

April 1887 United States Railway Telegraph and Telephone Company 

Telegraph Company 

merged with Phelps Induction Railway 

Summer-Autumn 1887 Construction of West Orange Lab 

October 1887 Incorporation of Edison Phonograph Company 

1888 Development of electric chair 

Spring 1888 Renewal of magnetic ore-milling project 

June 1888 Edison sells phonograph marketing rights 

October 1888 Edison and Dickson file first caveat on kinetograph 

1889-1890 Edison fails to produce low-voltage electric railroad 

April 1889 Formation of Edison General Electric to include all Edison manufacturing concerns 

May 1889 Harold P. Brown buys three of Westinghouse’s alternators for resale to the prison authorities for executions 

Summer 1889 Edison hailed at Paris Exposition 

104


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




October 1889 United Edison Manufacturing Company succeeds Edison United Manufacturing Company 

October 1889 US Circuit Court decides that Edison is the inventor of the electric light filament 

6 August 1890 William Kemmler electrocuted for murder in Auburn 

Spring 1892 Formation of General Electric by merger of Edison General Electric and Thomson-Houston 

April 1894 Introduction of kinetoscope 

August 1894 Edison forces North American Phonograph Co. into bankruptcy, later founds National Phonograph Co. 

March 1896 Edison builds fluoroscope, experiments with X-rays 

1899 Edison starts developing alkaline battery for electric automobiles 

Summer 1900 Final abandonment of magnetic ore-milling project 

1902 Edison initiates work on electric vehicles 

July 1902 Portland cement plant goes into operation 

December 1909 Edison initiates work on disk phonograph 

January 1912 Edison agrees to design self-starter for Model T 

Winter 1913 Edison attempt to introduce talking motion pictures fails 

February 1918 Closing of motion-picture studio 

October 1928 Edison receives special Congressional medal 

December 1930 End of phonograph production 

105


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.4.2 Early life and inventions 

Thomas Alva Edison was born on 11 February 1847 in a small town, a few miles 

from the southern shore of Lake Erie. At the age of twelve. he took a job as newsboy on 

the train from Port Huron to Detroit. The time-tabling meant that he had a fourteen-hour 

day, leaving at 7.00 in the morning and not arriving back until 9.30 at night. However, 

although as newsboy he could earn only the profits on paper sales, he also sold 

refreshments to the passengers and was able to take advantage of the six hours’ stop-over 

in Detroit to study in the reading room of the Young Men’s Association. He quickly 

expanded these business activities by hiring other boys and was soon making a profit of 

twenty dollars a week. 

One of Edison’s main problems was to estimate accurately his newspaper sales on 

the return run as he had to bear the cost of those which remained unsold. He attempted to 

reduce the risk by persuading a compositor on the Detroit Free Press to tell him in 

advance what the day’s main news story would be, so that he could gauge demand. 

On one occasion, in April 1862, the news broke of a huge and bloody battle in the 

American Civil War at Shiloh near Corinth, Tennessee. The Confederate General Albert 

S. Johnston had been killed and, although the battle was still in progress, the dead and 

wounded already numbered twenty-five thousand. 

“I grasped the situation at once. Here was a chance for enormous sales, if only the people 

along the line could know what had happened. If only they could see the proof slip I was then 

reading! Suddenly an idea occurred to me.” First he made for the telegraph operator on the 

Detroit station. Would he, Edison asked, telegraph to each of the main stations down the line 

and suggest that the station master should chalk up the news of the battle on the boards usually 

carrying the train times. In return Edison offered to supply the man with Harper’s Weekly, 

Harper’s Monthly. and an evening paper for the next six months. That bargain struck, he went 

to the Free Press offices and asked for 1,500 copies on credit. On being refused he talked his 

way into the office of the editor, Wilbur F. Storey, who listened to his request in silence. Then 

he handed the boy a slip of paper, saying: “Take that downstairs and you will get what you 

want.” 

“I took my fifteen hundred papers, got three boys to help me fold them, and mounted the 

train, all agog to find out whether the telegraph operator had kept his word. At the town where 

our first stop was made I usually sold two papers. As the train swung into that station, I looked 

ahead, and thought there must be a riot going on. A big crowd filled the platform, and as the 

train drew up I began to realize that they wanted my papers. Before we left I had sold a 

hundred or two at five cents a piece. At the next station the place was fairly black with people. 

I raised the ante, and sold three hundred papers at ten cents each. So it went on until Port 

Huron was reached. Then I transferred my remaining stock to the wagon which always waited 

for me there, hired a small boy to sit on the pile of papers in the back of the wagon, so as to 

discount any pilfering, and sold out every paper I had at a quarter of a dollar or more per copy. 

I remember I passed a church full of worshippers and stopped to yell out my news. In ten 

106


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




seconds there was not a soul left in the meeting. All of them, including the parson, were 

clustered round me, bidding against each other for copies of the precious paper. 

“You can understand why it struck me then that the telegraph must be about the best thing 

going, for it was the telegraphic notices on the bulletin boards which had done the trick. I 

determined at once to become a telegraph operator.” 

Clark1977, p11 

By a chance of fate, Edison was involved in an incident in which the infant son of 

J.U. McKenzie, a telegraph operator at Mount Clemens, one of the stations between 

Detroit and Port Huron, was almost killed. Edison heroically snatched the lad from the 

path of an oncoming rail car. To repay him, McKenzie taught Edison the skills of a 

telegrapher. 

At the age of sixteen, Edison was appointed as an operator in a small telegraph 

office at Port Huron. He had a somewhat casual attitude towards his employment, 

however, regarding it as an opportunity to study, repeating experiments he had read about 

in the Scientific American, rather than giving priority to the transmission of his customers’ 

messages. 

By the end of 1863 Edison felt he had learned all he could at Port Huron and moved 

on to become a railway operator with the Grand Trunk Railroad at Stratford Junction, 

about a hundred miles east across the Canadian frontier. 

At Stratford, Edison worked at night. During the day he continued with his 

experiments and studies. Edison’s study regime meant that he often fell asleep at his post. 

The railway had a monitoring system which required the operators to transmit a signal 

every hour as an indication that they were awake, but Edison managed to circumvent the 

safety regulations by means of a notched wheel, attached to a clock, which made the 

necessary connections and sent out the hourly “wide-awake” signal. His downfall was the 

failure to pass on orders to hold a freight train, which, in consequence was nearly involved 

in a head-on collision. 

In February 1865, Edison moved to Cincinnati to work for Western Union. He 

honed his skills and was promoted from “plug” operator to the status of “first-class man,” 

capable of receiving press copy for as long as required. With this advancement, his salary 

Clark 1977,p19 

increased from $80 a month to $125. 

107


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




One of Edison’s duties, as a telegraphist, was to transmit reports of Congressional 

proceedings. As a result, he became aware of the protracted procedure involved in 

recording votes. Each representative’s name was called in succession and his vote 

recorded. To cut out this waste of time, Edison devised a simple, electrically-operated 

device which utilised two switches, one for a “yes” and one for a “no” vote, which were 

positioned beside each Congressman’s desk. By the Speaker’s desk were two dials which 

displayed the running total of the votes as they were cast. Edison patented the device in 

1868. 

When the instrument was shown to a 

Congressional Committee in Washington it met 

with outright rejection – Edison had not realised 

that filibustering was a valued tactic in the 

legislative process. The use of the vote counter 

would have removed this weapon from the 

representatives’ armoury. Edison learned from this 

abortive exercise that successful innovations are 


market-led. 

After a spell in Boston, Edison moved to New York, where he was introduced to 

Frank L. Pope, a former telegraphist for Western Union and an acknowledged authority on 

telegraphy, who was now working for the Laws Reporting Telegraph, the operator of a 

system which provided up-to-the-minute information on current prices for commodity 

dealers. Pope was unable to give Edison a job, 

but allowed him to sleep in the cellar of the Laws 

building. Access to the equipment out of normal 

hours gave Edison the opportunity to familiarise 

himself with the operation of the system. 

One day he was in the office when the 

machine stopped working. He quickly diagnosed 

the fault, which was due to a contact spring 

having broken and jammed two gear wheels. He 

effected a repair and set the apparatus in 

108 

Jehl1937 

Fig. 4.35 The printing telegraph (1869) 

Beasley 1964 

Fig. 4.36 Edison’s printing stock ticker 

(1871)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




operation again. 

As a result of this success, Edison was appointed as Pope’s assistant and, shortly 

afterwards, when Pope left to set up his own company, was promoted and given a salary of 

$300 a month. Clark 1977,p28 In his new position he worked to improve the Laws’ indicator 

and succeeded in enhancing its performance so that it matched the performance of that of a 

rival company, the Gold & Stock Telegraph Company. 

Shortly after, the Laws company was taken over by Western Union, from whose 

employ Edison, once again, resigned, this time to set up in business with Pope and J. N. 

Ashley, the publisher of The Telegrapher, as 

bespoke electrical engineers and as a general 

telegraphic agency. The firm, offered to supply 

clients with raw materials or finished apparatus 

and even to draw up telegraphic patents on 

their behalf. 

Edison designed his Universal Stock 

Printer and perfected a new printer, the “gold 

printer,” which was leased to subscribers for 

twenty-five dollars a week. Once again, 

Western Union responded to the threat of competition by buying out its rival. Edison’s 

share of the sale price was $5000 and he used it to set up on his own account. 

Marshall Lefferts, a Western Union executive, bid to obtain exclusive rights to his 

services. He began to finance Edison’s research, setting specific tasks which left Edison 

with little time to work for anyone else. In due course, Lefferts decided to make a firm 

contractual arrangement with Edison. He offered $40,000 for the patent rights to the 

improvements he had been making to the company’s equipment. Edison had thought they 

were worth, perhaps, $5,000, but asked Lefferts to name his price. By all reports he was 

Clark 1977, p30 

astounded at the magnitude of the offer. 

The ease with which this money was acquired whetted Edison’s appetite and 

prompted him to enter into all manner of deals with a variety of business partners, and 

without any particular regard for the contractual niceties of the arrangements. In the spring 

of 1871, an automatic telegraph system, designed by George D. Little, had been bought by 

109 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.37 The automatic telegraph (1871)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




a group of businessmen who formed the automatic Telegraph Company to operate it. The 

machine did not function efficiently, so the company asked Edison to sort out the technical 

difficulties. He acceded and, for a fee of $40,000, agreed to assign to the company rights 


to any improvements that he was able to make. 

In 1873, Edison was working on the 

quadruplex telegraph, a system in which four 

signals could be sent over a single pair of 

wires. Initially he agreed to assign any 

patents to Western Union for a consideration 

to be mutually agreed. He then went on a trip 

to England and, on his return, reneged on the 

deal. As a result of this reversal Western 

Union’s chief engineer, George B. Prescott, 

was brought in on the understanding he 

would be known as joint inventor and would 

receive some of the profits from any quadruplex device patented by Edison. 

William Orton, the company’s President, did not consider that this deal provided 

sufficient security for an advance of the $10,000 that Edison needed to settle urgent debts, 

so Edison turned to Western Union’s competitor, the Automatic Telegraph Company for 

the money. 

He went on with the development of the quadruplex telegraph over a wire running 

from New York to Albany and back to New York and, by the late autumn of 1874, was 

ready for field trials before the Western Union board. The weather was bad and Edison 

knew that it could cause trouble, so, as an insurance against failure, he ‘fixed’ the results. 

“I had picked the best operators in New York, and they were familiar with the apparatus,” 

he later said. “I arranged that if a storm occurred, and the bad side got shaky, they should do 

the best they could and draw freely on their imaginations. They were sending old messages.” 

Not surprisingly, the quadruplex was accepted and it was soon installed on the lines 

linking New York with Boston and Philadelphia. In December 1874, Western Union paid 

Edison $5,000 on account and agreed to buy the relevant patents for $25,000 plus a royalty 

of $233 a year for each circuit on which they were used. 

110 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.38 The alphabetical keyboard 

telegraph (1872)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.39 Edison’s quadruplex telegraph 

(1874) 

111 

At this stage, Orton left New York and, 

in his absence, Western Union’s general 

superintendent, General Eckert told Edison that 

was not likely to receive any further payments 

from the company. The reason for this was 

that Eckert, himself, was about to quit and he 

wanted to take the technology to his new 

company, Atlantic & Pacific, which was 

backed by Jay Gould, who had provided the 

$10,000 for Edison the previous summer. Eckert, however, concealed from Edison that he 

was secretly negotiating with Gould. On 28 December Edison demonstrated the 

quadruplex to Gould at the Newark works and on 4 January, at Gould’s home in central 

Manhattan, the deal was closed for $30,000. 

When Orton later attempted to conclude his agreement with Edison he was told that 

the arrangement was made under an error and the quadruplex patents really belonged to a 

George Harrington, with whom Edison had agreed in 1871 to share certain automatic 

patents. The assignment to Harrington was recorded at the time in the Patent Office and 

had been sold on to Gould. On examination Western Union attorneys found that 

somebody had forged the word ‘or’, on the Patent Office records to indicate that Edison’s 

agreement with Harrington covered his other telegraph patents. Western Union 

immediately sued Gould’s Atlantic & Pacific, and the action, which lasted for more than a 

year, brought Edison’s sharp practice before public scrutiny. 

Edison spent most of the $30,000 on experiments attempting to make a wire carry 

six messages instead of four. Since he did not succeed, he was actually financially worse 

off than he would have been if he had not invented the quadruplex system. 

On the other hand, Gould will have made a handsome profit on the deal, as Edison 

commented subsequently. 

Inasmuch as every mile of wire actually built does the work of four miles of wire, the 

quadruplex system represents 216,000 miles of phantom wire, worth $10,800,000. On these 

$10 million worth of wires there is no repairing to be done. The value of those phantom wires 

is therefore, represented by a saving of $860,000 in repairs at $4 a mile annually, besides the 

interest on the $10,800,000 which it would have taken to build them. 

Thomas Edison 

Scientific American, 1892


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.4.3 Electromotograph 

During the spring and summer of 1874, Edison experimented with devices for 

automatic reception of telegraphic signals using a stylus and paper impregnated with 

different chemicals. He and Charles Batchelor noticed that, when the paper was wrapped 

round a cylinder and a battery was connected to the stylus, the friction between the stylus 

and the paper could be controlled by passing a current between them. Edison named this 

device the electromotograph and devoted much of 1875 to searching for applications of 

the phenomenon. 

4.7.4.4 Etheric force – the Black Box 

On 22 November 1875, during his 

work on the telegraph, Edison was studying 

the operation of a vibrator magnet that was 

being operated by a battery current. He 

observed an unusual spark coming from the 

core of the magnet. His apparatus consisted 

of a transmitting set comprising a circuit in 

which oscillation pulsations were developed on opening and closing the key. The 

receiving circuit included the inductance of a galvanometer, the capacitance of the wiring 

and gas piping and a spark gap receiver. Charles Batchelor, who was working with Edison 

Jehl 1937,p81 

at the time, described the observation in his laboratory notebook 

A new force. 

In experimenting with a vibrator magnet consisting of a bar of Stubb’s steel fastened at one 

end and made to vibrate by means of a magnet, we noticed a spark coming from the core of the 

magnet; this we have noticed often in relays in stock printers where there were a little iron filings 

between the armature & core & more often in our new electric pen & we have always come to 

the conclusion that it was caused by strong induction. But when we noticed it on this vibrator it 

seemed so strong that it struck us forcibly there might be something more than induction. We 

now found that if we touched any metallic part of the vibrator or magnet we got a spark. The 

larger the body of iron touched to the vibrator, the larger the spark. We now connected a wire to 

x the end of the vibrator rod & we found we could get a spark from it by touching a piece of iron 

to it & one of the most curious phenomena is that if you turn the wire round on itself & let the 

point touch any other portion of itself you get a spark. By connecting x to a gas pipe we drew a 

spark from the gas pipe in any part of the room. By drawing an iron wire over the brass jet of 

the cock. This is a simply wonderful & a good proof that the cause of the spark is a new 

unknown force 

Nov 22, 1875 

T.A. Edison 

Chas. Batchelor 

Jamie Adams 

112 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.40 The etheric force (1875) 

from Scientific American 25 December 1875


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Having noted the phenomenon, Edison immediately abandoned it to concentrate on 

his current interests. 

4.7.4.5 The electric pen and mimeograph 

Continuing his experiments on the recording 

telegraph, Edison devised an electric pen, a device in 

which a reciprocating stylus created small 

perforations as it passed over the surface of the 

paper. In an age when the main alternative methods 

of reprography were manual copying and typesetting, 

this machine found ready application and was soon 

put into production. Stencils cut with the pen could 

Jehl 1937,p94 

make from one to fifteen thousand copies. 

One variant was driven by foot and another by 

pneumatic power. The Music Ruling Pen had five needles and was used to prepare 

manuscript paper. 

4.7.4.6 Menlo Park – the world’s first industrial research laboratory 

In 1876, following a dispute over the terms of his lease with his landlord in Newark, 

Edison moved to fresh premises in Menlo Park, New Jersey, which, at the time, was little 

more than a stopping place on the railway from New York. 

He set up what was to become the world’s first industrial research laboratory. It was 

lavishly equipped in terms of contemporary resources. Edison ensured that it was 

provided with facilities to carry out any investigation with which he became involved. In 

particular, it had a well-stocked library and, reflecting his especial interests, an extensive 

range of chemicals and mineral ores. 

At Menlo Park Edison gathered around him, men having useful skills, such as glass- 

blowing (Böhm), the ability to construct machinery and gadgets from a simple sketch 

(Kruesi), a mathematician who could calculate the sizing of practical embodiments of 

Edison’s ideas (Upton), a chemist able to carry out analyses and synthesise new materials 

(Haid) as well as lads who were willing to work for hours at menial tasks such as 

113 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.41 The electric pen (1876)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




operating a vacuum pump (Jehl). The laboratory was also well supported by carpenters 

and a machine shop. 

Fig. 4.42 The world’s first industrial research laboratory, as restored by Henry Ford 

114 

Beasley 1964


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Edison demanded complete loyalty 

and obedience. Many of his staff were 

immigrants who, although highly skilled, 

were beholden to him for their 

employment. Those who were not 

prepared to accept the regime of an 

absolute monarchy were forced to move 

elsewhere. (Tesla, Field, Sprague) 

4.7.4.7 The telephone 

Towards the end of the 1870s, the telephone began to acquire commercial 

significance and Edison turned his attention to solving the technical problems which arose 

during the course of its development. He filed a patent application for the carbon button 

telephone transmitter in April 1877, but the patent was not granted until May 1892. 

Despite the delay in legal recognition, Western Union bid for the rights to the carbon 

microphone as soon as its success became apparent, offering $100,000 for the patents. 

Edison accepted but, surprisingly, insisted that it was paid in the form of a royalty of 

$6,000 a year for the next seventeen years over the life of the patent. The reason for this 

was that he knew it would soon be dissipated on experiments if he received it as a lump 

sum. 

By the 1868 and 1869 Telegraph Acts, the British Government had nationalised the 

telegraph companies and created an official monopoly. During the 1870s, Bell and Edison 

set up telephone companies in Britain and commenced commercial operations. In 

September 1879 the Postmaster-General, Lord John Manners, declared that the telephone 

was a telegraph within the meaning of the Acts of 1868 and 1869, and that private 

companies would only be allowed to operate under licence. Edison and Bell both refused 

to apply for licences and the Government immediately commenced proceedings against 

Edison. (Attorney-General v. Edison Telephone Company of London.) Despite retaining 

115 

Conot 1979 

Fig. 4.45 Evolution of the phonograph – 2 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.43 Edison assaying ores at Menlo Park 

(from Leslie’s Weekly)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




the cream of the British scientific establishment, 

including Lord Rayleigh, Sir William Thomson, 

later Lord Kelvin, and Professor John Tyndall, as 

expert witnesses, Edison lost. 

In the aftermath of this defeat, the Edison 

and Bell Companies amalgamated on 8 June 

1880 to form the United Telephone Company 

which took out a thirty-year licence from the 

Post Office in return for 10 percent of its 

profits. Edison sold his interest for £30,000. 

Clark1977, p63 

4.7.4.8 The phonograph 

Edison was an empiricist. Nowhere is 

this shown more clearly than with the invention 

of the phonograph, which took place in 1877 

Conot 1979, p100 Up till then, Edison’s work had 

progressed from the vote recorder, via the stock 

ticker to the quadruplex telegraph. Principles 

which he had exploited in the recording 

telegraph were utilised in the mimeograph and 

the electric pen. He had worked on 

microphones and produced a viable telephone 

system. He then turned his attention to the 

possibility of recording sound. The evolution 

of the idea is well illustrated by a series of 

extracts from his laboratory notebook. During 

June he was working on an autographic 

copying press (1), an embossing telegraph (2) 

and was also developing a speaker for the 

telephone. On 18 July 1877 (3) he connected a 

116 

Conot 1979 


Conot 1979 


Conot 1979 


Conot 1979 

Fig. 4.47 Evolution of the phonograph – 4


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Conot 1979 


Fig. 4.50 Edison’s instruction… 

Jehl 1937 

stylus from the telegraph to the speaker and shouted into it whilst a band of waxed paper 

was passed underneath. The stylus left indentations in the paper and, when the paper was 

passed under the stylus again, the telephone speaker emitted a faint sound. 

Edison immediately conceived the idea that he would be able to use this principle to 

store and reproduce sound. On 12 August he gave his assistant John Kruesi a sketch with 

instructions to make a prototype for further experiments. The device had a roller on which 

the recording medium was to be mounted. 

Conot 1979 


Fig. 4.51 …and Kruesi’s prototype 

117 

Beasley 1964


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




118


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




By 7 September (4), he had tried various coatings such as plumbago, a rough salt 

and arsenic acid. On 22 September (5), he experimented with ways of embossing paper 

strips and, on 3 December (6), he considered alternative ways of formatting the recording 

medium – cylinder, disc with a spiral track, or strip. 

Ever mindful of publicity, he posed in the laboratory for a sketch with his early 

instruments and also invited in the press. He formed a company to manufacture and 

exploit the phonograph, but when it proved to be no more than a scientific curiosity and a 

passing fancy, he abandoned interest in it to concentrate on the incandescent lamp and 

other applications of electricity. He formed the Edison Speaking Phonograph Company 

and sold his rights in the machine to it for $10,000 cash plus a substantial royalty. The 

company made and licensed the machines to fairground showmen. 

Fig. 4.52 Contemporary sketch of Edison with the phonograph at Menlo Park (1878) 

119 

Jehl1937


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.4.9 Other acoustic inventions 

During the period immediately after he discovered the principle of the phonograph, 

Edison made other acoustic inventions including the megaphone, the aerophone and the 

phonomotor. 

Fig. 4.53 Megaphone 

(from Scientific American 24 Aug 1878) 

Fig. 4.54 The aerophone 

120 

Jehl 1937 

Jehl1937 

Fig. 4.55 The phonomotor 

(from Scientific American, 27 July 1878) 

Jehl 1937


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.56 Illustrations from the New York Daily Graphic showing the invention of the phonograph 

121


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.4.10 The tasimeter and odoroscope 

During his work on the microphone for the telephone, 

Edison noticed that the rubber handle expanded and contracted 

with changes in temperature. This caused interference with the 

operation of the carbon module. He considered that this might 

form the basis of a device for measuring changes in temperature 

Jehl 1937,p186 He constructed an instrument in which heat was 

concentrated on a hard rubber rod which pressed against a 

carbon button of the type used in the microphone, altering its 

resistance. The button was connected in a Wheatstone Bridge 

circuit to magnify the effect of the changes in resistance. 

In a development of the instrument, the rubber was 

replaced by a strip of gelatine, which expanded as it absorbed 

moisture. They formed the basis of an instrument which, 

allegedly, would detect the presence of icebergs at sea, or be 

sensitive to drops of perfume thrown on the laboratory floor 

(the odoroscope). 

There was no practical outcome of these instruments and they faded into obscurity. 

122 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.57 The tasimeter in a 

Wheatstone Bridge circuit 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.58 Odoroscope


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.4.11 The incandescent lamp 

Friedel 1986 

New York Daily Graphic 

Fig. 4.59 Drawings of the Menlo Park laboratory, December 1879-January 1880 

Edison came late to the development of the electric light. Following a trip to 

Ansonia in Connecticut to view an arc lighting installation in the factory of William 

Wallace, a brass manufacturer, he was inspired to commence work on the electric light. 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.60 Edison 

platinum filament 

lamp (1878) 

Wallace was associated with Moses Farmer who had been working 

on problem of electric lighting since 1859. Edison immediately 

appreciated its potential, but perceived that the incandescent lamp 

rather than the arc would be the most practical installation for 

domestic premises. 

In order to raise funds, Edison turned to businessmen who had 

connections with the telegraph industry and thus would be familiar 

with his achievements in that field. Amongst those approached was 

Grosvenor P. Lowrey, the general counsel of Western Union, who 

suggested the setting up of a corporation to finance research and to 

take out patents. Edison also quickly gained the support of Dr. Norvin Green, the 

123


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




President of Western Union; Tracy R. Edson, a leading stockholder in the Gold and Stock 

Telegraph Company: and Egisto P. Fabbri, a partner in J.P. Morgan. 

The Edison Electric Light 

Company was floated with 3,000 

hundred-dollar shares of which 2,500, 

plus $30,000 in cash, went to Edison. It 

had been organised to own and license all 

Edison’s electrical inventions other than 

those concerned with telegraphy. 

Like Farmer, Edison initially 

attempted to construct a lamp with a 

burner of platinum. He used both wires 

and foils 

US Pat 218866 

in alternative 

constructions. To prevent destruction 

through melting of the platinum, he devised a thermal cut-out US Pat 214636 which 

disconnected the supply current when the temperature became excessive. 

Upton had calculated that, at the current price of platinum, an electric lighting 

system would cost at least $98 per lamp. Edison, however, concluded that he could easily 

bring the price of platinum down from twelve dollars to one dollar per ounce. 

Details of the approach adopted by Edison to achieve this objective were published 

Jehl 1937,p259 

in Scientific American on July 26, 1879: 

‘As an evidence of the faith of Mr. Edison and his colleagues in the system of lighting by 

incandescence, we mention the fact that they have prospectors searching for platinum in all the 

mining regions of the country. Mr. Edison is confident that the metal exists in large quantities 

in this country, and he has sent out circulars which read as follows: 

“From the Laboratory of T. A. Edison Menlo Park, N.J., U.S.A.” 

“Dear Sir: 

Would you be so kind as to inform me if the metal platinum occurs in your 

neighborhood? This metal, as a rule, is found in scales associated with free 

gold, generally in placers. 

If there is any in your vicinity, or if you can gain information from 

experienced miners as to the localities where it can be found, and will forward 

such information to my address, I will consider it a special favor, as I shall 

require large quantities in my new system of electric lighting. 

An early reply to this circular will he greatly appreciated. 

Very truly, 

Thomas A. Edison.” 

Specimens of platinum and iridosmine sprinkled upon a card were sent with these circulars. 

The difference in the metals is easily detected with a microscope or a magnifying glass. 

124 

US Pat 214637 

Fig. 4.61 Regulator for platinum filament lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Many replies enclosing samples of platinum have already been received at Menlo Park, 

and the metal has been found in sites in two places. Mr. Edison has a stamp mill and all the 

apparatus required for reducing ores of various kinds. His facilities for reducing refractory ores 

and metals are particularly good.” 

On September 20, Scientific American printed the sequel: 

“Notice was taken some time since of Mr. Edison’s circular letter of inquiry with regard to 

the possible occurrence of platinum in various parts of the country. Mr. Edison informs us 

that, so far, he has received some three thousand replies. Instead of being an extremely rare 

metal, as hitherto supposed, platinum proves to be widely distributed, and to occur in 

considerable abundance. 

Before Mr. Edison took the matter in hand platinum had been found in the United States in 

but two or three places in California and in North Carolina – and in these places it occurred but 

sparingly. It is now found in Idaho, Dakota, Washington Territory, Oregon, California, 

Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and also British Columbia. 

It is found where gold occurs, and is a frequent residual of gold mining, especially placer 

mining. Mr. Edison thinks he can get three thousand pounds a year from Chinese miners in 

one locality. One gravel heap is mentioned from which a million ounces of platinum are 

expected. Hitherto the product of the entire world would not suffice to supply electric lamps 

for New York City. Now Mr. Edison believes that our gold mines will supply more than will 

be required. The possible uses of this metal in the arts, however, are so numerous that there is 

no danger of an over-supply. 

In addition to platinum, Mr. Edison finds, among the large number of samples received 

daily, many other valuable metals and minerals, so that his researches in this direction are 

likely to result in increasing greatly the resources of our country in respect to the rarer and 

more costly minerals and metals.” 

Beasley 1964 

Fig. 4.62 “Long-legged Mary-Ann” 

dynamo (1879) 

4.7.4.12 Tar putty lamp 

In the search for a suitable metallic filament, 

experiments were carried out with boron, rhodium, 

iridium, ruthenium, chromium, titanium and 

zirconium, all of which were coated with an 

insulating layer of a refractory oxide. None of these 

materials was any more successful than platinum. 

During this period Edison continued to work 

on the carbon microphone for the telephone and also 

developed a practical generator – the “long-legged 

Mary-Ann”, thus named after a certain lady who used 

to visit the men at the laboratories from time to time. 

125


05/04/2006 19:34:00 





Tar putty filament 

(1879) 

Jehl1937 Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.64 Carbonised cotton 

sewing-thread lamp 

(1879) 

The decision to try carbon as a substitute for the metallic filament arose accidentally 

in August 1879. Jehl 1937, p331 Sitting in the laboratory one evening, pondering various 

problems, Edison was rolling a small piece of compressed lamp black and tar between his 

fingers. He rolled it into a long, thin filament and, glancing at it, the thought occurred to 

him that it might prove to be suitable for the incandescent lamp. An experiment was 

rapidly set up and the results looked promising. Further experiments were indicated. 

Following his customary approach, many different sources of carbon – lamp black, 

graphite, carbon from bone, blood, and even a hair from Kruesi’s beard – and a similar 

126 

Fig. 4.65 Edison cardboard 

horse-shoe lamp 

(1880) 

Friedel 1986


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




wide range of binders – tar, syrup and various hydrocarbons – were tried. The mixtures 

were kneaded for hours and then rolled into thin filaments. these were shaped into spirals 

using a small, tube-like cylinder of paper or cardboard. [1886] RPC 167 The putty was then 

carbonised in a muffle furnace. At this stage it was very fragile and frequently broke, 

resulting in great frustration. 

The ends of the filament and the leading-in wires were inserted into holes drilled in 

small blocks of carbon. Using a watchmaker’s eyeglass, the holes were packed with 

carbon or a carbon paste to hold the filament in place. They were then transferred to the 

vacuum pumps and the bulbs evacuated and sealed. 

There was a high attrition rate in the fabrication of these lamps – many of the 

filaments failed to reach the assembly stage, fifty per cent did not survive the mounting 

process and a further ten per cent shattered during the sealing stage. Yet more failed 

during the “running on the pumps” to drive off occluded gases. With all of these 

problems, the yield of good lamps, in the early stages of the development, was no more 

than two or three lamps per week. 

Some improvement was obtained by using a thread of silk, cotton or linen as a 

skeleton on which the tar putty was rolled, but, clearly, the technique could not provide a 

viable long-term solution. Edison next tried filaments stamped from cardboard, a process 

also used by Swan. The eventual solution was to construct the filament from a vegetable 

fibre. The story of the selection of bamboo and its evolution into a practical 

manufacturing process are set out in Appendix 3. 

Development of the lamp was a costly exercise. Edison rapidly used up the cash 

which had been raised by his backers and was forced back on his own resources. He spent 

the money which he had obtained from the sale of his British telephone interests and then 

started to liquidate his shares in the Lighting company, thereby losing his controlling 

interest. 

When production of the incandescent lamp began in earnest at the beginning of the 

1880s, Edison formed a number of companies including the Edison Machine Works, the 

Edison Electrical Tube Company, the Thomas A. Edison Construction Company, the 

Canadian Edison Manufacturing Company and the Edison Shafting Company, which 

127


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




enabled him to regain control of operations and to drive in the direction which he 

determined for the rest of the decade. 

One of the decisions taken by Edison was to continue to base his distribution of 

power on the use of direct current, despite increasing evidence that alternating current 

possessed technical and economic advantages. In 1891 he wrote, to Villard “The use of 

alternating current is unworthy of practical men.” Conot 1979, p301 and, as late as 1903, was 

still unconvinced of the superiority of alternating current – even though, by this stage, it 

had been adopted by his successor companies for central station generation and 

transmission. 

By the end of the decade the electrical industry had become so large that it could not 

be managed using the one-man, hands-on methodology practised by Edison. He merged 

his various interests and sold out to a group of financiers led by Henry Villard, who 

formed the Edison General Electric Company in 1888. The following year, Edison wrote 

to Villard. 

“I have been under a desperate strain for money for twenty-two years and when I sold out, 

one of the greatest inducements was the sum of cash received, which I thought I could always 

have on hand, so as to free my mind from financial stress, and thus enable me to go ahead in 

the technical field.” 

4.7.4.13 The electric railway 

As part of his grand vision, Edison foresaw the application of electricity to traction 

and set up an experimental railway at Menlo Park. In September 1883, Henry Villard, 

President of the Northern Pacific Railroad, underwrote the building of a three-mile track at 

Edison’s laboratory site and agreed to build fifty miles of electrified railway as soon as 

Edison had reduced operating costs to below those of steam. Before this could be 

achieved, Villard’s finances collapsed and Edison’s electric traction patents were 

challenged by S.D. Field. As with previous instances of potentially damaging 

competition, Edison found it expedient to collaborate with his principal competitor and 

formed the Electric Railway Company of America. Edison and Field installed a 

demonstration track, a third of a mile long, in the gallery of the Chicago Expositions. 

Along this track, incorporating a central supply rail as well as the normal outer two rails 

which acted as an earth return, the Judge hauled a car-load of twenty passengers. 

128


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Electric Railway Company failed for a variety of reasons, not the least of which 

was that Edison was preoccupied with the development of the electric lamp. 

Beasley 1964 

Fig. 4.66 Edison’s electric locomotive (1882), from a photograph in the Smithsonian Institute 

This photograph was re-touched to show him, instead of Charles Hughes at the controls. 

(Conot 1979, p466) This may be verified by projecting the horizontal lines to the perspective 

vanishing point, thus showing Edison’s head to be disproportionately large in comparison with those 

of the other figures in the photograph. The absence of a shadow on the face confirms the subterfuge. 

4.7.4.14 The Edison Effect, pre-cursor of the thermionic valve 

A major problem with the vacuum filament lamp was blackening of the interior of 

the glass bulb. A multitude of experiments was carried out but they failed to reveal the 

cause. Upton, in October 1882, had been first to note “The blue on the lamp always 

appears on the positive pole. The blackening of the wire always occurs at the negative.” 

Conot 1979, p337 

Writing in 1925, Ambrose Fleming, the inventor of the thermionic diode 

Fleming 1925, p160 

commented 

129


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




About this time (1883) Mr. Edison made an interesting observation. He sealed into a 

lamp a metal plate placed between the legs of the carbon loop. This plate was carried on a 

wire sealed through the wall of the glass bulb. He noticed that when the filament was made 

incandescent by a direct current, a galvanometer or other current detecting instrument 

showed a small electric current in a circuit connecting this 

plate with the positive terminal of the filament. On the other 

hand, in a circuit connecting the plate and the negative end of 

the filament, there was no sensible current. This effect was 

called the “Edison effect” but Edison gave no explanation of it, 

not did he make of it any practical application. 

Thrower 1994 

Fig. 4.67 The “Edison 

Effect” 

Edison did, however, patent the tripolar lamp. 

130 

US Pat 307031 

He sent samples to England where Fleming, who had been 

retained as a scientific consultant by the British Edison Lighting 

Company, performed on them a number of experiments which 

he described in a paper presented to the London Physical 

Society. Fleming 1883 Eventually they were to form the stimulus for Fleming’s invention 

of the thermionic diode detector. 

4.7.4.15 Wireless communication 

In May 1885, Edison had an idea 

for communication using two metallic 

plates which were mounted in an 

elevated position on aerial masts, the 

masts of ships or suspended from 

balloons. Due to the capacitance 

US Pat 465971 

Fig. 4.68 Edison’s proposal for wireless 

communication (1885) 

between the plates, it was suggested 

US Pat 465971 

that a high voltage impressed on the transmitting plate by way of an induction 

coil, would induce a complementary voltage on the receiving plate and this could be 

detected by an electromotograph receiver, It was alleged Conot 1979, p339 that Edison had 

managed to communicate over a distance of two miles with this apparatus, but, had this 

been so, it is likely that he would have attempted to develop the idea further. 

Nevertheless, on the basis of an opinion given by Professor F.B. Crocker of Columbia 

University, that Edison’s patent covered important features of wireless telegraphy, the 

Marconi Wireless Telegraphy Company of America agreed to pay Edison $60,000 half in 

cash and half in stock, for the patent.


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Edison subsequently developed the idea of using inductive coupling for wireless 

communication between a railway carriage and wires alongside the track (the Grasshopper 

telegraph). This did not prove reliable in practice and he sold out to the Phelps Induction 

Railway Telegraph Company. 

4.7.14.16 If it moves, patent it – Never mind the quality, feel the width 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

“I have before me several patents by Edison in his own or other names. There are, amongst 

other, three in 1878, Nos. 4226, 4502 and 5306; three in 1879 Nos. 2402, and 4576, which is 

now the patent in question; and subsequently in 1879, 5127. In 1880 No. 3765, which has 

been called in the argument the bamboo filament patent; and in 1881, No 539 and No. 1918. 

Whenever he hit upon any improvement Edison seems to have applied for an English patent 

without waiting to perfect the invention, and no one can read the patent in question of 1879 

without being struck with the evidence of haste shown by the crude language and imperfection 

of description in every part of it.” 

Judgement of Mr. Justice Kay 

Edison and Swan v Holland, [1888] RPC 459 

1869 

1873 

1877 

1881 

1885 

1889 

Edison's Patents 

1893 

Edison’s early experiences made him strongly aware of the power of patents. In 

1881 he filed twenty-four applications for patents in Britain, compared with only seven 

each by the native inventors, Joseph Swan and St George Lane-Fox. 

1897 

1901 

131 

Heerding 1986, p19 

Frequently, his patents related to trivial improvements and reflected both a desire to obtain 

1905 

1909 

1913 

1917 

Fig. 4.69 Annual tally of patents granted to Edison 

1921 

1925 

1929 

1933


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




blanket cover to exclude all chances of 

competition and a lack of prior 

consideration of the merits of his proposals. 

Edison received substantial sums 

from sale and licensing of patents. The 

amounts ranged from $5000 for the 

Polyform quack medicine, which he 

devised as a cure-all for his laboratory 

workers, to $47,000 for automatic 

telegraph rights ($17,000 from England 

and $30,000 from Gould), $50,000 for the 

quadruplex, $100,000 each for the telephone transmitter and the electromotograph, 

$175,000 for British telephone rights, $70,000 (plus $330,000 in stock) for British ore- 

milling rights, and $435,000 from Lippincott for phonograph-marketing rights. The 

Bell Telephone Company paid him $130,000 over a span of more than twenty years for 

an option on future telephone inventions, although none was forthcoming. He also sold 

marketing rights to various inventions in Europe, Central and South America, Australia, 

and Asia. 

Conot 1979, p465 

The beginning of 1880 was a period of intense activity in research and development 

work. In January Edison applied for patents covering electric lamps, apparatus for produc- 

ing high vacua and a specific lamp and holder arrangement. On 28 January an application 

was filed for a generic patent covering the complete system of electrical distribution. 

During the remainder of the year a further fifty-six applications were lodged, two-thirds of 

Jehl 1937 

Fig. 4.70 Indirectly-heated zircon 

radiator lamp 

them relating to lamps, dynamos, auxiliary 

equipment, or variations of the distribution system. 

Conot 1979, p104 

Whilst he claimed to be a practical man, many 

of Edison’s ideas were either completely 

impracticable or wildly speculative. For example, 

after his initial failure with platinum filaments, 

Edison was so disillusioned that he considered 

132 

US Pat 248431 

Fig. 4.71 Apparatus for preserving fruit under 

vacuum


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




abandoning use of electricity as an energy source. He devised a lamp that used steam 

passing through copper pipes to heat a polished copper mirror plated with gold or platinum 

which focused the heat on to a small pellet of refractory oxides to bring it to 

incandescence. Caveat No.6, 13 June 1879 Apart from the fact that the apparatus was based on 

unsound physical principles – a matt black coating would have been more effective 

radiator than the plated copper mirror – a cursory test was all that would have been needed 

to prove the unworkability of this idea, which was an adaptation of a scheme he had to 

focus heat from a platinum heater on a zircon rod by means of an elliptical reflector. 

He also filed a patent application on the application of the method of creating a 

vacuum using mercury pumps, which had been developed for the fabrication of the 

incandescent lamp, to the preservation of fruit and fresh meat, but took no account of 

anaerobic effects. 

The “invention” of US Patent 219628 owed not a little to the Jablochkoff Candle, 

which had come to prominence a couple of years earlier. 

The object of the 

invention is to produce a 

candle or light-giving body 

by the incandescence of a 

conductor of electricity in 

the form of a cylinder, prism 

or other mass of a size 

adapted to yield the required 

volume of light. 

The invention 

consists in an electric lightgiving 

body formed of a 

conductor, such as a finely 

divided platinum, iridium, 

ruthenium, or other metal 

difficult of fusion, 

incorporated with nonconducting 

material. 

The candle, made as 

aforesaid, can be of any 

desired size or shape, and 

the metallic particles become 

US Pat 219628 

Fig. 4.72 Incandescent filament lamp analogue of the 

Jablochkoff Candle 

incandescent by the passage of the current, and the non-metallic particles are luminous and 

increase the brilliancy. This is accomplished by a comparatively small electric current. I mix 

with such finely-divided conductors infusible materials – such as oxide of magnesium or 

zirconium – in different proportions, so as to obtain any degrees if conductivity required. 

In some instances I saturate rods, sheets, or other forms of infusible oxides with a salt 

of the metal difficult of fusion, and reduce the same by heat to a metallic state. 

133


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




I will mention that the use of a non-conducting material is not absolutely necessary, as 

the finely-divided metals, owing to their porosity, have high resistance, and become easily 

incandescent; but I prefer to use the non-conductor. 

In Figure 1 is shown a lamp composed of finely-divided iridium mixed with oxide of 

zirconium and molded in the form of a split hollow cylinder, x. Fig. 2 is a detached section of 

the same. Fig. 3 is a perspective view and Fig. 4 is a plan view. 

The cylinder being split, the current enters the binding post A, passes through the lever 

L, through the regulating wire n to the plate g, thence up one side of the iridium cylinder x, 

down the other side to the plate h, thence, by wire k, to the regulating screw m and binding post 

n’. 

The regulation of the temperature of the cylinder x is obtained by the thermal current 

regulator in the same manner as is shown in my application No. 156, filed October 14, 1878. 

The incandescent conductor made in this manner may be of any desired shape. 

I claim as my invention – 

1. For electric lighting, a conductor of electricity formed of a finely divided metal 

incorporated with a non-conductor of electricity, substantially as set forth. 

2. A rigid electric-light-giving body having a longitudinal incision or separation from near 

the base to near the end, for insuring the circulation of the electric current through the entire 

body, substantially as set forth. 

3. In combination with a rigid light-giving body having a longitudinal incision, an 

expansive thermal-circuit regulator to control the strength of the current by the heat developed, 

substantially as set forth. 

A schedule of Edison’s US 

patents is attached in Appendix 6. 

It is interesting to note that, 

although nearly eleven hundred 

inventions are disclosed, very few 

name a co-inventor. In even fewer 

instances are his employees named 

as inventors in contemporaneous 

patents, although a few 

independently-minded individuals, 

exemplified by Tesla, Sprague and 

Field, broke away from his 

influence and subsequently filed 

patent applications for significant 

inventions. 

Modern experience indicates 

that, given the other calls on his 

time during his prolific periods of 

134 

Jehl 1937 


Close-up of 

simplified pump 

designed by Jehl 

US Pat 251536 


Vacuum pump 

patented 27 Dec 1881 naming 

Edison as inventor


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




patenting, it is likely, indeed, probable, that Edison claimed inventions made by others. 

Certainly he was prepared to take credit for a paper written by Upton which he presented 

to the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Conot 1979, p149 A letter from 

William Hammer to Edison’s assistant, Francis Jehl, who was responsible for creating the 

vacua in the lamps, indicates that he (Jehl) designed an improved vacuum pump. Jehl 

1937, p406 

“As you will remember, this vacuum apparatus consisted of a combination of a Sprengel 

drop pump and a Geissler lift pump, together with a McLeod Gauge and tubes containing 

phosphoric anhydride and a gold leaf with a spark gap at the top connected with an induction 

coil and battery. You will remember that Mr. Edison decided that this type of pump was too 

long, unwieldy and expensive for the new lamp works and he offered a prize for the best 

design of a simple and inexpensive pump. I remember you won the prize, which I believe was 

one hundred dollars, for your simple form of Sprengel drop pump.” 

Here I may state that the prize was not a hundred dollars. I received 1.6 shares of stock of 

the Edison Electric Light Company with the remark: “Keep it under your cap, Francis.” 

The pump was, however, patented in the name of Edison. 

Friedel 1986 

Fig. 4.75 Experimental vacuum 

pump 

designed by Francis Upton 

4.7.4.17 After the lamp 

Upton’s laboratory notebook shows that he, also, 

did novel work in this area. However, the only patents 

(US Pats 248425, 248433, 251536, 263147 and 266588) 

concerned with vacuum apparatus name Edison as sole 

inventor. Upton was a key collaborator in other aspects 

of the lighting system. 

From 1870 to 1880 Batchelor was involved with 

most of Edison’s inventions, playing a major role with 

the mimeograph and the telephone. James Adams and 

Charles Edison also made important contributions. At 

the West Orange laboratory, phonograph recording and 

the production of the alkaline storage battery owed 

much to Aylsworth and Dickson did most of the work 

on the kinetoscope and the kinetograph. 

135 

Conot 1979, p469 

Released from the treadmill of the incandescent lamp, Edison dabbled with a 

succession of inventions. He took up with the phonograph again and, despite the


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




commercial success of the disc-shaped record of Berliner’s gramophone, persisted with 

cylinders until 1913. 

He also re-visited the magnetic extraction of minerals from their ores and went on 

to devise a technique for the manufacture of iron briquettes for blast furnaces. 

Unfortunately for Edison, just as production was getting under way, huge deposits of 

rich iron ore were discovered in Minnesota. The price of iron ore plummeted, rendering 

Edison’s mills uneconomic and putting him out of business. 

When he was finally forced to close them down, he had poured $2 million into the project. 

Most of the money had come from the sale 

of his General Electric shares, and when 

the project failed the shares were worth 

double that sum. Reminded of the fact by 

his business associate, W.S. Mallory, 

Edison ruminated for a few minutes, 

pulling his right eyebrow as he often did 

when thinking over a problem. “Then,” 

Mallory remembered, “his face lighted up 

and he said: ‘Well, it’s all gone, but we 

had a hell of a good time spending it.’” 

4.7.4.18 The twilight years 

The list of Edison’s patents (Appendix 

6) provides an epitome of his activity in later 

life. He experimented with moving pictures, 

but failed in an attempt to introduce talkies. 

He worked for many years on re-chargeable 

batteries for battery-powered vehicles. 

Portland cement and prefabricated buildings 

were an offshoot from his ore separation 

operations. A brief flirtation with X-rays 

produced an idea for a unworkable fluorescent 

lamp based on a glass bulb coated with 

calcium tungstate crystals. 

US Pat 865367 

Amongst his miscellaneous inventions were military projectiles, 

136 

US Pat 865367 

Fig. 4.76 Fluorescent lamp (1896) 

US Pat 

1138360 

Fig. 4.77 Field sequential colour cinematography 

(1912) 

US Pats 1297294 1300708 

a method of extracting rubber from plants US Pat 1740079 , a method of assisting orchestral


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




players to maintain a uniform pitch and tempo US Pat 1323218 , a frame sequential system of 

colour cinematography US Pat 1138360 US Pat 970616 

and an autogiro. 

137


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.78 Talking doll 

phonograph mechanism 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.80 Edison-Dickson 

magnetic ore separator 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.82 Microtasimeter 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.84 Dead-beat galvanometer 

138 

US Pat 970616 

Fig. 4.81 Flying machine 

Fig. 4.85 Projectile 

Dickson 1894 


Pyromagnetic generator 

Dickson 1894 

Fig. 4.83 Gas-powered 

pyromagnetic motor 

US Pat 1300708


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Many of his ideas paid little heed to the laws of physics. For example, his pyromagnetic 

motor and generator relied on successively heating and cooling a mass of magnetic 

material above and below its Curie point (at which the magnetism disappears) so that, 

in the case of the motor, the material was successively attracted to and not attracted to a 

magnet (and conversely in the case of the generator), paying no regard to 

thermodynamics and hence to the efficiency of the process. Edison’s patents ranged 

from the Japanese bamboo filament to bullets, the Edison Effect to the phonomotor – 

from the far-fetched to the far-flung, from sublimation to the ridiculous. 

4.7.5 The also-rans 

4.7.5.1 Moses G. Farmer 

Like Swan, Moses G. Farmer developed incandescent electric lighting over a 

period of several decades. In 1858 and 1859 he constructed battery-powered lamps in 

which specially shaped strips of platinum were heated to incandescence in free air. The 

light from this source was sufficient to illuminate his home in Salem, Massachusetts. 

Farmer worked on many of the pressing technical problems of the day. In 1847 he 

designed an electric locomotive powered by Grove batteries. Later he was involved 

with the quadruplex telegraph, the printing telegraph, electric signalling systems, the 

dynamo, and the incandescent lamp. He designed Boston’s first fire-alarm telegraph 

system and manufactured telegraphic instruments. He proposed the technique of self- 

excitation which was successful with the dynamo. Whilst employed as electrician by 

the United States naval torpedo station at Newport during the period 1872 to 1881 he 

carried out his more important experiments in incandescent lighting. Later he reverted 

to the telephone and aviation and back to electric traction. Many of his ideas were 

ahead of commercial developments and therefore were not profitable. 

In 1877 he constructed a lamp consisting of a graphite rod in an atmosphere of 

nitrogen. Around 1878, he proposed connecting incandescent lamps in parallel and 

regulating the dynamo voltage so that each individual lamp might be controlled without 

affecting the others. In 1879 he patented a lamp which contained a horizontal carbon 

rod between two large carbon blocks in an exhausted or nitrogen-filled glass globe. 

139


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




This lamp was unsuccessful because the seals failed. Eventually the Farmer patents 

came under the control of the United States Electric Lighting Company. 

4.7.5.2 Hiram S. Maxim 

After a rudimentary education, Hiram S. Maxim 

worked for a variety of manufacturing companies. He 

gained practical experience in the production of coaches, 

machinery, scientific instruments, ironwork, and ships 

and made inventions relating to steam engines and 

automatic gas machines. 

His interest in electricity started around 1877 when 

he was appointed as chief engineer for the newly formed 

United States Electric Lighting Company, which he co- 

founded. Although the company was primarily interested 

in arc lighting, he also worked on incandescent-lighting 

experiments in its laboratories. Maxim constructed an 

incandescent lamp from sheet platinum in air, similar in 

principle to Farmer’s lamp of 1859 and Starr’s of 1845, 

but including an automatic short-circuiting device to cut 

off the current when the lamp became too hot. He also 

produced a lamp which utilised a graphite rod in a glass 

globe containing rarefied hydrocarbon vapour. 

The next year, Maxim worked on arc lighting and 

concerned himself with problems of electrical generation, 

distribution, and control. He returned to incandescent 

lighting in 1879, however, when Edison’s activity in that 

field stimulated public interest. 

In 1880, he produced a lamp which, according to Jehl, one of Edison’s assistants, 

was the result of fairly overt industrial espionage. His high resistance filament was cut 

from cardboard, carbonised, and sealed into an exhausted glass bulb. The first filaments 

were in the shape of a Maltese cross, but in later lamps they took the shape of an M. It 

140 

Jehl 1938 

Fig. 4.86 Maxim’s first 

carbon filament lamp (1880) 

Frst 1926 

Fig. 4.87 Maxim’s later 

carbon filament lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




was claimed by Jehl Jehl 1938, p611 that Maxim was able to make a satisfactory lamp only 

after Edison personally explained to him the entire process, and after he had enticed 

away one of Edison’s best assistants. 

Here I mention another visitor, well known at that time, who appeared at the laboratory one 

day. His name was Hiram S. Maxim. He had made an arc lamp and generator which he 

exploited and which was known as the Maxim arc light system. He, too, as I have already 

mentioned, dabbled about with an incandescent lamp idea in 1878 and like others had no 

success. His lamp was of very low resistance and possessed many other defects – it was simply 

an abandoned experiment of no practical value. 

Maxim was very much interested in what Edison showed him and the two spent almost a 

day together. Edison explained to him how the paper filaments were made and carbonized 

and all about the glass-blowing part. In fact, Maxim spent nearly two hours with Edison in 

the glass house where Böhm, Holzer and Hipple were working. He, too, like the celebrated 

Cleveland electrician took leave with the most touching cordiality. 

Maxim did not run to New York and give his opinion to a newspaper, but went to his 

laboratory and began trying to make a lamp after Edison’s ideas. He had no success, 

however, and after a few weeks sent to Menlo Park an emissary who got in touch with 

Böhm. It was also said that the agent approached another of our men. The deportment of 

Böhm changed perceptibly and soon became suspicious. He was changing his allegiance to 

that of Maxim. In fact, he soon departed from Menlo Park and entered that electrician’s 

employ. This as far as I am aware was the only defection that ever occurred at our 

laboratory in those early days. 

In a few months Böhm managed to place the Maxim laboratory in 

condition so that it was able to produce some incandescent lamps that 

had their light-giving element made of paper. While at Menlo Park, 

Böhm had had the opportunity of watching all the various processes 

by which Edison made a practical lamp, and that acquired knowledge 

he imparted to Maxim. With the compensation he received, he was 

enabled to return to Germany and study. After receiving the degree of 

Ph.D. from the University of Freiburg in 1886, he returned to 

America. 

Maxim, having thus studied Edison’s ideas, announced in the 

Scientific American of October 23, 1880, his new lamp, which in 

reality was but a bad imitation of the Edison paper lamp. Instead of 

making a carbon in the shape of a horseshoe, Maxim made his at first 

in the form of a Maltese cross and later in the form of an M. His 

company, the United States Electric Light Company, made several 

installations during its struggling existence, and then passed away, as 

did also Maxim the electrician – though Maxim the gun maker survived 

in England where he found it more congenial to live than in 

America. The trouble with most of the early imitators of Edison’s 

ideas was that they had no system, while Edison had worked out a 

fundamental one which embraced all the necessary accessories and of 

which the lamp was but one of the principal parts. 

Francis Jehl 

Maxim used the technique of “filament flashing” to improve the uniformity of the 

carbons in his lamps which went into production in 1880. In 1881, he emigrated to 

England after serving as the representative of the United States Electric Lighting 

Company at the Paris Exposition. Eventually, he moved on to new fields and became 

141 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.88 Böhm’s 

incandescent lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




renowned for his invention of the Maxim gun. He became a British citizen and was 

later knighted for his inventive accomplishments. In later years he developed an interest 

in aerial navigation. 

4.7.5.3 St. George Lane-Fox 

St George Lane-Fox (1856-1932), cousin of the 

philosopher Bertrand Russell and the second son of Augustus 

Lane-Fox, a scientist and a general in the British Army, was one 

of the pioneers of electric lighting. 

After several years of study and practical research in the 

field of electricity, during which, among other things, he 

installed an electric lighting system in Pall Mall 

The Electrician 3.8.1878 Lane-Fox constructed his first incandescent 

lamp using a platinum-iridium filament (or bridge, as he called 

it). GB Pat 3988/1878 The filament was required to be of high 

specific resistance and the lamps were to be connected in 

parallel. Indeed, Lane-Fox was one of the earliest inventors to 

understand the practicalities of “subdividing the light.” When he read a paper before the 

Society of Telegraph Engineers and Electricians, he received a hard time from his 

contemporaries, including R.E.B. Crompton, who dismissed the introduction and use of 

Lane-Fox 1881 

parallel circuits as wasteful. 

He made another lamp about the same time with a “burner” constructed from 

asbestos impregnated with carbon and placed in a nitrogen-filled glass bulb. The 

nitrogen was introduced, as in some earlier lamps, to prevent oxidation of the 

illuminant. Neither of these lamps were satisfactory but, when Edison and Swan made 

their advances in 1880, Lane-Fox rapidly quickly followed suit, using a carbon filament 

in a vacuum glass globe. He carbonised a French grass fibre, removed its hard outer 

surface, and then treated it with hydrocarbon vapour– a process which he had developed 

independently The Electrician, 20.1.1888, p341 – to obtain a filament of uniform resistance. On 

10 March 1879, Lane-Fox was granted a British patent on the flashing process which 

had also been discovered in the United States by Sawyer and Man. 

142 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.89 Lane-Fox’s 

carbon filament lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




In 1881, Lane-Fox applied for seven patents, the same number as Swan, but 

seventeen fewer than Edison He was later the first to patent a carbonised filament made 

The Electrician, 17.12.1886, 

from cellulose, which he ‘parchmentised’ with the aid of zinc chloride. 

p121. 

Lane-Fox was a visionary who, by 1881, already considered a daily output of 50,000 

lamps to be feasible in technical terms. He thought in terms of a complete distribution 

system and collaborated with the Brush Electric Light Company which produced 

generating equipment. The Anglo-American Brush Electric Light Corporation paid 


£50,000 for the rights to Lane-Fox’s incandescent lamp patents. 

Lane-Fox developed his own distribution system. He used a single-wire circuit 

with both the lamps and the generator grounded so that the earth acted as the return 

conductor. The current was regulated by batteries. He devised three different types of 

meter for measurement of current consumption. 

At the end of 1883 Lane-Fox abandoned his work in the field of electric lighting and 

went off on a pilgrimage to Tibet. His firm conviction that the incandescent lamp would 

soon displace the arc lighting and his persistent urging covering all aspects of the complete 

electric lighting system led to differences of opinion with the directors of Brush and he 

sought peace of mind by travelling abroad. 

4.7.5.4 William E. Sawyer and Albon Man 

William E. Sawyer commenced working on incandescent lighting in 1875. 

Heerding 1986, p50 By 1877 he was carrying out full time research on electricity and had 

developed several lamps which employed graphite burners operating in a nitrogen 

atmosphere and at least one with a platinum filament. The glass enclosures were 

cemented to metal holders and were demountable to replace the rods in the carbon 

lamps. The lamps were connected in parallel. 

Sawyer’s work was constrained by inadequate finance. Early in 1878 he met 

Albon Man, a Brooklyn lawyer, who offered financial backing. Man quickly developed 

an interest in the technical aspects and he soon began to participate in the experimental 

work. Their first lamp utilised a carbon rod mounted on carbon blocks. In order to 

permit expansion and contraction of the carbon it was formed into an arch or horseshoe. 

143


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Initially the bow was fashioned from a rod of retort carbon, and later, in 1878, twigs of 

live willow and many other substances were tried, including carbonised paper cut into a 

horseshoe shape. These proved costly to replace, so the lamp was redesigned with a 

straight carbon for quick renewal with easy scaling and exhaustion. Nitrogen was used 

within the glass globe to reduce the rate of oxidation of the carbon. 

Sawyer and Man also developed a process for making carbons more uniform by 

heating them by passage of an electric current in the presence of a hydrocarbon. The 

vapour in contact with these hotter portions decomposed, depositing a layer of pure 

carbon on the horseshoe or pencil. Thus carbon was precipitated where the resistance 

was highest, and the process could be controlled to produce any desired resistance 

uniformly along the entire length of the illuminant. Lamps with treated carbons were 

more efficient than those containing untreated carbons. The process was patented 

Sawyer and Man in the United States on 7 January 1879. They also invented a 

mechanical meter for the measurement of current consumption. 

4.7.6 Subsequent technological developments 

4.7.6.1 Developing the carbon filament 

Initially the Edison lamp led the industry and 

established a dominant position which he exploited to 

achieve economies of scale. As a result he produced a 

lamp which performed much better than its rivals. At the 

1881 Paris Exposition it was awarded a Diploma of 

Honour, whereas the lamps of Swan, Lane-Fox and Maxim 

had to be content with gold medals. 

Swan 1929, p82 

By attention to detail, Edison improved the efficiency 

of the carbon filament from the 1.68 lumens per watt of the 

first commercial specimens. In 1881, the untreated 

bamboo filament had a rating of 2.25 lumens per watt. The 

asphalt-treated filament of 1888 achieved 3 lumens per 

watt and a further ten per cent improvement was obtained 

by the use of the “filament-flashing” process in 1893. 

144 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.90 Diehl’s carbon 

filament lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




A widely publicised comparative test by the Franklin Institute in 1885 showed that 

although the Edison lamps exhibited good length of life and uniformity of performance, 

they consumed more energy for an equal amount of light output than any other make 

tested. The tests showed the average efficiency of the standard Edison lamp at that time 

to be 2.8 lumens per watt, and that of the competing lamps down to 3.65 lumens per 

watt. 

There were steady developments in the production of carbon filaments – Edison’s 

tar putty was superseded, first by the Bristol board and then by bamboo. Swan’s 

parchmentised cotton thread gave way to extruded cellulose. Interestingly, although the 

“squirted” filament was technically superior, it was not adopted immediately either by 

the Edison Company in USA or the Edison licensee company in Germany, both of 

which continued to produce the bamboo filament lamp. 

145 

Bright 1949, p117 

D.G. Fitzgerald of the School of Telegraphy and Electrical Engineering in London 

devised a structureless filament in 1882. He soaked paper in zinc chloride to make it 

homogeneous, washed it in baths of dilute hydrochloric acid and water, and then dried 

it. The resulting sheet was cut into strips, carbonised and formed into filaments. 

The next year Swan discovered a process for extruding a viscous solution of nitro- 

cellulose through a die into a coagulating bath of alcohol. The thread was washed and 

denitrated before carbonising. In 1884 Edward Weston, an arc lighting pioneer, 

developed a modification of the Swan process that was used by the United States 

Electric Lighting Company. Gun-cotton in the form of flat sheets was treated 

chemically to separate the nitryl from the cellulose. The resulting cellulose product was 

a tough, firm translucent substance from which the strips were cut in a sinuous form and 

carbonised. The Weston product was called the “Tamadine” filament and was used in 

the Westinghouse stopper lamp of 1893. 

Alexander Bernstein suspended a fine metallic wire in a liquid carbon compound 

and passed an electric current through the liquid from the wire to an electrode on the 

base of the container, forming a hard and dense deposit on the end of the wire. 

Dimensions of the resulting filament were controlled by varying the current and the rate 

at which the wire was withdrawn. In 1888, Legh S. Powell dissolved cotton in a hot


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




zinc chloride solution, extruding the mass through a die into alcohol or water. He then 

washed out the zinc chloride and shaped and carbonised the filament. 

Structureless filaments represented an improvement over natural-fibre-based 

filaments because greater homogeneity in composition and uniformity in cross-section 

were obtained, particularly when they were followed by the Sawyer-Man process of 

“flashing” the filaments in a hydrocarbon atmosphere. 

4.7.6.2 Value engineering 

Following successful development of the carbon filament lamp, manufacturers 

turned to value engineering rather than fundamental inventions. They concentrated on 

infrastructure and incremental improvements to existing products instead of making 

major technological changes. 

A major cost factor in the early lamps was the large amount of platinum used in 

their construction. Platinum was employed because, as well as being a good conductor 

of electricity, its expansivity matched that of glass and the seal between glass and 

platinum was good. Edison had taken specific measures to increase supplies of the 

metal, but, nevertheless, increasing demand drove up its price, and by 1890 it 

Bright 1949, p125 

represented about one-third the cost of the entire lamp. 

In an attempt to reduce the penalty, as early as 1881 Sir William Crookes had 

suggested a copper, silver, or gold wire encased by a sheath of platinum. Attempts to 

embed iron or copper wires in a cement which would adhere to both the glass and the 

wire were unsuccessful. In 1891 R.A. Fessenden, devised an alloy of iron, nickel, 

cobalt, silicon, and gold or silver. By 1893 the commonest method of reducing the 

platinum content was the Siemens’ seal which consisted simply of using a very short 

length of pure platinum to pass through the glass and welding to it a copper wire to carry 

the current from the base and another base metal wire to carry the current to the 

filament. 

Initially, all of the steps in the production of incandescent filament lamps were 

performed by hand. As production ramped up, machinery was developed to take over 

the various processes and make them more uniform. Typical of these was the invention 

in 1894 by Michael J. Owens of the Libbey Glass Company of a semiautomatic paste 

146


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




mould blowing machine for making lamp bulbs. The first bulbs were entirely hand 

blown by Böhm. Corning Glass Works introduced the use of moulds, which produced 

greater uniformity. In 1890, Corning experienced labour difficulties and Libbey 

expanded into glass making on a large scale. The improved process was introduced in 

1895 and resulted in significantly reduced costs. Experiments with semiautomatic bulb- 

blowing were also made in Germany at about the same time. Attempts were made to 

raise the operating temperature of the filament above the normal 1600°C by adding 

refractory materials to the carbon. The Seel lamp used threads of silk or wool 

impregnated with a mixture of sodium silicate and gum arabic. Others employed 

threads impregnated with potassium silicate, whilst Alexander Lodyguine used a 

mixture of boron fluoride and sugar. 

A major step in the realisation of a working incandescent lamp was the 

development of the process of “running on the pumps” to produce a viable vacuum. 

Nevertheless, imperfect vacuum continued to be a failure mechanism in the early 

production lamps. 

In the Fitzgerald lamp produced in 1882, an auxiliary terminal was connected to 

one of the two main terminals by a short piece of iron wire wrapped with magnesium 

ribbon. When the filament was heated during the exhaust process, the wire became hot 

and the magnesium combined with the residual oxygen. This was the first commercial 

use of a “getter” – an agent used inside the bulb to improve the quality of a vacuum. 

Bright 1949, p130 

In 1886, the Siemens brothers in Germany introduced hydrogen gas at low 

pressure into filament lamps. After the insertion of the gas, the glass bulb and filament 

were heated above normal operating temperatures. Bulb discoloration was said to be 

prevented while longer lamp life was obtained. 

In 1894 Arturo Malignani, an Italian engineer who had set up an electric-lighting 

plant in his home town of Udine, introduced a small amount of red phosphorus vapour 

in the exhaust tube while the filament was heated above normal operating temperature 

to improve the vacuum. When news of the discovery reached the General Electric 

Company it dispatched a representative immediately to buy the American rights to the 

process, which was also adopted by many lamp producers throughout Europe. The 

147


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




phosphorus-exhaust method was introduced to America in 1896. General Electric lamp 

engineers improved the technique and were able to reduce exhaust time to less than a 

minute. 

Edison’s patent victory with the vacuum-lamp patent caused some US lamp 

producers to commence production of gas-filled lamps. Incandescent carbon has a high 

vapour pressure and it was thought that the partial pressure of the gas filling would 

inhibit sublimation Early gas-filled lamps had failed because the gases conducted heat 

away from the filament to a greater extent than they reduced filament evaporation. 

The Star Electric Lamp Company and the Waring Electric Company introduced 

such lamps by 1894. Star employed a heavy hydrocarbon gas in its “New Sunbeam” 

lamp, whilst the “Novak” lamp of the Waring Electric Company used a filling of low- 

pressure bromine vapour to minimise heat loss from the filament. The bromine 

combined with carbon molecules thrown off by the filament, developing a high vacuum. 

The principal advantage of the bromine lamp was that it reduced bulb discoloration. 

Waring was not able to continue production for long because General Electric obtained 

an injunction on the grounds that the action of the bromine filling was an alternative 

means of creating a vacuum and this infringed the Edison vacuum-lamp patent. 

Experimentation with gas-filled lamps continued elsewhere. Professor William A. 

Anthony of Cooper Union made an intensive study of the problem in 1894 and 

concluded that bulb blackening and filament destruction were caused by sublimation of 

the filament and that the insertion of inert gases of great molecular weight would inhibit 

bulb blackening It was not possible to implement these findings immediately, however, 

because the volatility of carbon was so great that there was no gas with a sufficiently 

high vapour pressure to produce a gas-filled carbon lamp which was more efficient than 

a vacuum lamp and there were no viable methods of producing the inert gases – argon, 

krypton and xenon – which were most effective for this purpose. Eventually nitrogen 

was used widely, but this had to await the introduction of metal filaments. 

148 

Bright 1949, p132


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.7 New filament materials 

4.7.7.1 Refractory mixtures and carbon additives 

In an endeavour to avoid the use of pure carbon the Englishman F.G. Ansell, in 

1883 electro-deposited calcium, aluminium, and magnesium on carbon filaments and 

subsequently oxidised them. Filament operating temperatures were no higher than those 

of pure carbon, however. He also tried wires of these metals which he reinforced 

physically by oxidising their surfaces. In 1886 Max Neuthel in Germany impregnated 

magnesia and porcelain clay with platino-iridium salts and then heat-treated the 

structure to reduce the salts to a metallic state. The filament was then coated with 

chromium and operated in an air ambient. The main failure mechanism for these 

composite structures was the differential expansivity of the constituent materials which 

caused the filaments to fracture. 

In the USA, Turner D. Bottome, attempted to enhance carbon filaments by 

addition of high-melting-point metals. US Pat 401120 In 1887 he applied for a patent on the 

inclusion of tungsten and, in 1889, on the addition of molybdenum. Neither was 

successful. In 1887 Lawrence Poland devised a new filament based on iridium, a 

material which had previously been used some decades earlier. In their efforts to design 

around the Edison patents, Westinghouse retained the services of the Russian inventor 

Alexander Lodyguine. He coated carbon, platinum, or other metallic cores with various 

metals, including tungsten, osmium, molybdenum, and chromium and then attempted to 

remove the cores. US Pats 575002 575668 These filaments were also unsuccessful. The 

American, F.M.F. Cazin was another inventor who experimented with composite 

filaments. 

4.7.7.2 Metal filaments 

Germany was the seat of developments which would ultimately render the carbon 

filament obsolete. Rudolf Langhans, in 1888 proposed a composite filament consisting 

of an “inner mineral core of great light-giving power which was in itself a conductor, 

together with an outer coating of carbon, silicon or boron which conducted the current to 

the mineral vein or core when the latter had passed to the radiating condition.” He was 

encouraged in this research by the Thomson-Houston Electric Company which brought 

149


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




him to America in 1889, and financed his efforts to develop a substitute for carbon. The 

investment did not, however, bear fruit in America, although he was granted a patent in 

1894. Eventually he returned to Europe, where his lamp was made and sold for some 

years. 

After his invention of the incandescent gas mantle, Carl Auer von Welsbach 

turned his attention to the electric lamp. He outlined the history of the metal filament in 

a paper which was published in 1921 in Elektrotechnischen Zeitschrift. 

150 

Fürst 1926, p137 

He had come to the conclusion that there could be no further potential in carbon 

and thus decided to concentrate on high-melting-point metals as a substitute. His 

objective was to find a metal which could be formed into a wire or filament which could 

be made incandescent without plastic deformation. 

4.7.7.2.1 Osmium 

Following initial research with platinum, he began to study osmium. The 

platinum group metals were highly brittle materials. Osmium and ruthenium were 

inflammable and had poisonous combustion products. Osmium was a very rare metal, 

mostly found with iridium in the presence of platinum. The main deposits were in the 

Urals, America, Japan and Australia. 

It was not possible to draw the purified osmium after 

removal of the natural impurities. Von Welsbach therefore 

devised a technique for synthesising a wire of this metal, 

for which he received a German patent on 19 January 1898. 

corresponding GB Pat 1535/1898 

In this patent he disclosed two 

methods, but only the second one was successful. 

[1912] RPC 401 

Finely separated osmium powder was mixed with a 

binding medium and ground into a paste. This was 

squeezed at high pressure through fine holes bored in 

diamond or sapphire to form a filament of 0.1mm diameter, 

comprising osmium and the carbon-based binding medium. 

After the extrusion it was collected on cardboard discs 

Fürst 1926 

Fig. 4.91 Auer’s Osmium 

Lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




which were moved to and fro so that a continuous loop of desired size was built up. The 

filaments were dried and made red hot in the absence of air to carbonise the binding 

medium. The loops were then further 

heated by means of an electric current 

to white heat, as a result of which, the 

binding medium was vaporised 

completely and the individual particles 

of pure osmium sintered together. The 

osmium loops were then welded 

electrically to the ends of platinum 

lead-in wires. 

The Deutsche Gasglühlicht A.G. 

(Auer-Gesellschaft) introduced the 

first osmium lamp on the market in 

1902. As the filaments were very 

fragile they could only be installed and 

used in an upright position. 

Osmium was a better conductor than carbon 

and, in order to operate the lamps on supply 

voltages of 110 or 220 volts, it was necessary to 

mount very long filaments in the bulbs. This did 

not prove practicable with glass envelopes of the 

customary size, so it became the practice to connect 

three 40-volt lamps in series across a 110-volt 

supply. Even with 40-volt lamps it was necessary 

to utilise two filaments connected in series within 

the bulb. Eventually 110-volt lamps with five 

filaments were constructed. 

Whereas platinum becomes plastic in the 

region of 1700°C, osmium melts at 2,500°C, 

permitting a light emission of one candle power for 

Fürst1926 

Fig. 4.92 Mounting instructions for osmium lamps 

151 

Fig. 4.93 Tantalum lamp 

Fürst 1926


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




an input of 1.5 watts. The corresponding figure for carbon was 3.5 watts. The lifetime 

of an osmium lamp was in the region of 1000 hours. 

(The effective life for incandescent lamps was defined as the time taken for the 

light emission to fall to 20% of its initial value and was determined by variations in the 

filament and its deposition on the glass envelope.) 

4.7.7.2.2 Vanadium, niobium and tantalum 

At the turn of the century, it was especially apparent to Wilhelm von Siemens, the 

second son of Werner, who had taken over the running of the Siemens company, that a 

new approach must now be sought. The Stefan-Boltzmann Law which defined the 

characteristics of radiation from hot bodies, taught that increasing the temperature of 

light-emitting bodies increased their efficiency as generators of light. The only 

materials which could achieve significantly higher temperatures without vaporisation 

were the rare heavy metals which had high melting points. 

Alternative filament materials needed also to have the mechanical durability of a 

carbon filament and suitable dimensions and properties for mounting in a glass 

enclosure. Only if an incandescent lamp had these properties would it establish itself in 

the world markets. 

Siemens was prepared to devote substantial resources to the attainment of these 

goals. He gave free rein to men who seemed to him to be able to achieve these 

objectives. Without being personally involved, he was instrumental in the development 

of the new incandescent lamp. 

Work was commenced at the beginning of 1902 under the direction of Werner von 

Bolton and Otto Feuerlein. Von Bolton had at his disposal in the laboratory a selection 

of heavy metals. After he had studied many properties of these metals, he felt that 

metals of the vanadium group exhibited the desired heat characteristics. 

Vanadium itself had too low a melting point. Filaments of the closely related 

niobium, which had a much higher melting point showed promise, but the third element 

of the group, tantalum, with a melting point of 2,800C was the most successful. 

152


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The important sources of tantalum were America and Australia, with additional 

deposits in the Urals, in Italy and Bavaria. Although the ores were rare, they existed in 

much greater quantities than the raw materials of osmium. Tantalum occurs in nature only 

in combination with other materials. Great efforts are needed to purify it and this is what 

von Bolton attempted first. He obtained the pure metal in the form of a powder which he 

subsequently melted in vacuo, preparing ingots which he worked mechanically. This 

material could be hammered like steel, rolled and drawn into fine wires. 

The first tantalum lamp was prepared on 28 January 1903. It had an arc-shaped 

filament of drawn tantalum wire with a diameter of 0.28mm and a length of 54mm. 

This wire could only be used for low voltages of 4-6 volts. 

Otto Feuerlein then commenced work on fabrication of lamps for the most 

commonly used voltages of 110-220 volts. Whilst a carbon filament for lamps of 25- 

32 c.p. was only 35-40 cm long, an equivalent tantalum wire 

for a voltage of 110 volts had a length of 70cm. In July 1903 

he ordered a tantalum wire of 0.05mm and used this to 

construct a lamp in a bulb of the usual size. 

Fleming 1921 

Fig. 4.95 “Half-watt” gasfilled 

tungsten filament lamp 

The tantalum lamp could 

be used in all applications in 

which the osmium lamp was 

used and had an operating life 

of 600-800 hours. It had an 

energy requirement of 1.5 

watts per candle but this did 

not represent an improvement 

on the osmium lamp. The fact 

that its filament was 

constructed from a drawn wire rather than a sintered 

powder gave it increased mechanical strength, but it 

existed in the market place merely as an alternative 

technology rather than one which would dominate. 

153 

Fleming 1921 

Fig. 4.94 Drawn-wire 

tungsten incandescent 

lamp


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.7.2.3 Tungsten 

Tungsten melts at a temperature of 3,000ºC. It is therefore possible to heat a 

filament or wire of this material to well over 2,000ºC without plastic deformation. A 

lamp filament fabricated from it is therefore not affected catastrophically by the over- 

voltages which occur on any normal supply. 

In 1904, the Austrians Just and Hanaman attempted to construct a tungsten 

filament lamp by utilising the method developed by Welsbach for osmium. 

GB Pat 23899/1904 The technique was successful and was rapidly adopted throughout the 

industry. Many years later, when writing his history of the development of metal 

filament lamps. Welsbach freely admitted that, in his excitement over the success of 

osmium, he overlooked the possibilities of tungsten, which was already well-known in 

other contexts and was much more widely available. 

The last significant step in the evolution of the metal filament lamp was the 

development in 1910 by Irving Langmuir of General Electric of the hot working process 

for production of ductile tungsten wire. Again, the process itself was old, having been 

developed during the 1890s by Henri Moissan but its application to the production of 

incandescent lamps represented a new departure. 

The final development which took the incandescent filament lamp to a form of 

construction which continued virtually unchanged until the end of the twentieth century 

was the filling of the glass bulb with an inert gas, such as argon, which had the effect of 

reducing the transport of material from the filament to the glass envelope where it would 

cut down the light transmission and hence reduce efficiency. 

Some of the developments were of a purely cosmetic nature. Clear glass was used 

for the enclosures of the early lamps, but, as the efficiency of the filaments increased, 

steps were taken to reduce the superficial brightness by providing a diffusing envelope. 

In some lamps, the bulb was frosted by dipping it into a hydrofluoric acid solution to 

diffuse the light. Others employed opal glass. Reflectors and diffusing shades were 

used with clear glass or part of the bulb was silvered, etched or painted. In some cases 

the bulb was covered with a thin film of collodion or varnish. 

154


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




There were attempts to produce duplex bulbs which had a second, or even a third, 

filament which could be brought into operation when the first one failed, but these were 

little more than a gimmick and did not achieve widespread sales. 

The following table illustrates the improvements in efficiency obtained as a result 

of advances in filament construction. 

4.7.8 Infrastructure 

Light output per kW input 

Year Lamp technology Light output (c.p.) 

1879 carbon filament 220 

1897 Nernst lamp 600 

1900 osmium filament 650 

1904 GEM metallised carbon 450 

1904 tantalum filament 650 

1906 sintered tungsten filament 900 

1911 drawn tungsten filament 1250 

1913 gas-filled tungsten 2000 

Source Fürst 1926, p162 

“Cavendish had very few experimental appliances, and his only method of comparing 

the electrical resistance of substances or wires was by taking electric shocks through them, and 

adjusting them until the shocks appeared to be equal. [He] had a valet called Richard, who 

was made to add to his duties by acting as a shock-meter. I remember assisting Maxwell in a 

similar capacity one afternoon, to decide whether two electric shocks taken through different 

circuits were equal or different in intensity.” 

Ambrose Fleming 

Fleming1921, p65 

“What a marvellous mind and vision must that American, have. He not only created a 

comprehensive system of distributing electricity in a commercial manner, but made an 

efficient generator, a new, cheap and simple lamp, a meter; in fact, every piece of apparatus 

necessary, and last but not least, the handy humble insulating tape.” 

French electrician 

Jehl 1938, p726 

Although the provision of centralised gas supplies created a market for electric 

lighting, the industry possessed no infrastructure when Edison and Swan produced the 

first viable incandescent lamps. Edison had made detailed calculations, based on market 

research on sales of gas to domestic consumers, which established a price at which they 

would be prepared to change to electric lighting. There was, however, no means of 

transmitting the electric current to domestic premises, and no means of measuring the 

current if the transmission problem could be overcome. 

155


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The use of copper conductors was well established, but insulators were only 

imperfectly understood, having previously only been widely used in the context of 

telegraph cables which were operated at low voltages. Indeed, many of the early 

lighting installations relied on bare conductors and, had the lamps which they supplied 

been capable of working at the voltages used in modern practice, there would have been 

many more deaths from electrocution than actually occurred. 

Although Edison’s original method of distribution of power at his laboratory in 

Menlo Park was by way of overhead lines, his plan for commercial installations was to 

lay cables underground. 

India rubber was known to be a good insulator and had been used successfully 

with submarine cables. Jehl 1938, p718 Copper conductors for the distribution of power 

Fig. 4.96 Laying supply mains in the First District of New York 

Engraving from Harper’s Weekly 24 June 1882 

156 

Friedel 1986


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




had a much greater cross-section. The first experimental installation was based on 

wooden troughs in which the bare conductors were mounted. This choice was on the 

basis of expediency, in order to put on a demonstration for Edison’s financial backers. 

Lack of durability and small deficiencies in the insulating properties were not 

considered to be a drawback for this purpose as Edison expected to update the 

installation as developments took place. 

No attention was paid to small leakages because there was no background 

knowledge of the use of insulation for underground conductors and no awareness of the 

mechanisms of progressive breakdown due to decomposition, electrolysis and other 

actions which set in when a high tension and a heavy current were employed. 

Initially, the wooden mouldings with bare copper conductors were buried under 

six inches of earth. Tests showed the insulation to be good but, after heavy rainfall, it 

failed completely – the previous good test result was due to the insulating properties of 

dry earth. 

The cables and mouldings were dug up again, the covers taken off the wooden 

troughs and coal tar poured over the wires. This effected a temporary respite, but soon 

the leakage was as bad as ever. The coal tar was tested and found to be so acid that it 

caused the fatal leaks. Another experiment consisted of filling the grooves in the 

wooden moulding which held the conductors with a plastic compound of powdered slate 

and a binder. Again the insulation failed. Abandoning the empirical approach, Edison 

ordered his assistant to spend two weeks in the library reading all he could find on the 

subject of insulation and insulating materials, such as resins, gums and oil. 

Howell, the assistant responsible for the installation, recalled his experience with 

the laying of the first underground conductors. 

‘How to insulate these wires was a knotty problem. Mr. Edison sent me to his library 

and instructed me to read up on the subject of insulation, offering the services of Dr. Moses 

to translate any German or French authorities which I wished to consult. After two weeks’ 

search I came out of the library with a list of materials which we might try. I was given 

carte blanche to order these from McKesson & Robbins and within ten days I had Dr. 

Moses’ laboratory entirely taken up with small kettles in which I boiled a variety of 

insulating compounds. The smoke and stench drove Dr. Moses out. The results of this stew 

were used to impregnate cloth strips, which were wound spirally upon No.10 B.W.G. wires 

one hundred feet in length. Each experimental cable was coiled into a barrel of saltwater 

and tested continually for leaks. Of course, there were many failures, the partial successes 

pointing the direction for better trials. These experiments resulted in our adopting refined 

Trinidad asphaltum boiled in oxidized linseed oil with paraffin and a little beeswax as the 

insulating compound to cover the bare wire cables, which had been previously laid 

157


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




alongside of trenches throughout the streets of this little Jersey village. Barrels of linseed 

oil, bales of cheap muslin and several tons of the asphaltum were hauled in, two 50-gallon 

iron kettles were mounted on bricks, and the mixing operation was soon progressing in a big 

way. Through the pot in which this compound was boiled, we ran strips of muslin about 2½ 

inches wide. These strips were wound into balls and wrapped upon the cables. Up from the 

ground came the wires once more, suspended on wooden sawhorses above the earth. After 

the man who served these tapes upon the cables had progressed about six feet, he was 

followed by another man serving another tape in the opposite direction, and he in turn by a 

third man serving a third tape upon the cable in the direction of the first winding. After the 

cables were all covered with this compound and buried, the resistance to the earth was 

found to be sufficiently high for our purpose. 

The temporary system of underground conductors lasted throughout the winter of 

1880-1881 until Edison abandoned the demonstration in 1881. It showed the feasibility 

of operating underground conductors for carrying large currents and served as a pilot for 

commercial installations. 

A by-product of this work was the development of 

the ubiquitous insulating tape which subsequently proved 

to be so useful. Francis Jehl, Edison’s assistant, recalled 

that, when he was sent to Europe in 1882, electricians 

working for arc light companies would often beg for 

some of the Edison insulating tape for splices in their 

lines. Their normal technique was to insulate their wire 

connections using thin sheet rubber which was wrapped 

over the bare wire. This was then fixed with cord or 

thread and frequently this was ineffective. 

Jehl 1938 

Fig. 4.98 Underground tee-branch 

connector 

158 

US Pat 251552 

Fig. 4.97 Patent for underground 

conductor 

Jehl 1938 

Fig. 4.99 Evolution of Edison underground 

conductors 

Early in 1881, Edison gave considerable 

thought to an underground power supply system. He devised a practical system and 

filed a patent application on 22 April 1881 and this was granted on 27 December 1881. 

US Pat 251552 It was based on copper rods mounted in iron pipes. The insulator was the


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




mixture of refined Trinidad asphaltum, boiled in oxidised linseed oil with paraffin and 

beeswax devised for the pilot installation at Menlo Park in 1881. The underground 

conductors were separated by pasteboard washers from the protective pipe. In New 

York City half-round rods were used, at first, in the two-wire feeder-system from the 

Pearl Street Central Station. The washers were slipped over the two copper conductors 

and held at equal distances by cord. When the washers were firmly held in place, the 

assembly was inserted into a wrought-iron pipe, one end of which was placed in the hot 

asphaltum compound and a suction hand-pump applied to fill the pipe by sucking the 

insulating compound into the voids. 

One of the problems experienced in this process was the formation of air-bubbles 

in the insulator. Later, the cardboard washers were replaced by rope winding. The 

U-shaped expansion joints were replaced by 

flexible copper cables. Multiple thin corrugated 

copper bands were also tried as couplings, but 

proved less effective. 

In the development of this system of 

underground conductors solutions to many 

problems had to be devised. Fittings such as 

junction boxes, boxes for house connection 

service and safety catch boxes all had to be 

designed and constructed in a variety of sizes. 

The early systems suffered many imperfections, exemplified by the following 

report recorded by Edison’s assistant, Francis Jehl. 

In the tests of a radically new system, of course, certain unexpected things will happen, 

and minor defects will appear from time to time; that was the reason Edison conducted such 

careful trials before permanent operation of the plant began. 

On August 24, 1882, the steam dynamo was running without a hitch, the underground 

system received its full pressure, and the staff at the station was well-satisfied with the 

results. Shortly, however, a police officer appeared at the station. He announced that some 

of the “juice” must be leaking out at the corner of Nassau and Arm streets, because all 

horses passing a certain spot exhibited certain equestrian antics such as had never before 

been witnessed. 

It was a great day for journalism and the Herald, Times, Tribune, Sun, and other papers 

all printed amusing accounts of the affair. Some of the incidents they recorded follow: 

“A peddler of tinware, with a ten dollar ‘nag’, drove through the crowd. At the moment 

he entered the charmed spot, his quadruped gave a snort, and, with ears erect and tail 

pointing to the North Star, dashed down the street at a 2:40 gait. Roars of laughter followed 

159 

Jehl 1938 

Fig. 4.100 Street safety connector box


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




the terror-stricken peddler as he grasped the reins with one hand and with the other 

endeavored to hold down his dancing stock in trade.” 

“A farmer with a sleepy sorrel plug also drove by. The old mare began a double-shuffle 

on the cobblestones. The farmer rubbed his eyes and gazed with astonishment at the 

remarkable evolutions of his hitherto peaceful beast.” 

“Next came a big truck loaded with paper. No sooner had the horses stepped upon the 

magic spot than they dropped kicking upon their knees.” “Next came a one-horse van of an 

express company. Again the crowd parted, making a lane in such a fashion that the horse 

had to pass over the mysterious spot, but they looked innocently at the driver in response to 

his inquiring gaze. When he turned around after the horse had bolted and he had him under 

control again, the puzzle was so intricate that he forgot to swear till he got to Beckman 

Street.” 

At the power station a reporter began to shoot inquiries at Clarke, who took off his 

glasses and slowly started to clean them with his handkerchief in order to consider his 

replies. He then cautiously began: “The explanation of any trouble of that kind is very 

difficult. In fact, we haven’t even it consideration yet, and we have no evidence that the 

shocks, if there were any, came from our station.” 

“You have wires laid at that point.” 

“Yes sir.” “The question is then, would it not be possible for a horse to be affected by 

the electricity from your wires?” 

“We can say, generally speaking, that if you should connect two poles of any electric 

battery or dynamo to two pieces of damp ground, while a current was prevented from 

passing from one to the other by an intervening spot of dry 

ground, of course, any animal or other conductor in passing 

over the strip of dry ground, if it were narrow enough, could 

make contact between the two poles, and could receive a 

shock.” Then Clarke drew a sketch that explained the Nassau 

Street mystery without confirming it. Later on in the day, 

Edison told Clarke that the leak occurred because some men 

who had dug there had spiked one of the electric tubes.” 

A major difficulty encountered by the first commercial 

suppliers of electricity was that there was no established method of measuring the amount 

of power that had been supplied. Edison devised a technique which was based on electro- 

deposition. He interposed an electrolytic cell in series with the power supply leads. At 

periodic intervals a “meter reader” would call and collect the electrodes, which would then 

be weighed, enabling the current supplied to be calculated from the mass of metal 


Measuring insulation of 

cables in the street (from 

Harper’s Weekly 

Jehl 1941 

160 

Jehl1941 


Clarke’s sketch 

transferred from one plate to the other. 

The method was based on the 

assumption that the supply voltage 

remained constant (a premise that was 

by no means valid) but, until a better 

scheme could be devised, it was 

generally accepted by the consumers. 

Even such simple artefacts as a


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




universal means of making electrical connection to the lamp had to be devised from 

scratch. The first Edison base was simply a round wooden plug which slipped into a 

wooden socket containing a hole of the same size. Strips of metal on the base made 

contact with complementary strips in the socket. No means of retaining the lamp were 

provided, it being held in place solely by gravity. 

161


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Fig. 4.103 Insulation failure in a supply cable, recorded by Thomas Worth in Judge 

162 

Jehl 1941


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Fleming 1921 

Fig. 4.104 Edison electrolytic 

zinc plate house meter (1882) 

This drawback was addressed by the provision of a 

screw thread modelled on the cap of a kerosene can. A 

wooden base supported and insulated the metal screw 

shell and ring terminals and was attached to the bulb 

with plaster of Paris. In 1881 the size of the base was 

reduced. Next, the wood was superseded by plaster of 

Paris, and the metal ring above the shell was replaced by 

a metal button on the end of the base. Thereafter, 

changes were superficial and the 

basic design remained unchanged 

until the present day. Each producer 

had his own design which was not 

compatible with that of other lamp manufacturers. Until standards 

were agreed, it became customary for lamp manufacturers to supply 

adapters. Eventually all manufacturers adopted a common 

specification, although this did not always transcend national 

Edisonia 1904 

Fig. 4.106 Quick break switch used at 

Pearl Street generating station 

barriers, so export trade was 

Bright 1949, p115 

inhibited. 

As the entire industry was 

new, the need to develop an 

infrastructure extended from the 

development of simple 

components such as switches, right up to the 

provision of power stations and generating plant which required huge capital 

investment. In the USA, Edison established 

a vertically integrated organisation with all 

of the elements under a single control. 

Siemens, in Germany, adopted a similar 

approach but, in England, Swan developed 

a horizontally integrated network of 

163 

Jehl 1941 

Fig. 4.105 Early 

Edison lamp and 

socket 

Fig. 4.107 Edison Jumbo No. 2 

Edisonia 1904


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Jehl 1941 

Fig. 4.108 Edison’s Pearl Street generating station 

(1882) 

164 

suppliers similar to the modern 

Japanese keiretsu. 

Fig. 4.110 Interior of the Pearl Street Station, 1882 

Friedel 1986


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Jehl 1938 

Fig. 4.109 Interior of Pearl Street station 

from Scientific American 

165


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Swan United Electric Light Company’s illustrated catalogue of 1883, which 

gives an indication of the costs and travails involved in private installations at the time, 

is reproduced as Appendix 4. 

4.7.9 Patents and litigation – agreements and combinations – market power 

“It would be gross immorality in the law to set everybody free to use a person’s work 

without his consent and without giving him an equivalent.” 

John Stuart Mill 

“With respect to a great number of inventions in the arts, an exclusive privilege is 

absolutely necessary, in order that what is sown may be reaped. In new inventions, protection 

against imitators is not less necessary than in established manufactures protection against 

thieves. He who has no hope that he shall reap, will not take the trouble to sow. But that 

which one man has invented, all the world can imitate.” 

Jeremy Bentham 

Manual of Political Economy 

“Berlin is crawling with patent agents who exist to help the industrialist, but whose help 

would not be necessary if the law had not created artificial obstacles.” 

Dr J.Th. Mouton 

Vragen des Tijds (1890) 

“...... few circumstances could be more prejudicial to the welfare of the industry as a whole 

than that entire branches should fall into the hands of monopolists who use their position to 

crush out all progress in hands other than their own.” 

The Electrician. 

20 June 1890. 

The monopoly granted by letters patent reduces the impact of competition and 

enables an innovation to be established with relative freedom. Patents are therefore 

regarded as a desirable adjunct to innovation. However, the manner of their use does not 

always reflect the altruistic visions of those who established the legal framework. 

4.7.9.1 Diversity of national patent laws 

Possession is proverbially nine points of the law, and it is hardly to be wondered at that a 

feeling existed in electrical circles that in actions for infringement the odds were largely in 

favour of the patentees. From an abstract point of view this feeling is by no means to be 

regretted, for every invalidation of a patent is a tacit reproof to the Patent Office - or rather to 

the patent law - which leaves the patentees to discover whether the protection it professes to 

confer is worth the paper on which it is written. Under the existing régime the English patent 

law is as much a lottery as the Government lotteries of France or Italy. For our own part, we 

are inclined to think that a deplorable mistake was made when the “poor inventor” was 

encouraged to seek a delusive protection by diminishing the cost. Far better would it have 

been to have raised the charges still higher, and by inaugurating a rigorous search for 

anticipations to have placed an English patent upon a level with those of the United States or 

of Germany. 

Electrician 20 July 1889, pp 329 

166


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Although the basic concepts of patent protection were similar – the applicant 

disclosed details of his invention to the state and, provided it satisfied requirements of 

novelty, inventiveness and utility, a monopoly was granted for a specified length of time – 

details of practice varied from territoryto territory. For example, in Britain the duration of 

a patent was fourteen years (twice the length of an apprenticeship) from the date of filing 

of the complete specification, whereas in USA it was a maximum of seventeen years from 

the date of grant. Some countries had ‘working’ requirements, that is to say, the invention 

had actually to be practised within the territory. Other countries curtailed the term of the 

patent if corresponding foreign patents were allowed to lapse or were invalidated. 

The USA was one territory where the latter restriction applied. At the date of the 

Edison tar-putty carbon filament lamp patent, US patent laws contained a provision that 

an American patent was valid only as long as the shortest-lived patent on the same 

invention in a foreign country, if the foreign patent had been issued first. The 

corresponding Canadian patent was declared invalid by the Canadian Deputy 

Commissioner of Patents, on 26 February 1889, for non-compliance with Canadian 

statutes regarding manufacture and importation. As the Canadian patent had been 

granted before the American patent, the effect of this decision would have been to 

nullify its US counterpart. Fortunately for Edison, the case was retried by the Minister 

of Agriculture and it was decided that the Deputy Commissioner of Patents did not have 

proper jurisdiction over the matter. The decision was reversed and the patent remained 

valid. Bright 1949, p88 US patent protection for the Edison lamp was, however, curtailed by 

two years as a result of the eventual expiry of the Canadian patent. (Although the 

British patent had expired on 10 November 1893, the American limitation provision was 

not applicable in that instance because of legal technicalities – it was decided that the 

date applicable to the British patent was not 10 November 1879, the day on which it was 

initially filed, but was rather either the date of the filing of the complete specification or 

the date on which the Great Seal was attached. Both of those dates were subsequent to 

27 January 1880, the date of the American patent.) 

To meet the ‘working’ requirement in France, Swan endeavoured to sell his French 

patents to a local manufacturer. The best offer he received was £40,000 so he determined 

to set up his own plant and manufacture his lamps there. 

167


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Belgium was another country that had a ‘working’ requirement. In order to validate 

one of Swan’s patents, James Swinburne, an employee, was commissioned to call at 

Antwerp, on the way to set up the Paris factory, so that a lamp could be made there in 

order to comply with this requirement of Belgian patent law. Swan 1929, p83 It took three 

weeks to set up the necessarymachines and complete the exercise. Part of a saw-mill was 

boarded off to serve as the works. The plant was a Gramme (series wound) dynamo 

whose speed varied from about 500 to 1500 revolutions from minute to minute. When the 

lamp was finally completed, it cost about £100. It was subsequently sold at a knock-down 

price to the owner of the sawmill, with a caution that he should, on no account, actually 

use it. 

There were also some fundamental differences of philosophy from territory to 

territory. The German Federation inherited the approach of the Kingdom of Prussia. 

Heerding 1986, p250 The term ‘invention’ was not defined by law but was left to scientific or 

judicial interpretation. The stance adopted by the Patentamt was that too many patents 

hampered industrial progress and standards of patentability were accordingly made very 

high. In consequence eight out of ten applications were refused and, of the two which 

survived, one, on average, was withdrawn after three years. 

In the Netherlands, opinion against private monopolies ran so strongly that the 

patent system was suspended completely from 1869 to 1912. When the patent laws were 

eventually restored, the Dutch acquired a reputation for harsh examination with the 

imposition of extremelyhigh standards of patentability. 

Commercial interests were often adversely prejudiced by these differences in 

practice from country to country and this gave rise to Parliamentary lobbying in an attempt 

to rectify the situation. 

“In considering the position of manufacturers in this country as compared with their 

foreign rivals, some reference to British patent laws is necessary. One condition of the grant of 

a patent in most foreign countries is that the patent shall be worked – that is to say, that the 

patented article shall be manufactured – in that particular country within a specified period. 

But a foreign manufacturer is able to secure patent protection in this country without any 

obligation to manufacture here. In this way English inventors are placed at a distinct 

disadvantage as compared with their confreres abroad, and the general effect is to diminish the 

amount of patented articles manufactured in this country, and to bring about a corresponding 

increase in their manufacture abroad, thereby stimulating their importation to this country in 

competition with British products.” 

Garcke 1907, p81 

168


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




This particular problem was resolved by means of a provision in Lloyd George’s 

1907 Patents Act. 

In America, as a result of agitation during the early nineties, when the tar-putty 

patent and a number of fundamental patents in other industries were cut short before 

their full terms, patent laws were amended with effect from 1 January 1898, to include a 

provision that domestic applications for patents might be filed any time within seven 

months of the earliest foreign application without prejudicing the full seventeen year 

term of the US patent, regardless of its date of issue. 

The last part of the nineteenth century saw the initial moves towards international 

harmonisation of the patent system. In 1873, an international congress on the protection of 

industrial property was convened in Vienna following an American refusal to take part in 

the World Exhibition due to inadequate patent protection. Heerding 1986,p245 A second 

meeting, took place in 1878, concurrently with the World Exhibition in Paris. At this 

meeting an international union in the field of industrial property was proposed, and, in 

1883, l’Union pour la Protection de la Propriété Industrielle was formally established in 

the French capital. Amongst other things, the Paris Convention provided for mutual 

recognition of priority for the first filing in a signatorycountry, reciprocity of treatment for 

applicants and rights of passage for ships and vehicles in transit. 

4.7.10 Litigation in the UK 

“In the columns of your Law Report of to-day there occurs a most extraordinary instance of 

the evil tendency at present pervading the practice of even our highest Courts of warping or 

straining the language of a patent specification so as to make it read in some forced sense in 

favour of a patentee who is backed up by wealthy supporters. This evil tendency, which is 

deliberately fostered by eminent leading counsel and by a few professional experts, who lend 

themselves to this mode of securing a monopoly for the patentee, is rapidly bringing into 

discredit the administration of the patent laws.” 

Prof. S.P. Thompson 

Letter to the Times, 6 Jul 1886 

“To sum up the whole question, I have pointed out that there exists a practice of judicially 

stretching patents so as to make them include more than the inventor claimed, and I maintain 

that such a practice is essentially unjust. Mr. Imray admits the practice, and defends it in the 

case of what he calls fundamental inventions. Prof. Forbes has explained how the machinery 

of the courts is such that wealthy owners of patents can avail themselves of this practice to 

crush inventors of small means. I have also pointed out that there exists a practice in the law 

courts of representing a mere improvement in detail to be a fundamental invention, in order to 

gain the advantage of having the patent stretched. This also Mr. Imray does not dispute, but 

retorts that the opinion of a mere professor is not worth that of six judges. When I narrow 

down the issues to particular cases he tries to evade the issue by coining definitions that beg 

the question, and parables which omit the facts. I submit then, that my main propositions 

169


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




remain unshaken; and, in closing the discussion, I can only thank Prof. Forbes and Mr. Imray, 

whose letters have respectively helped to expose and illustrate this blot in the administration of 

patent law.” 

Prof. S.P. Thompson 

Letter to the Times, 22 September 1886 

4.7.10.1 Edison v. Swan 

Although Swan felt he had solved the problem of the sub-division of the light with 

the lamp which he produced and exhibited in December 1878, he took no steps to patent 

it. He was of the opinion that, having regard to the state of the art, the broad features of an 

incandescent lamp containing a carbon conductor in an evacuated glass globe were not 

patentable. In his view the only matters which were patentable at that date, were those 

particular components and processes which made such a lamp practical. It was not until 

1880 that he applied for and obtained his first patent in connection with the incandescent 

electric lamp. This was for the special process of evacuation, the essential feature of 

which was continuing the exhaustion of the bulb whilst the carbon was incandescent to 

remove all occluded gases, the so-called “running on the pumps.” He also patented later 

the manufacture of carbon filaments from parchmentised thread, and the special means 

employed for attaching the filaments to the current supply leads. 

The publication by Edison of a stream of British patents relating to the incandescent 

electric lamp alerted Stearn to the risk of Swan’s being anticipated by a prior filing. 

Swan 1929, p69 After the success achieved in December 1878, he repeatedly urged Swan to 

patent his ideas. Swan, however, influenced by his own views on the novelty of his 

proposals, and relying on his public demonstrations, made the tactical error of delaying his 

application. Stearn’s apprehensions proved well founded. On 10th November 1879, 

Edison applied for and obtained a British patent, claiming, in the broadest terms, the 

invention of an incandescent electric lamp comprising simply a carbon filament within a 

glass receiver from which the air had been exhausted. GB Pat 4576/1879 This patent was the 

outcome of an experiment which he had made on 21st October 1879, with a lamp 

containing a loop of carbonised sewing thread mounted in an evacuated bulb. 

Swan established a company in Newcastle to manufacture his lamps and this was 

rapidly succeeded by a larger concern under the title The Swan United Electric Lighting 

Company Ltd. Almost as soon as the new company was formed, the Edison Company, 

which had recently been floated to acquire and exploit Edison’s UK electric lamp patents, 

170


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




applied for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the Swan Company from infringement of 

the patents. Swan found that the legal proceedings were a great distraction from the 

demands of running his business, as the following extracts from letters he wrote to his 

wife, indicate. 

“Yesterday afternoon I went to Mr. Moulton’s, and had a conversation with him as to the 

‘action’. He would very much like to help us, but fears, unless we make some very strong 

effort, he will have to go against us. There is a letter from Sir Wm. Thomson to our attorney. 

He will give evidence in our favour. It is very good of him! No doubt he would rather keep 

out of it if only he consulted his own feeling and convenience.” 

“I need not say how glad I was to receive your telegram telling me that the lamp I used at 

the lecture (to the Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle on February 3rd, 1879) is in 

safety and unbroken.” 

“I have made an affidavit denying the contention of the Edison Company, and it is 

expected that to-day the question will be decided whether they obtain an injunction to restrain 

our Company from making lamps. I do not think there is the slightest doubt the application for 

an injunction will be refused; our opponents will, therefore, gain no advantage of any kind at 

this stage of the proceedings.” 

The application for an interlocutory injunction was indeed refused and negotiations 

for a peaceful settlement of the action took place. Edison already had experience of such a 

situation in an earlier conflict over telephone patents and the solution adopted on that 

occasion was for the Bell and Edison interests to merge to form the United Telephone 

Company. This served as a precedent for the resolution of the conflict over lamps, the 

culmination of the discussions being an amalgamation of the two rival companies under 

Swan 1929, p87 

the banner of The Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company, Ltd. 

The compromise which was reached had an historical consequence, since it created 

a commercial pressure to produce an expedient resolution of the dispute over who had 

priority in the invention of the filament lamp. Swan had publicly exhibited his lamp in 

December 1878 and on several occasions in 1879 before the date of Edison’s British 

patent of November 1879. Swan 1929, p101 When the amalgamation took place, beneficial 

ownership of this patent was vested in the new company. On account of its exceedingly 

broad and fundamental claims, if the patent could be sustained, it would give the company 

a very valuable monopoly. Infringers, however, were not slow to perceive that the prior 

public demonstrations by Swan might be used as a means of invalidating Edison’s patent. 

The company was consequently placed in a somewhat awkward predicament. So far as 

the invention and development of a practical form of incandescent lamp in the United 

Kingdom and the actual processes employed for its successful manufacture were 

171


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




concerned, Swan contributed the lion’s share; but, so far as the maintenance of a patent 

monopoly was concerned, Edison’s patent was of the utmost value. In order to retain this 

patent and preserve the monopoly, it became necessary for the company to satisfy the 

Court either that the lamps shown by Swan in 1878 and 1879 were unsuccessful 

experiments, or, alternatively, that they were not incandescent lamps containing a carbon 

filament, for Edison’s claims mentioned a carbon filament as an essential feature. In 

subsequent proceedings the Court of Appeal decided that the carbon conductor in the 

Swan lamp was not a filament, with the effect that the company succeeded in saving the 

patent and securing the maintenance of its monopoly, but at the expense of diminution of 

the credit due to the inventor on whose work its successful manufacture of the 

incandescent electric lamp was based. 

4.7.10.2 Edison v. Woodhouse (First Action) – [1886] RPC 167, [1887] RPC 79 

“If my left one don’t get you, my right one will.” 

172 

Big John – popular song 

On 10 October 1879 Edison was granted a patent GB Pat 4576/1879 on his original tar- 

putty, carbon filament lamp. The specification was drafted with great skill and the 

invention claimed in broad terms to cover the high resistance filament sealed in vacuo in 

an all-glass vessel to prevent attrition of the filament by oxidation or, what was known at 

the time as “air washing”, in which physical bombardment of the filament by residual gas 

molecules resulted in transport of material from the filament to the walls of the container. 

Platinum lead-in wires were used to avoid expansivity mismatch problems and the 

connection to the carbon filament made by pressing the tar putty round the metal electrode. 

On the 2 January 1880 Swan was granted a patent GB Pat 18/1880 for the technique of 

“running on the pumps” – continuing the evacuation process whilst the filament was 

heated to incandescence in order to remove occluded gases which were a source of 

deterioration of the vacuum during operation of the lamp. 

On the 29 September 1881 Charles Gimingham was granted a patent 

GB Pat 4193/1881 

for a method of manufacturing lamps in which metal cups were formed in the ends of the 

lead-in wires to clamp the carbon filament.


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




These three patents became vested in the Edison and Swan United Electric Light 

Company (Limited) as part of the settlement of the action and counter-action between 

Edison and Swan. 

In 1884, Ediswan commenced proceedings for infringement of the above three 

patents against the firm of Woodhouse and Rawson. When the case was heard in May 

1886, no evidence was offered in respect either of Swan’s or Gimingham’s patent and the 

case proceeded only on Edison’s. 

Before their witnesses were called, the defendants requested that their process 

should not to be disclosed in open court and asked that part of the case should be heard in 

camera or that a sealed report should be made to the Judge by an independent assessor. In 

the event, this question did not require consideration as the questions were not pressed. 

In his judgement, Mr. Justice Butt, sitting for Mr. Justice North, accepted the broad 

interpretation of the claims urged upon him by counsel for Edison, viz. that the invention 

was the incorporation of a carbon filament in vacuo in an hermetically sealed glass 

enclosure. 

“....... there is one fact which is either admitted or beyond contest in this case, and that is, 

that before the date of the Specification in question no good and efficient incandescent electric 

lamp was made or known. The invention Mr. Edison claims has been compendiously stated by 

Sir Frederick Bramwell in his evidence, and he states it in these words: He is asked by Sir 

Richard Webster this question:- “Of course the construction of the Specification is entirely for 

my Lord, but would you please tell us, only for the purpose of pointing to previous knowledge, 

what combination you find described there as an electric machine or lamp?” Answer: I find a 

vessel made entirely of glass, containing a carbon filament attached to the conducting wires, 

which wires are sealed through the glass. I find that this vessel is to be exhausted of its air to a 

very great degree, the patentee mentioning that one millionth of an atmosphere may be left. 

The patentee says that with a lamp of that construction light can be obtained by rendering the 

filament incandescent by means of an electric current.” That is his account of the invention, 

and I adopt that account, and adopt it without the slightest hesitation, because it is not a matter 

which depends on my own judgement.” 

[1886] RPC 167 at 173 

In considering the prior art, he found that all of the features of Edison’s lamp were 

present in the one demonstrated publicly by Swan before the date of Edison’s application. 

The only difference was in the form of the conductor. The Swan lamp had a straight rod- 

like filament, inviting counsel for the plaintiffs to contend that it was not a filament and 

counsel for the defendants to attempt to refute the contention. Addressing the semantic 

arguments, Mr. Justice Butt said, 

173


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“The first time I can find Mr. Swan’s conductor spoken of by him as a filament is in his 

final Specification of the patent which forms one of the matters in this suit, and that is under 

the date of 1st July, 1880, Mr. Edison’s final Specification being some seven or eight weeks 

prior to that. What he read, and what he did not read, is unknown to me; but having, at all 

events if he had chosen to use it, the advantage of the knowledge conveyed to the public of Mr. 

Edison’s Specification, it is true we do find Mr. Swan some weeks later calling his carbon 

conductor a filament. Now, a rose does not smell any sweeter for being called a rose, and the 

fact that Mr. Swan did subsequently call that rod a filament does not at all convince me that it 

was properly so called. ................ Words often become, when applied to particular trades or 

sciences, twisted from their original meaning. A dozen at one time meant 12, but I am not 

quite clear what number it has not been held in the Courts to mean in particular trades. It 

certainly in many does not mean 12, or anything like 12. So, with regard to these matters, an 

illustration was given. A portion of a very beautiful flower, I believe it was a tulip, was 

produced, and I referred to that portion of it which holds and supports the anther as a filament, 

and I was told that in botany it was universally recognised as the name for it whatever the 

thickness of the thing might be. So be it. It has acquired that name in botany, just as these 

conductors have since among electricians acquired the name of “filament,” but I suspect it 

would be found they have acquired the name of “filament” since flexibility was introduced and 

rigidity was tabooed.” 

After debating the matter at length, he came to the conclusion that Edison’s lamp 

was not anticipated by Swan’s and that, therefore, Edison’s patent was valid and infringed. 

Judgement with costs was awarded to the plaintiffs, with an account of profits and delivery 

up or destruction of the infringing lamps. This decision was subsequently upheld by the 

Court of Appeal. 

4.7.10.3 Edison and Swan United Electric Light Co. v Woodhouse and Rawson 

(Second Action) – [1887] RPC 99 

In 1885, Ediswan brought a second action against Woodhouse and Rawson, on this 

occasion alleging infringement of the Sawyer and Man patent GB Pat 4847/1878 on a process 

for the treatment of a carbon filament, the so-called “carbon-flashing” method, Ediswan 

having acquired the patent in 1883. 

Untreated carbon filaments, when heated by an electric current, exhibit hot spots – 

points and lines of uneven brilliancy. By heating the carbon to a temperature as high as 

7,000°F whilst immersing it in a fluid of hydrocarbon, freedom from these defects was 

obtained. The method was to heat a pencil of carbon by passing an electric current 

through it whilst in a hydrocarbon gas or liquid. The rod, so heated, decomposed the 

surrounding gas or liquid, the carbon of which entered and filled up the pores of the pencil, 

depositing a perfectly homogenous layer, generally of bright grey colour, upon the exterior 

174


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




surface. Carbons prepared by this process, when heated by an electric current, glowed 

with a uniform brilliancythroughout. 

The basic effect had originally been observed in 1849 by Despretz, who was 

attempting to volatilise carbon by means of electricity in a hydrocarbon atmosphere. With 

the revival of interest in carbon, details of his work were again publicly discussed during 

the late 1870s and a similar process was used by Lane Fox in 1879. GB Pat 1122/1879 The 

carbon and the lamps were covered with lamp-black which was deposited in flakes. On 

removing these, the carbon was found to be smooth, bluish grey and larger than before. 

Sugar charcoal subject to this treatment became harder and brighter. In his experiments 

Despretz used a 600-cell Bunsen’s battery. 

As Despretz was attempting to fuse or volatilise carbon and not to produce it or 

make in any specific shape or form, his experiments were held not to be an anticipation of 

the Sawyer and Man invention. The patent was held, by both the High Court and the 

Court of Appeal, to be valid and infringed. 

The strain of the proceedings broke the health of Woodhouse, who did not recover. 

He died two years later, at the age of thirty one. 

As a result of this action, the Anglo-American Brush Electric Light Corporation 

Limited was forced to indemnify purchasers who acquired carbon filament lamps from it. 

Anticipating litigation, it paid a retainer to leading barristers at the patent bar, so that it 

would have the best representation when the writs materialised. 

4.7.10.4 Edison and Swan Electric Light Company v Holland – [1888] RPC 459, 

[1889] RPC 243. 

In 1885 the Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company brought an action 

against the Jablochkoff and General Electricity Co. Limited, suppliers of lamps which 

allegedly infringed the Edison tar-putty GB Pat 4576/1879 and Sawyer-Man carbon filament 

processing GB Pat 4847/1878 patents, and Mr. W. Holland, the manager of the Albert Palace, 

Battersea, where use had taken place. 

These lamps had been supplied by Brush, so fulfilling the terms of its indemnity, the 

company obtained leave to defend the action as third parties. [1888] RPC 459 at 466 However, by 

suing the customers rather than the actual manufacturers, Edison and Swan were able to 

175


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




circumvent Brush’s retainer, and obtain the services of the Attorney General (Sir 

Richard Webster) and other leading counsel, leaving Brush to find another team of 

lawyers. A contemporary report highlighted this legal sleight of hand. 

It may have occurred to our readers to wonder why the Edison-Swan company did not 

serve a writ upon the Brush Company in the first place. But thereby hangs a tale. the facts are 

these. Some time before the present action was commenced the Brush Company thought it 

would be wise on their part to secure the services of the three eminent counsel – Sir Richard 

Webster, Mr. Aston and Mr. Moulton, and accordingly retainers were duly offered and 

accepted. Shortly afterwards the Edison-Swan Company – who were evidently alive to this 

transaction – entered their action against Holland, and the same three above-named eminent 

counsel, Sir Richard Webster, Mr. Aston and Mr. Moulton, knowing nothing of Holland, 

accepted retainers on behalf of Edison-Swan. When, therefore, the Brush Company, in spite of 

the opposition of the plaintiffs, succeeded in being made “third parties in the action,” the three 

aforesaid eminent counsel found themselves in a decidedly queer position. The Brush 

Company was by no means willing to relinquish its claim upon their services – neither were 

their opponents. However, an understanding was eventually arrived at on this point of 

etiquette, and in the action against Holland the three eminent Q.C.s appeared on behalf of the 

plaintiffs. But now comes the rub: if Edison-Swan enter an action against the Brush Company 

to prove infringement and obtain damages, then the three eminent counsel who have hitherto 

so ably championed their rights will be found on the side of the alleged infringer! In such a 

case we should be prepared to witness a display of forensic ability of a most interesting, not to 

say entertaining, character. 

The Electrician, 22 Feb 1889 p 447 

In this case the defendants made a substantial attack on the breadth of claim of the 

tar-putty patent, arguing that it was not justifiable on the ground of lack of commercial 

success. The argument was refuted by leading counsel for the plaintiffs, but Edison did 

not appear in court to support his invention, as was customary in such cases. The judge 

clearly took offence at the plaintiff’s conduct of the litigation, as the following petulant 

remarks from his judgement indicate. 

“Sir Frederick Bramwell, in his evidence for the Plaintiffs, put the case in the strongest and 

most favourable manner by saying that Edison made the first commercially successful 

incandescent lamp. Unless that is so his claim to so large a monopoly would not in my opinion 

be arguable. I proceed to inquire: Did he make a commercially successful lamp? That is: 

Was any of the modes of making the lamp particularly described in his Specification 

commercially successful. In most important patent cases when the validity of the patent is 

impeached for want of novelty the most important witness is the inventor. It is usual to put him 

in the box and expose him to cross-examination. Mr. Edison is in America; but if there were 

any reason which prevented his appearing as a witness at the trial the Court has power to direct 

an examination in America. He has neither been produced, nor has any attempt to examine 

him in America been made; and an objection was made during the evidence to reading 

statements made by him in later patents to show what he really had invented at and before the 

date of his patent in 1879. I must say that this mode of conducting the Plaintiff’s case seems to 

me to put the Defendants at an unusual disadvantage; and I think that the Court is bound to 

prevent them from being prejudiced by it as far as possible. I shall not hesitate to refer to the 

language of Edison’s subsequent patents as admissions by him so far as they tell against the 

claim now made in his name to a large monopoly. I have before me several patents by Edison 

in his own or other names. There are, amongst other, three in 1878, Nos. 4226, 4502 and 

176


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




5306; three in 1879 Nos. 2402, and 4576, which is now the patent in question; and 

subsequently in 1879, 5127. In 1880 No. 3765, which has been called in the argument the 

bamboo filament patent; and in 1881, No. 539 and No. 1918. Whenever he hit upon any 

improvement Edison seems to have applied for an English patent without waiting to perfect the 

invention, and no one can read the patent in question of 1879 without being struck with the 

evidence of haste shown by the crude language and imperfection of description in every part of 

it. In the later patent No. 5127 of 1879, Edison gives careful directions as to the mode of 

carbonising strips of Bristol boards in moulds, preferably made of wrought iron. In the 

bamboo patent, No. 3765 of 1880, he begins by again asserting that the practice, so far as he 

knows, had been to make carbons of as low resistance as possible, and that he discovered that 

the incandescing material should have the highest possible resistance in a very small bulk, and 

further that carbons which are purely structural in character alone possess these qualities. By 

“purely structural,” he explains, is meant a carbon where in natural structure, cellular or 

otherwise, the original material is preserved unaltered; that is, it is not modified by any 

treatment which tends to fill up the cells or pores with unstructural carbon or to increase its 

density or alter its resistance. One object of this invention, therefore, is to provide such 

carbons and means and methods for their manufacture. He then mentions several kinds of 

vegetable fibre, among others the hard, glossy exterior of the bamboo cane. Elaborate 

directions are given for shaping and carbonising these fibrous substances, and the claims 

include (1) “an incandescent conductor formed of one or more carbonised natural fibres,” (6) 

“a slip or filament made of bast or fibre, like cane or bamboo,” and (12) the method of forming 

them and then carbonising them. In all there are in this patent 44 claims. To say that purely 

structural carbons alone possess the requisite quality was altogether an error. Swan’s 

unstructural carbons, parchmentised as they are called, are among the best burners known. 

The Plaintiff’s have been challenged again and again during the cross-examination of their 

witnesses to prove, if they can, that any lamp with a burner made according to the description 

in the body of the Specification of November 29, 1879, has been brought into the market in 

England or in America. No evidence of this has been given, and I conclude that there was no 

commercial use of the invention of that kind. Until he had taken out his subsequent patents it 

seems that Edison did not introduce any lamp to the public, Dr. Hopkinson saw some, he says, 

probably in 1881, made under one of these later patents. In that year, 1881, Edison exhibited 

some at the Paris exhibition in the month of September. These were bamboo filament lamps, 

and this was the first public exhibition of his lamps, at any rate, in Europe. No doubt this is not 

conclusive that the invention had no utility, because, as it has been argued, improvements may 

have been invented so rapidly as to have superseded the original invention before it could be 

brought out publicly; but it is somewhat difficult to make out that lamps described in the 

Specification of 1879 were commercially successful if none were ever brought into the market; 

and the success of a lamp made under a subsequent patent like the bamboo lamp, which has 

been largely used, can hardly support a previous patent which did not describe it. It has been 

attempted to argue that the patent of 1879 did include the bamboo filament; first because the 

second claim includes all filaments of carbon, and secondly, because in the body of the 

Specification Edison says, “I have carbonised and used wood splints.” I can only say I admire 

the courage of such an argument. The question is whether the Specification particularly 

describes a commercially successful lamp, so as to support so wide a claim. This is not 

answered by saying that the claim is wide enough to include all filaments, and therefore they 

must be taken to be all described. And with respect to so much of the argument as rests upon 

the words, “wood splints,” those words do not describe anything so as to show a workman how 

to make them. Indeed, they are not intended as a description, but occur in a sentence which 

may be properly called a passing observation, as though here, and in other parts of the 

Specification, Edison was simply putting on paper a cursory allusion to experiments, how 

made, and, whether successful or not, he does not pause so say.” 

He held that the tar-putty carbon filament patent GB Pat 4576/1879 was invalid. 

“First, because the second claim is for a monopoly of incandescent lamps containing a 

filament of carbon for a burner, which claim I think is far too wide considering how Edison 

had a much actually invented; secondly, because his Specification does not describe a lamp 

177


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




which ever became, or, as I think, could have become, commercially successful; thirdly, 

because the directions therein contained are so insufficient that no one could have made the 

carbons that he describes without considerable previous experiment; fourthly, because one of 

the processes described, namely, mixing the carbon with a volatile powder, I believe to be 

practically injurious if done as Edison directs; fifthly, because the coating with a nonconducting, 

non-carbonisable substance, if not injurious, is of no practical utility; sixthly, 

because the same may be said of coiling the filaments, on which the Patentee lays great stress.” 

He expressed his impatience further, in his judgement on the Sawyer-Man patent, 

GB Pat 4547/1878 with innuendoes about the length of time which had been taken up by the 

case. 

“The Plaintiff’s reply in this case was unfortunately interrupted. The Attorney-General 

asked leave, if the Court wanted more assistance on any point, to add somewhat to the reply. I 

have not thought right to trouble him further. Every point has been put again and again to the 

scientific witnesses. Twenty-one of the working days of the Court have been occupied by this 

case. I have not arrived at the conclusion I have intimated without considerable thought and 

care, and I do not think that further argument would be a fruitful expenditure of public time. I 

must, therefore, decline to trouble Counsel any more on the case. I have been furnished with a 

prints of the shorthand notes; they contain, as was perhaps inevitable in such a case, a 

considerable number of verbal inaccuracies some of which completely distort the meaning of 

what was said.” 

He did, however, hold that this patent was valid and infringed, awarding the usual 

remedies of an injunction, damages and costs. 

The plaintiffs appealed from the adverse judgement on the tar-putty patent, but no 

cross-appeal was made by the defendants. In the Court of Appeal, defence counsel 

attempted to distinguish these proceedings from those of the earlier case against 

Woodhouse and Rawson. He argued strongly that the decision in that case was reached on 

a false understanding of the facts. 

“Up to a certain point in this case it was put forward as the great merit of Edison’s 

invention, that the filament was shaped before it was carbonised. That now appears to be a 

mistake and is dropped. It is extraordinary that in the former case the counsel were permitted 

to suggest that the F.J.R. 1 conductor was first carbonised and then shaped; that they relied on 

that as the differentia of a filament, and allowed the Court to give its judgement on that 

representation. It is extraordinary that Swan, who was sitting in Court, never interfered. The 

Attorney-General made a great point of that in the former case; he relied on it; he called it the 

touchstone of the invention. On this point, then, the case is different. And when we proposed 

to have a commission to examine Carré in Paris, the Plaintiffs, instead of being taken by 

surprise, said they would admit Swan’s carbon was obtained from Carré, and the next day, 

after the Attorney-General had consulted his clients, he admitted the conductor of F.J.B. 1 was 

made as described by La Fontaine. I refer to this to show that it was not the case, as the 

Attorney-General endeavoured to say, that no one knew anything about this. Swan knew: he 

does not say so distinctly, but that is the conclusion to be drawn from his evidence. It is very 

material, when we come to discuss what is a filament, to take away the misconception on this 

point.” 

178


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




He also presented new evidence that the patent was bad for insufficiency of 

directions to enable anyone to make a successful lamp and that there was lack of adequate 

support for the very broad claim to the use of a carbon filament. In his judgement, Lord 

Justice Cotton acknowledged the new evidence but refused to overturn the Edison patent. 

“It is now admitted that the carbon burner of Swan’s lamp was formed into its shape before 

it was carbonised, and this removes one of the points much relied on by the Plaintiffs in the 

former action. But we have now evidence, which was not before the Court in the former action 

of what was being done by Mr. Swan and by Mr. Stearn after the experimental trial of this 

lamp. We have the evidence of Mr. Swan and of Mr. Stearn. We have had before us the lamp, 

and we have the letters written by Stearn to Swan in 1879 and 1880, which were apparently 

admitted by Counsel to show what was being done by Swan and Stearn. We see that lamp was 

treated by them as a failure, and that their attempts to correct its defects led to lamps which 

differed more widely than this one did from the lamp described in Edison’s patent. This 

evidence assists the conclusion at which the Court arrived in the former action, that Swan’s 

lamp of 1879 was not a success, and I think enables me to come to the conclusion that this 

lamp was an experiment which failed and was abandoned, and that the difference introduced 

by Edison was one which changed failure into success.” 

He gave short shrift to the attempts to cast doubts on the sufficiency of the 

description and also dismissed the attempt to denigrate an embodiment in which the tar 

putty was coated with a coating of a non-carbonisable substance. 

Lord Justice Lindley gave a strong endorsement to the patent by dismissing Swan’s 

contribution as a failed experiment. 

“The novelty depends on whether Swan’s lamp, F.J.B. 1, was an anticipation, for I am 

convinced that Proctor and Heaviside are wrong in the date they assign to the hairpin lamps 

made by Swan. The correspondence referred to by the Attorney-General is conclusive as to 

this matter. The lamp, F.J.B. 1, was held by this Court, in the action against Woodhouse, not, 

to be an anticipation of the Plaintiffs’ patent, but it was then supposed that the carbon pencil 

used in it was carbonised after and not before it assumed its final shape. This was a mistake, 

and was admitted to be so in this action. The question of anticipation must considered anew on 

the evidence before us. If Swan’s lamp F.J.B. 1 had been a success instead of a failure, it 

would, in my opinion, have been an anticipation of the Plaintiffs’ patent. The evidence, 

however, shows that it was a failure and that Swan had not got the key to success. His own 

efforts to improve this lamp show that he was not thinking of filamentous incandescent 

carbons, but of other materials. Still his lamps did give light for a time, and was very near, 

though, in my opinion, not quite an anticipation. It was, in truth, an unsuccessful experiment.” 

Finally, two of the appeal judges gave their approval to the very broad claim to a 

carbon filament. 

“Before concluding, I ought to notice the very formidable objection taken by Mr. Justice 

Kay to the validity of the patent, on the ground that the second claim is for a monopoly or 

incandescent lamps containing a filament of carbon for a burner, and that such claim is far too 

wide considering how much Mr. Edison, had invented. Whether the view here taken of the 

patent is correct or not turns in my opinion, on what Mr. Edison did when he introduced 

‘carbon filaments.’ That was, I think, a new departure of the highest importance in electric 

lighting, and if this be so, the claim is not too wide.” 

Lindley L.J. [1889] RPC 243 at 284 

179


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“It appears to me, moreover, to be proved, not only that, every successful lamp since 1879, 

which is available for multiple arc lighting, has employed a filament, but also that there is no 

proof yet that any filament cannot be adapted to the patented combination. If this is so, why is 

the claim too wide? It is not the fault, but the virtue of the invention that it covers so large a 

field.” 

Bowen, L.J. [1889] RPC 243 at 285 

This was a watershed case, from which the Edison and Swan United Electric Light 

Company emerged in an unassailable position. It despatched, in short order, a number of 

small, would-be competitors, including at least one who claimed that his filaments were, 

[1887] RPC 471 

in fact, made by Edison . 

A contemporary critique, set out in full in Appendix 5, demonstrates how Edison, 

from a position of comparative weakness, exploited the vagaries of the common law 

system to gain a position of market dominance. Biased presentation of evidence which, 

if not deliberately mendacious, was delivered with such obfuscation and economy with 

the truth as substantially to cloud the issues, whilst an unfair exploitation of the rules of 

legal etiquette and avaricious patent claims were utilised to gain ascendancy over 

competitors. 

4.7.11 Development of the British incandescent lamp industry following the 

carbon filament lamp cases 

In 1880, the Anglo-American Brush Electric Light Corporation, Ltd. had set up a 

factory to exploit the developments of St. George Lane-Fox. They also had rights under 

the dynamo and arc lamp patents of Charles F. Brush and were able to manufacture both 

arc and incandescent installations. Bright 1949, p105 Towards the end of the 1880s, after 

experiments lasting about two years, Brush had been ready to replace the Lane-Fox system 

by one using a process, devised by Wynne and Powell, GB Pat 16805/1884 in which the carbon 

filaments were formed from an extruded cellulose thread, for its entire incandescent lamp 

production line. However, following the successful litigation of the Edison and Swan 

United Electric Light Company, [1889]RPC 243 the extrusion process, was abandoned in 

Britain in 1889, despite the fact that Emile Garcke, Brush’s General and Commercial 

Manager, had announced to shareholders on 3 October 1888 that his company was in a 

position to produce a lamp which “in terms of price, efficiency and life” was superior to 

any other British or foreign lamp. A factory at Brook Green, in London, which had been 

completed in 1889 with the aim of introducing the Wynne and Powell process on a very 

180


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




large scale, never went into production. After standing empty for four years, it was sold to 

the British General Electric Company, which was founded by Hugo Hirst (1863-1943), 

Jones 1970, p73 

who emigrated to England from Germany in the 1880s. 

After 1891, competition withered. Some companies were stopped by injunctions. 

Some accepted licences. Some voluntarily suspended operations and others became 

insolvent. By 1893, the number of producers in the lamp business in Great Britain had 

dropped to seven, and not all of these were actively engaged in lamp production. 

Bright 1949, p108 

As soon as Edison’s basic patent expired, Hirst set up a small incandescent lamp 

works in England which soon became the largest British producer, under the technical 

management of Charles John Robertson, who had returned to his native country in 1894 

after working in the Netherlands for several years. Robertson was “well known as one of 

the most experienced incandescent lamp makers in England and on the Continent”. 

The Electrician, 29.9.1893, 595. 

Within three years of the expiry of the tar-putty lamp patent, however, around fifty 

new brands were introduced in the British market. Many of the new lamps were 

imported. Despite the increased number of competitors and the reduction of prices to 

about a shilling for the standard 8- to 32-candlepower lamps, Ediswan had the 

advantage of a high-quality lamp and a well-established commercial position and 

continued to lead the industry. It also still had important patents on lamp holders and 

lamp fittings. Many of the newer firms soon failed, and only about thirty domestic and 

foreign brands remained on the market at the end of 1896. 

4.7.12 Conflicts elsewhere 

4.7.12.1 Conflicts in USA 

“I wish sometimes that Elihu was not in such uncertain business as the Electric Light. Just 

as soon as it succeeds, the money all flows away in litigation.” 

Mary Louise Thomson 

Beloved Scientist, Elihu Thomson 

Woodbury 1944, p185 

“I had a conversation with Mr Flint about the prospects of his Company, the United States 

Electric Lighting Company, and he informed me that in a couple of months the new Works 

would be ready to start manufacturing.” 

“Mr. Flint assured that they had retained all the best patent lawyers in America and 

altogether I have never seen any more extravagant waste of money in every conceivable 

direction than takes place in this company, which seems to count upon its profits from some 

vague notion that there is a grand future for the electric light.” 

181


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




“He incidentally told me that the fees paid by the Company to experts and lawyers 

amounted to a sum of from $40,000 to $50,000 per annum. I expect the Company will have to 

sell a good many lamps and machines if it desires to see anything of these 50,000 dollars 

again.” 

G. von Chauvin 

Letter to Siemens Bros. & Co., London, 17.5.1881; 

Siemens Archives, No.36 Lh 816, Munich. 

By the time that the necessary infra-structure to support the industry had been built 

up, arc lighting technology was relatively mature and therefore was not dominated by 

patents in the same way as incandescent lighting. Such patents as were in force could be 

avoided by using alternative techniques which were still economically viable. 

One important infringement action of the early eighties was between the Brush 

Electric Company and the United States Electric Lighting Company for alleged 

infringement of two Brush arc-lighting patents. Proceedings commenced in 1880 and 

ended in 1884 in a complete triumph for the United States Company. One of the patents 

was withdrawn by the plaintiff during the trial, and the other was held to be invalid. 

Up to 1885, most inventors and companies in the incandescent lamp industry were 

preoccupied with setting up production and adopted a laissez-faire attitude to patents. 

By the mid-1980s around a dozen manufacturers had become established in the United 

States. Most of them owned or had rights under patents which purportedly covered their 

products. Swan sold his American patent rights to Brush and did not take an active part 

in USA. The market was dominated by the Edison Electric Light Company which 

supplied around 75% of all filament lamps produced in the USA. Total production at 

that time was at the rate of about 300,000 lamps a year. Edison had the strongest patent 

position, owning, at the end of 1883, 215 patents and 307 pending applications on 

Bright 1949, p85 

lighting. The number of patents granted increased to 345 by mid-1887. 

Initially, the directors of the Edison Electric Light Company held the view that the 

company could maintain its business monopoly without the expense of litigation, 

keeping its patents in reserve. (Bulletin of the Edison Electric Light Company, No. 20 

(Oct. 31, 1883), pp. 45-46.) This attitude changed as competition became stronger. 

Between 1885 and 1901 the Edison company and its successors instituted well over two 

hundred infringement suits under its lamp and lighting patents, spending around 

$2,000,000 on litigation. These proceedings resulted in an overwhelming victory for the 

Edison interests. 

182


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The foundation of Edison’s legal success was a series of actions on the basic tar 

putty carbon filament lamp patent. The chosen test case was against the United States 

Electric Lighting Company, which was, at that time, Edison’s largest competitor in 

incandescent lighting and had title to the patents of Maxim, Farmer, and Weston. 


The proceedings commenced in 1885, but did not come to a hearing, in the Circuit 

Court for the Southern District of New York, until 1889. After a complex trial, a 

judgement in favour of Edison was handed down by Judge William Wallace on 14 July 

1891. Judge Wallace held that Edison had been the first to make a satisfactory high- 

resistance illuminant of carbon and, in so doing, had made commercial incandescent 

electric lighting possible. The decision of the lower court was upheld by the Circuit 

Court of Appeals on 4 October 1892. 

A considerable amount of litigation involving other electrical patents took place 

during the late eighties and early nineties. In 1887 the Edison Electric Light Company 

sued Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Company, a construction firm which installed 

equipment made by the Westinghouse Electric Company, for alleged infringement of 

eleven of its patents on the distribution of electric energy. After six years, the New 

Jersey Circuit Court upheld the Edison feeder-and-main patent, which was one of the 

eleven patents in suit, and decided that Westinghouse was infringing it. The decision 

was reversed in 1894 upon appeal by Westinghouse, effectively opening that method of 

energy distribution to all users. 

When the patent covering the paper illuminant was granted to Sawyer and Man in 

1885, Consolidated Electric Light Company immediately filed a suit against the 

McKeesport Light Company, an operating affiliate of the Edison Company. The circuit 

court held in 1889 that the broad claims of the Sawyer and Man patent were invalid 

because their low resistance illuminants were based on the wrong principle for success. 

Westinghouse and Consolidated filed an appeal, as a result of which, the decision of the 

lower court was upheld on 11 November 1895. 

In 1888 the Thomson-Houston Company was successful in its suits against the 

Citizens Electric Light Company for infringement of an 1881 patent covering 

improvements in current regulation for dynamos. In 1895, Western Electric successfully 

183


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




challenged the validity of a Thomson-Houston arc-regulator patent, when accused of 

infringement. The Brush Electric Company also failed to prove infringement by the 

Western Electric Company of a patent for a device for activating a new set of carbon arc 

electrodes when the first ones had been consumed. 

Although they failed with some patents for which broad claims were made, the 

position of major firms in the industry was strengthened by decisions on other cases. 

Patent conflicts were, however, dissipating a large amount of resources of many 

companies. The smaller ones were emasculated by costs of litigation, even when their 

defence was successful. Many independents were forced to liquidate or sell out. 

Early in 1891, in a development of the strategy it had employed in the telephone 

and electric lamp industries, the Edison Company made a proposal for a merger with its 

chief rival, the Thomson-Houston Electric Company. By bringing together the patents of 

Edison and Thomson-Houston, a tremendously powerful patent position could be 

established. Moreover, Charles A. Coffin, who headed Thomson-Houston, had 

expansionary ambitions and was receptive to the idea of increasing his company’s 

control over the industry. The trust movement was at that time current in many 

American industries, and conditions in the electrical goods industry were favourable to 

combinations. The culmination of this wave of corporate purchases, consolidations, 

mergers, and reorganisations was the concentration of most of the non-communication 

electrical goods production of the United States in the hands of General Electric and 

Westinghouse which, between them, handled more than 75 per cent of the total 

business. 

At first the Edison directors declared that they did not intend to raise lamp prices, 

and would license their competitors. This attitude did not prevail for long as the 

General Electric officials who succeeded them decided that they could greatly increase 

their market share, which by that time was down to 40 per cent, by pressing home their 

patent victory. There were only about four years of the patent life remaining in which to 

consolidate the position. Within a short time injunctions had closed the lamp plants of 

the Sawyer-Man Electric Company, the Perkins Electric Lamp Company, the Mather 


Electric Company, and the Sunbeam Electric Lamp Company. 

184


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Beacon Vacuum Pump & Electrical Company of Boston attempted to avoid 

an injunction early in 1893 by claiming Heinrich Göbel’s carbon filament lamp 

anticipated Edison’s. Göbel had taken out no patents on his developments, however, 

and the evidence to prove his priority of invention was questionable. Judge Colt of the 

Boston Circuit Court dismissed the action and granted an injunction against Beacon on 

18 February 1893. 

Further injunctions were granted against other producers of incandescent lamps; 

whilst some simply closed down their plants without waiting for legal action against 

them. Even after the first use of the Göbel defence had failed, it was used in other cases. 

In the St. Louis Circuit Court, Judge Hallett ruled that the probability of anticipation by 

Göbel was sufficiently great for him to refuse to grant an injunction against the 

Columbia Incandescent Lamp Company. Although that decision was later reversed on 

appeal, it permitted Columbia to continue operating during the twilight years of the 

patent. 

A few other companies kept their plants open by attempting to design around the 

Edison patent. The courts issued fresh injunctions against some of the redesigned 

lamps, but a few were sufficiently differentiated to be able to remain on the market. 

Further companies sprang up after 1892 to produce non-infringing lamps. From 1892 

till the expiry of the patent, there were probably ten or more competing producers 

making lamps at all times, despite the vigorous efforts of the General Electric Company 

to close them down. 

One example of the machinations practised in order to avoid being closed down is 

illustrated by the conduct of the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Company. It 

had been chosen to supply the lighting for the Chicago World’s Fair of 1893, and its 

ability to meet this contract was placed in jeopardy by the Edison tar-putty patent 

victory. After its subsidiary, the United States Electric Lighting Company, was closed 

down, Westinghouse transferred lamp manufacture to the Sawyer-Man Company but 

this was also injuncted. Westinghouse then resumed production using a lamp housing 

based on early patents of Sawyer and Man, Farmer, and Maxim, employing a stoppered 

base instead of an hermetically sealed glass globe and a type of filament covered by a 

Weston patent controlled by Westinghouse. This construction was used by 

185


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Westinghouse until the Edison patent expired, before reverting to a sealed-bulb lamp, 

which was more efficient at retaining a vacuum. 

Patent litigation after 1892 enabled General Electric to increase its share of the 

domestic market, which rose to around 75% of all lamps sold. GE also strengthened its 

position by taking action against central station operators and even against companies 

which repaired incandescent lamps by replacing broken filaments, an activity which was 

just beginning in both the United States and Europe. 

As a result of these activities, the electrical goods industry developed into a 

duopoly in which both parties held important conflicting patents. Westinghouse owned 

the patents of Maxim, Sawyer and Man, Farmer, Weston, Tesla, Stanley, and others, as 

well as those of Westinghouse himself. General Electric’s portfolio included patents of 

Edison, Thomson, Brush, Sprague, van de Poele and Bradley. Westinghouse’s strength 

lay in the use of alternating current for power generation and transmission and GE 

dominated the manufacture of lamps because, although the basic Edison lamp patent 

No. 223,898 had expired on 17 November 1894, it still owned hundreds of minor 

patents in this field. General Electric also controlled many important patents on electric 

traction. 

Bright 1949, p102 

The stalemate was resolved, in the characteristic manner of an oligopoly, by 

neutralisation of conflicting advantages, in this case, by means of a cross-licensing 

agreement. Royalties were to be paid on the basis of use of the patents by the other 

company. It was agreed that General Electric had contributed 62½ per cent and 

Westinghouse 37½ per cent of the value of the combined patents; and the business 

handled by the two companies in the covered fields was to be divided in that proportion 

without royalty payments. If either company exceeded its agreed market share, royalties 

were payable. The agreement came into force on 31 March 1896, and had a term of 

fifteen years. Although the patent-licensing agreement specifically excluded lamp 

patents, the two companies suspended a large number of patent infringement suits 

against one another. 

For a short time in the mid-1890s, following the expiration of the tar-putty carbon 

filament patent, there was keen competition in the incandescent-lamp industry. Profits 

were small or non-existent for many companies, but, with their greater resources, 

186


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




General Electric and Westinghouse were able to survive this, by means of economies of 

scale and cross-subsidies. Although some new companies continued to enter the 

business, many more, older ones were forced out, and the total number of firms declined 

rapidly. 

In August 1896 General Electric, together with six other companies, formed an 

association known as the Incandescent Lamp Manufacturers Association, with the 

objective of controlling prices and market shares. Ten further companies joined the 

association shortly after its formation and others were subsequently brought under its 

control, leaving only a small minority outside its sphere of influence. A price-fixing 

agreement was made between the members of the association and Westinghouse. A 

pool price of about twenty cents a lamp was established for the 8- to 25-candlepower 

sizes to succeed the prices of twelve to eighteen cents a lamp which had previously 

prevailed. Larger lamps were priced higher according to candlepower. A premium was 

charged for lamps supplied with bases other than the Edison and Westinghouse designs. 

4.7.12.2 France 

The International Exposition of Electricity at Paris in 1881 greatly stimulated 

continental European interest in incandescent lighting. 

In France, patent laws required articles to be manufactured within the territory to 

maintain patent validity, but there were no indigenous developers of incandescent 

lamps. Swan offered his French patent rights for sale, but, since the highest offer 

received was only £40,000, he decided in 1881, to set up manufacture himself, as, by then, 

a large pent-up demand for lamps, including a potential contract for lighting the Grand 

Opera for three years, had developed. 

Swan 1929, p82 

Swan cast around for someone competent to superintend this undertaking. He hired 

James Swinburne, a young mechanical engineer and later a Fellow of the Royal Society 

and eminent as an electrician, consulting engineer, and expert witness. After a mere three 

weeks’ intensive training as an electrician at the lamp factory at Newcastle, he was sent 

out to set up a similar factory in Paris. 

Shortly after, Edison established the Société Electrique Edison and the Compagnie 

Continentale Edison. By 1882, installations of isolated incandescent lighting plants 

187


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




were common, and central-station lighting followed within a short time. Domestic 

manufacturers entered the business and, by the end of the eighties, there were more 

producers of incandescent lamps in France than in England. 

Conflict between Swan and Edison companies soon arose and was resolved by the 

formation in 1888 of a joint enterprise, the Compagnie Générale des Lampes 

Incandescentes. 

The French courts were not so favourable to the Edison patents as those in 

England and the United States, and the company was not able to establish a dominant 

Bright 1949, p110 

position. Competition remained keen and the market open. 

4.7.12.3 Germany 

“While united against a common opponent in this country [the United Kingdom], a law 

suit was being carried on in Germany at the same time, between the Edison and the Swan 

Companies, and the evidence on some points could hardly be recognised as being based 

upon the same facts as those which were brought forward in the English law courts. The 

result denied to Edison the rights of exclusive manufacture of glow lamps and confined 

those rights to lamps of the kind that he described.” 

The Electrician 26 June 1891 

Edison had offered to license the German Siemens and Halske Company under his 

patents for the manufacture of incandescent lamps but Werner Siemens declined. The 

Edison patents for continental Europe were then assigned to the Compagnie 

Continentale Edison in Paris. Emil Rathenau acquired the rights for Germany and 

organised a research company which was succeeded, in 1883, by the German Edison 

Company (Deutsche Edison Gesellschaft für angewandte Elektrizität), which produced 

lamps itself and sub-licensed others. The Siemens & Halske Company played an active 

part in the organisation and control of the new concern. The first central station in 

Germany was erected in Berlin by an Edison-licensed company in 1884 and many 

independent inventors and engineers soon started to produce lamps of their own design. 

Edison and Swan lamps supplied most of the market in Germany for a few years. 

As elsewhere, patent conflict arose and, in 1891, after several years of litigation, the 

Supreme Court at Leipzig decided that the Edison patent was valid, but that the Swan 

lamp did not infringe. 

In 1887, in the absence of an effective patent monopoly, the German Edison 

Company changed its name to Allgemeine Elektrizitäts-Gesellschaft (AEG) to 

188


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




emphasise its independent position and terminated its obligations to the Compagnie 

Continentale Edison. 

The value of filaments made from colloidal cellulose was also recognised in 

Germany. Heerding 1986,p260 In 1889 they were the subject of a case brought by AEG against 

De Khotinsky. The latter employed the Weston process, but his right to do so was 

contested by AEG, which held the patent but, until then had made no use of it, because it 

was already making the established Edison bamboo lamp, and with the high volume of 

sales – then about 650,000 lamps a year and rising rapidly– it was not prepared to risk the 

technically difficult changeover to the Weston system. 

Towards the end of the century, representatives of the German industry formed a 

cartel which had as its objectives ‘removing economic losses by common agreement’ 

and ending ‘ruinous price competition’. They worked out an agreement for raising and 

standardising the quality of incandescent lamps and for reducing competition. The 

association set a retail price equivalent to about one shilling, as well as wholesale and 

manufacturers’ prices. 

4.7.12.4 The Netherlands 

“(The Netherlands) .....a fortunate country where no patents exist.” 

J. A. Snijders Professor of Electrical Engineering at Delft University 

De vorderingen der Electrotechniek 

The national experience of patents in the Netherlands between 1850 and 1865 was 

highly unsatisfactory. Heerding 1986,p243 Of the 140 patents which on average were granted 

annually, no less than 124 had been concerned with inventions made abroad. Fees had 

been paid in respect of only forty-three patents, and of these thirty-four related to foreign 

inventions. The national perception was that the opportunity presented by the law, to 

appropriate all manner of inventions and monopolise these by means of import-patents, 

had encouraged abuse. The Dutch Society for the Promotion of Industry petitioned the 

King for the abolition of the Patent Act in 1854, and again in 1860. Matters came to a 

head in 1867 when the Association for the Promotion of Manufacturing and Craft 

Industries in the Netherlands (APMCI), a powerful pressure group representing small and 

medium-sized enterprises, described the Patent Act as an obstacle to the growth of 

industry and prejudicial to the national prosperity, and lobbied for its suspension. This 

189


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




viewpoint was also gathering strength in neighbouring countries with a movement to 

foster free trade. The feeling was that, by abolishing patents, the Netherlands could set an 

example to the world, so a bill was introduced and became law in 1869, having been 

approved by the overwhelming majorities of 49 votes to 8 in the Lower House and 29 to 1 

in the Upper House. 

The absence of a patent law made little or no difference to everyday life. A report 

by the Dordrecht branch of the APMCI stated that the major inventions of the day were 

successfully introduced, “as is evidenced by the various sorts of electric lighting and the 

Bell telephone”. Sickinga 1883, p56 To the compilers of the report, following their visits to the 

various world exhibitions, it was plainly apparent that many of the inventions were made 

simultaneously and independently of each other, citing Edison, Swan and Maxim, among 

others, in this context. 

A vigorous debate on the merits and de-merits of the patent system waged during the 

ensuing years. The arguments were coloured by the prejudices of individual industries. 

Opponents pointed to shortcomings of existing patent laws in the foreign countries, which 


were evident from the countless lawsuits. 

The Netherlands were relatively backward in the economic and technical fields, and 

had no native electrical industry. In this context the absence of patent legislation gave 

small companies, and those which were just starting up, protection from the disruption and 

expense of litigation and thus improved their chances of survival. With freedom from the 

need to pay royalties, electrical articles equal in quality to their foreign counterparts could 


be produced for two-thirds of the cost. 

Indications are that the absence of patent legislation furthered the progress of Dutch 

industry. This was particularly so with regard to the electrical industry and specifically the 

foundation of incandescent lamp manufacture. If Edison’s carbon filament patent had 

existed in the Netherlands, and had been interpreted there as it was in the United Kingdom 

and the United States, there would have been no incentive to establish the glow lamp 

industry. De Khotinsky, Robertson and Pope would not have been attracted there in the 

first place, and, even if they had, their embryonic operations would immediately have been 

swamped with litigation – as, for example, were Lane-Fox’s and Swan’s in England in 

1882. This threat would have stifled the spirit of enterprise of the Dutch entrepreneurs, 

190


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




who were obliged by circumstances to start on a modest scale. Their policies would have 

been determined not by free market competition, but by the legal constraints which bound 

Edison’s American competitors. 

Even after the abolition of the Patent Act the debate continued and the ACMPI 

reiterated its opposition to “so reactionary a measure as a Patent Act” on the ground that 

the situation in industry had improved. The majority of the existing companies had 

achieved greater prosperity and new enterprises had been established, a development 

which had been significantly aided by tariff adjustments. On the other hand, the Society 

for the Promotion of Industry which had originally petitioned for the abolition of the Act, 

changed its attitude and, in 1879, requested the Minister of Waterways, Trade and Industry 

to introduce a new Patent Act. The campaign for patent legislation, Machlup 1950, p5 which 

had been orchestrated by the patent agents, failed to sway public opinion which remained 

strongly opposed to a new patent law. The Government would have faced certain defeat if 

it had attempted to introduce one. 

During the 1880s an international dimension was added to the controversy. In 1883, 

despite having no patent law, the Netherlands, became a signatory to the new Paris 

Convention on the Protection of Industrial Property. The treaty was ratified by the 

majority of the member governments in the following year. This was a trigger for the 

exertion of moral pressure, the Dutch delegate being informed, “Vous étes un peuple de 

brigands”. deMeijer 1891, p19 The Netherlands were repeatedly urged to introduce patent 

legislation in order to fall into line with other members. Although the issue stimulated 

disquiet at the Foreign Office in The Hague, opinion elsewhere in the country as a whole, 

and in the APMCI, in particular, was stronglyopposed to this change. The view expressed 

by the chairman of the association was 

“It is one thing to say that we do not want a new patent law, and another to say that we will 

not join in an international system. The Netherlands need have no qualms about taking part in 

the deliberations and having a representative there; if no satisfactory system emerges, we can 

stand on the sidelines. “ 

This was a development of an earlier statement from the same source. 

“Patents will disappear when industry frees itself from the dominant influence of those who 

govern it and who control the labour of hundreds and thousands; when labour attains greater 

freedom and the development of industry is no longer virtually dependent upon the owners of 

the large factories.” 

“It appears to me that, in the urge to reintroduce a patent law in this country, there is a 

failure to take account of the history of this industrial institution, of the demands of the times, 

191


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




of the logic of facts, of the experience of nations in this area, and that we should do our country 

a disservice were we to add our voice to those of the advocates of patents, for while this would 

benefit some of those who hold positions of power in industry, it would be at the expense of 

the nation as a whole.” 

J.Th. Mouton 

Report of the 28th General Meeting of the APMCI, 1879, 25. 

So far as the Dutch were concerned, the main benefit arising from the treaty lay in 

the safeguarding of trademarks and the Netherlands – like Switzerland – was not prepared 

to introduce patent legislation. The view accepted by the Dutch government was that the 

country was not bound in this matter. Overseas complaints continued to rumble on. 

These were either motivated by direct commercial interest from companies such as the 

Compagnie Continentale Edison or from members of the Paris Union for the Protection of 

Industrial Property. This feeling is exemplified by the 1882 edition of La Lumière 

Electrique (vol 7, pages 637 ff), which, discussing the freedom from patents in the 

Netherlands, contained an exhortation to French manufacturers: “N’allez pas exposer à 

Amsterdam!” The signatories to this appeal, who included Paul Jablochkoff, urged 

diplomatic pressure and a boycott, and described the Netherlands, Greece, Switzerland and 

Turkey, none of which had patent legislation, as Balkan states. This contrasts with the 

view of the English electrical fraternity which, after years of patent litigation, denounced 

the resulting concentration of monopoly as “a legal terrorism over small traders” and 

adjudged the process to have proved disastrous for the progress of the British electrical 

industry. 

The lack of a patent system in the Netherlands attracted a number of entrepreneurs 

who wished to capitalise on the commercial opportunity presented by the solution to the 

problem of the subdivision of the light. One of these was Gerard Philips, who had lived 

and worked in Britain during the critical period, and had observed the patent fray at first 

hand and was aware of its effects on the incandescent lamp industry. He formed a 

partnership with Jan Jacob Reesse, a chemical technologist, to establish an incandescent 

lamp works in the Netherlands. 

Whilst in London, Philips had learned about the Wynne and Powell process for 

producing extruded cellulose-based carbon filaments at the works of the Anglo-American 

Brush Electric Light Company. Philips, who had previously been retained as its Dutch 

representative by the Allgemeine Elektrizitäts Gesellschaft (AEG), was conversant with 

192


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




the mechanically-complex Edison method of processing bamboo fibre employed by that 

company. He was also aware of the difficulty involved in the manufacture of the 

(alternative) Seel filament DE Pat 36206 and therefore entered into negotiation with Wynne 

and Emile Garcke, who was in charge of Brush’s general and commercial affairs, with a 

view to establishing a company in the Netherlands to set up production of the Brush lamp. 

In 1890, Mouton, who owned margarine and pharmaceutical factories in The Hague 

and was chairman of APMCI, characterised the confusing lawsuits concerning Edison’s 

basic patent which were being prosecuted in England and Germany as follows: 

“The big companies fight each other, then join forces to obstruct others in the performance of 

their industrial activities.” 

Vragen des Tijds, 106 ff. 

Debating with supporters of a patent system, Mouton contested the classic argument 

that patents advanced the cause of industry, claiming that in the space of fifteen years – the 

life of most patents – a greater number of margarine factories had come into existence in 

the Netherlands than could ever have been the case had patent protection existed. 

Mouton 1890 With the increasing strength of Dutch industry, however, attitudes were 

beginning to change. In 1883 the margarine manufacturer Jurgens had won a patent case 

in England, their principal export market. Had they lost, both they and their competitors 

would have faced extinction. 

The swing of the pendulum in the other direction was a result partly of the work of 

the Association of Supporters of a Dutch Patent Law and partly as a result of foreign 

pressure in the form of a proposal from the French to exclude the Netherlands from the 

international agreement to protect trademarks. However it was 1912 before the Dutch 

Parliament eventually passed a patents bill which was forced through to meet the needs of 

Dutch industry. 

193


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.13 Cartels 

4.7.13.1 The petition of the Robin Electric Lamp Company Ltd. for a compulsory 

licence under the tungsten filament patents – [1915] RPC 202 

In 1911 a patent was granted to J.T. Robin GB Pat 6856/1911 for an improved lamp 

having a second filament. This lamp looked like an ordinary lamp, but had four contacts 

on the base instead of the two which were present on a normal lamp. If one filament 

failed, the other could be brought into operation by simply turning a band, thereby 

doubling the life of the lamp for very little extra cost. This was important because electric 

lighting was in price competition with gas. Although the invention was applicable to all 

types of filament lamp, and could thus be used with extruded tungsten or carbon filaments, 

these were considerably less durable than malleable tungsten filaments. If lamps were to 

be put on the market using these older filaments, they would not be a commercial success. 

Robin Electric was formed in 1912 by the R.F. Syndicate to make the double- 

filament lamp. The company did not wish to be vulnerable to an action on any of the 

Association’s patents and, in November of that year, approached Siemens, who offered to 

manufacture the lamp for them, but stipulated that it should be sold at 1s a lamp above the 

Association’s list price for normal lamps. This offer effectively meant that Robin must 

join the ring. 

Robin contended that the price was prohibitive, and, with a view to manufacturing 

these lamps themselves, requested Siemens and British Thomson-Houston to supply them 

with tungsten wire. Both companies declined, but B.T-H. offered to manufacture the 

lamps. Robin Electric then requested the two companies to grant them a licence to 

manufacture the wire, not specifying any patents. Neither of the companies complied with 

the request, but they did not reject it either. B.T-H., on being threatened with petition for a 

compulsory licence, offered to sell the wire at a price that would involve the addition, for 

the wire alone, of about 10d to the cost of a lamp that would otherwise cost about 4d. 

Robin Electric could get the wire from a Swiss firm at ½d a metre, and as the cost of 

putting in the double filament was about 1½d, argued that it would be penal to charge an 

extra shilling. 

Robin Electric contended that was unreasonable that they should be compelled to 

sell at such high prices. They accepted that the sale of their lamps was likely to spoil the 

194


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Association’s market, but they were willing to cross-license the Association to use their 

patent. 

A petition for a compulsory licence under Section 24 of the Patents and Designs Act 

1907 was presented to the Board of Trade by the Robin Electric Lamp Company Ltd. and 

opposed by British Thomson-Houston and Siemens. [1915] RPC 202 The grounds of the 

petition were that, by failure to grant a licence under the patents in suit, the establishment 

of a trade or industry in the United Kingdom was unfairly prejudiced. This was the first 

case under this provision to be heard by the Court as, under the previous act, the grant of a 

compulsory licence was regarded as a ministerial, not a judicial matter. In the 

proceedings, the Court was required to consider the interests of the public as well as of the 

Petitioners. 

When the case came before Mr. Justice Warrington in the High Court in March 

1915, counsel for Robin Electric argued that, in the seven years remaining of the term of 

the principal patent, it was likely that B.T-H. would sell around thirty million “Mazda” 

lamps. He attributed the high price of these sales to the creation of a smoke-screen from 

the combination of more than a hundred patents for gradual improvements in drawn wire 

filament lamps. 

Conscious of the fact that he was setting a precedent, Mr. Justice Warrington refused 

the petition on the ground that the trade or industry to be considered was that of the 

making of tungsten filament electric lamps and the launch of a particular lamp would not 

be the establishment of a new trade or industry. It would be nothing more than the entry of 

a fresh trader into an existing trade or industry. There was no ground for the suggestion 

that the trade or industry has been unfairly prejudiced by any act or omission of the 

Respondents. The supply of lamps was found to be adequate to meet public demand and, 

although poor families could not afford electric lighting, there was no evidence that the 

price was so high as to be a serious burden to the consumer – in fact it had been 

considerably reduced in the previous two or three years. 

This judgement epitomised the attitude of the establishment towards the large 

electrical manufacturers, an approach which did not change until the middle of the 

twentieth century. 

195


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.13.2 The Phoebus Organisation 

“This survey shows quite clearly that, compared with Germany, France, Belgium, 

Switzerland, Austria and Sweden, Britain has still a long way to go in the formation of 

“rings” and “combines”. It shows, above all, how farcical can be the action of a local 

authority, public supply or industrial executive, who, determined to break down a “ring” in 

this country, places an order abroad. Without exception, such a policy means 

encouragement of a worse “ring” abroad, and is, in effect, pure hypocrisy. Hitherto, 

ignorance of such foreign “rings” or “combines” may have provided an excuse, but it 

should be difficult to plead ignorance in the future when the facts are available as a result of 

this investigation. We do not condemn combinations or trusts or rings either to fix prices or 

to control production, since we feel that they are essential to modern industrial progress, and 

are a condition of efficiency both at home and abroad.” 

“The time is certainly past when industry, merely to preserve in all their pristine 

purity the doctrines of Free Trade, should allow itself to be forced out of existence. The 

survival of the fittest may be a natural law, but interpretation of the law may take different 

forms: in the least civilised form, it is the bitter struggle of individuals in a chaos of 

destruction, with perhaps the emergence of one victorious type: at its highest, it is the cooperation 

of individuals to ensure the highest common level of advancement without strife 

and without destruction. Combination in industry belongs in essence to the latter, 

unrestricted competition to the former. No one who has the natural prosperity and the 

future of our industrial civilisation at heart would wish for the former, and yet the prejudice 

against “rings” and “combines” in this country, as far as the basic industries are concerned, 

if it has any thought whatever behind it, belongs directly to it.” 

Combines and Trusts in the Electrical In dustry 

BEAMA 1927, p6 

Before 1914, agreements in USA, Germany and the United Kingdom between the 

leading lamp manufacturers provided for the cross-licensing of the then important 

patents relating to filament lamps and for exchanges of manufacturing information; they 

also limited competition in defined areas. MMR 1968, p55 Some of the arrangements 

provided for joint selling at fixed prices but these broke down in the face of strong 

competition from outside manufacturers. 

The world market for electric lamps expanded rapidly after the end of the first 

World War, but was more than compensated by increased production capacity which 

gave rise to cut-throat competition and dumping. In an attempt to rationalise 

competition, negotiations between the world’s leading manufacturers led, in 1925, to an 

international agreement, at first between continental manufacturers, and later including 

leading British manufacturers. This agreement was known as the ‘Phoebus Agreement’ 

from the name of the company, SA Phoebus, Geneva, which was set up to administer 

the organisation. The agreement had two acknowledged main functions – the exchange 

of patents and technical information, which was conditional upon adoption of common 

prices and terms, and the division of the world’s markets in electric lamps. The existing 

196


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




patterns of trade were frozen by the allocation of percentage sales quotas to each party 

or local groups of parties based on past trading figures, patents were not to be opposed 

and assistance, including supply of components, to non-member manufacturers was 

prohibited. A central Sales Committee was set up to decide general sales policy and lay 

down principles for the determination of prices, terms and conditions of sale for the 

information of local groups which, in turn, were required, after conferring with the local 

distributive trade, to fix the price schedules and terms and conditions of sale for their 

areas. Outside manufacturers could only be acquired collectively; the parties did, in 

fact, acquire a number of such businesses which were organised as fighting companies. 

The Phoebus organisation specified the maximum life for lamps made by 

members, with penalties for excessive life or short life. Mention of longevity was also 

proscribed as an attribute for advertising purposes; no markings indicative of quality 

were permitted. 

The American General Electric Company (GE) was not itself a party to the 

Phoebus Agreement, but it influenced the preliminary negotiations through its 

subsidiary, International General Electric Company (IGE), which acted as a holding 

company for General Electric’s overseas interests. IGE subsequently reached separate 

agreements with most of the parties which provided for the exchange of patents and 

know-how, the preservation of the USA and Canada as the exclusive market of IGE, the 

grant to the other parties of exclusive rights in their respective home markets and the 

mutual grant of non-exclusive rights in common markets. Some of the parties to the 

Phoebus Agreement made similar complementary agreements with one another. 

Under the Phoebus Agreement each party (or group of parties) was allocated a 

quota in its home territory and in certain common territories. A schedule, which 

converted the many different types and wattages of lamps into unit values, was drawn 

up and revised annually. Annual sales of all the parties were calculated in units for each 

territory. Each party’s quota for each territory was then determined by applying a pre- 

determined local percentage to that total. Each party’s quota was compared with its 

actual sales to determine excesses and deficits. The calculations involved the 

examination and tabulation at Geneva of hundreds of thousands of individual invoices 

remitted by the parties. Penalties were paid by those whose sales exceeded their quotas 

197


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




and compensatory payments were made to those in deficit. The original British parties 

to the agreement were the British General Electric Company (GEC), British Thomson- 

Houston (BT-H), Ediswan, Metrovick, Siemens and Cryselco (owned jointly by GEC 

and NV Philips). 

The agreements remained in force up to the start of World War 2, so that, in 1939, 

the world’s leading lamp manufacturers, apart from the Japanese, were cross-linked by a 

series of agreements which reserved home markets to home manufacturers, regulated 

competition in common markets and employed the ownership of patents to induce 

independent manufacturers to enter into similar contracts involving quota restrictions 

and observance of agreed prices. 

4.7.14 Physicalregulation 

“Playing second fiddle in the orchestra of progress is not a very glorious proceeding; 

and it is as well to understand that the reasons we did not play first fiddle or lead the whole 

orchestra are to be sought among the Blue Books and Acts of Parliament, and not in the 

supposed degeneracy of our engineers and capitalists.” 

Whyte 1904, p72. 

The French technical journals are full of lamentation and sorrow. The obnoxious and 

absurd electric lighting regulations imposed twelve months ago have been re-issued and 

confirmed by the Prefect of Police, and their authority has now been extended by the 

endorsement of the “Conseil d’Hygiène,” the “Commission Technique,” and the “Commission 

Supérieure des Théâtres.” We published the full text of these regulations in our issue of March 

25, 1887 p446, and as the alterations seem to be unimportant it will be scarcely worthwhile to 

reprint them. Whilst many of the provisions are, as may be supposed, such as will commend 

themselves to the English electrician, there are some others which cannot be read without a 

feeling of impatience, and to which the description above applied to them will not seem one 

whit too strong. Such, for instance, are the rule which require that the chimney shaft of all 

boilers used for electric lighting must be carried to a height of 15 ft. above that of any other 

chimney within a radius of 650 ft; that if batteries are used a special air shaft must be built for 

ventilation, and must open above the roof; that the maximum difference of potential with 

alternating current must not exceed 120 volts. This last is of course a fatal blow to 

transformers in Paris. It seems as if London may even now escape from the ignominious 

position on the list of capital cities lit by electricity which has hitherto seemed likely to occupy. 

Electrician 25 May 1888, pp70-71 

When the use of electricity for domestic lighting became feasible, legislation was 

needed because the electricity supply companies had to dig up the streets to lay cables 

from a central generating station to the consumers’ premises. The promoters of electricity 

undertakings were making heavy capital investments, and understandably sought legal 

protection of their right to supply electricity. The climate of public opinion at this time 

was coloured by opposition to the effects of private monopoly. 

198


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Lord Farrer, who had for many years been Secretary to the Board of Trade observed 

in 1882 Garcke 1907, p50 that the early large-scale undertakings, such as harbours, roads and 

bridges were managed by public bodies. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, 

public opinion changed and greater emphasis was placed on individual effort. The 

concept of the superiority of private enterprise became a fundamental tenet of political 

economy. At the same time major developments took place in engineering science, whilst 

the growth of industrial undertakings was fostered by the legal status accorded to joint- 

stock partnerships. Capital accumulated and fostered an investment boom, with the result 

that there was a rapid general advance in supplying the public with industrial and social 

facilities. 

During the latter half of the nineteenth century reaction set in, and criticism began to 

be directed against the large monopolies which had been created. At the same time, local 

and municipal institutions were strengthened by giving them greater powers. Amongst the 

first of these measures were the Telegraph Acts, 1868 and 1869. The Public Health Act 

of 1875 gave local authorities absolute control of the layer of subsoil under the streets 

needed for water supply, drainage or public lighting; deeper subsoil belonged to the 

owners of the adjoining property. No one had any general right to dig up the streets to 

supply gas or electricity to private consumers. The first gas plants had been authorised 

by individual private acts of Parliament, but many of the general clauses repeated in all 

such acts were brought together in the Gasworks Clauses Acts of 1847 and 1871. 

Tramways were similarly regulated by the Tramways Act, 1870, which laid down the 

general conditions under which tramway undertakings could be authorised. However, a 

separate special act of Parliament was still required for each undertaking, and the 

consent of the local authority was essential. 

A Parliamentary Select Committee of both Houses was set up in March 1879, “to 

consider whether it is desirable to authorise municipal corporations or other local 

authorities to adopt any schemes for lighting by electricity; and to consider how far and 

under what conditions, if at all, gas or other Public Companies should be authorised to 

supply light by electricity”. The chairman was Lyon Playfair, FRS, MP, later Lord 

Playfair of St Andrew’s, (1818-98), an eminent scientist who first trained as a doctor, 

then became an academic chemist before entering politics. 

199


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Although the technological climate was changing rapidly, the supply of electricity 

for domestic purposes was not contemplated. The Playfair Committee took evidence 

from many distinguished scientists and engineers, including William Siemens, John 

Hopkinson and Sir William Thomson (later Lord Kelvin). Surprisingly, Joseph Swan 

was not called as a witness nor was his work mentioned. Edison’s work was mentioned 

briefly, but the witnesses doubted whether it would be successful. Among the experts 

giving evidence only John Hopkinson and Sir William Thomson foresaw the coming 

widespread use of the incandescent filament lamp. 

The general ignorance of the parameters in which the electricity supply 

undertakings would need to operate is epitomised by the evidence Bowers 1982, p154 submitted 

to the Playfair Committee by W.H. Preece, the Electrician to the Post Office, who was 

questioned about interference on telephone lines caused by ac electric cables. Preece 

had conducted tests and found that interference was negligible if there was a separation 

of at least six feet. Asked to look ahead, Preece said he saw no reason to think that 

currents in electric cables would increase, nor did he think the telephone would be 

widely adopted by the public in Britain. It was being widely used in America, but things 

were different in Britain, said Preece, because “we have a super-abundance of 

messenger boys.” 

The Playfair Committee considered only arc lighting, and concluded that there 

was no immediate need for general legislation. The transcript ran to over 300 pages 

though their report, in June 1879, was only two pages long. They did not think there 

was a need for general legislation at the time. Electricity had advantages for lighting 

and “Scientific witnesses think that, in the future, it might be used to transmit power: 

continuing experiment should be encouraged.” 

Immediately after the Playfair Committee had reported, the situation changed 

rapidly as a result of the successful development and commercial production of the 

incandescent lamp. During 1879 and 1880, seven local authorities promoted 

Parliamentary bills to permit the installation of public lighting, although no supply to 

private customers was contemplated at this time. These plans were modest in scale 

amounting to no more than £5-10,000 in capital value. No such acts were passed in 

200


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




1881, but by early 1882 a total of twenty-eight bills before Parliament contained 

provisions relating to electric lighting. 

Seven of the bills were promoted by companies, and they were intended to give 

the companies general powers to produce and supply electricity wherever they might 

make an agreement with a local authority. The companies would have power to break 

up the streets and erect poles as necessary. There were minor differences between the 

bills, but it was assumed that local authority approval would always be required. 

Another group of eight bills was promoted by the existing gas companies which would 

permit them to supply electricity as well as gas, and on similar terms. The remaining 

thirteen bills were by local authorities who simply sought powers to supply electricity . 

The reaction of the Board of Trade was that the provisions of the seven company 

bills were acceptable but some of the other bills either lacked adequate provisions for 

regulating the supply of electricity or created unacceptable monopolies. A general act 

was needed to lay down conditions which should apply to all schemes for the supply of 

electricity. The Board of Trade specified ten general principles. 

(i) Every person should be free to make and use electric power on his own premises 

without interference, so long as he does not injure or annoy others. 

(ii) Every person should be free to supply electric power to others without interference, 

so long as he can do it without interfering with the streets or with the property of 

others, or with existing electric systems, or otherwise injuring other persons. 

(iii) Every person to whom electric power is supplied from any public source should be 

free within his own premises to use it in whatever manner he thinks best. 

(iv) In each town the local authority should have the option of establishing a general 

public source and distribution of electric power. 

(v) If they do not establish it themselves, then they should be empowered to license 

private undertakers to do it. 

(vi) In the case of concessions to private persons, the period of the concession should be 

limited to a short period, with a power to the local authority to resume. 

(vii) Such provisions concerning force and supply to be introduced as present knowledge 

enables Parliament to frame. 

(viii) Provisions should be introduced for protecting the Post Office and other public or 

private interests from injury. 

(ix) If the local authority decline to supply themselves or license others to supply, no 

power to use the streets, &c., should be granted without the authority of Parliament, 

and the powers so granted should be subject to all the conditions to which licensees 

of the local authority are subject. 

(x) Concessions to existing gas companies must be watched and guarded with great 

jealousy, because it will be their interest either to extend their present monopoly and 

powers of charging to the new source of light, to which they have no claim, or to 

defeat the practical success of the electric light. 

These principles were embodied in the Electric Lighting Act, 1882. The lack of 

understanding of the real prospects of electricity supply is indicated by the adoption of the 

201


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Fig. 4.111 Lighting Plan for Edison’s Holborn Viaduct Installation 

format of the Tramways Act, 1870 incorporating the general conditions which had been 

judged suitable for horse traction. These legislative conditions were formulated at a time 

of public reaction against what were deemed “public monopolies” and the electrical supply 

industry had to bear the full brunt of this policy. 

The 1882 Act established three alternative procedures for establishing electricity 

supply undertakings: Licence, Provisional Order, and Special Act. The Board of Trade 

could grant licences to any local authority, company or person, and such licences would 

be for periods not exceeding seven years but could be renewed. Prior consent of the 

local authority was required but this was seldom given because many of the local 

authorities owned gas works, and they regarded the advent of the electric light as 

threatening their investment. Garcke 1907, p18 Inthe absence of consent the Board could grant 

a ‘Provisional Order’, which had to be confirmed by Parliament. The Provisional Order 

would be for up to 21 years, but any undertaking established under a Provisional Order 

(or under Special Act) could be purchased compulsorily by the local authority after that 

time. The purchase price would be ‘fair market value’ at the time of purchase which 

meant that the purchase price would merely be the value of the components of the plant, 

not the value of the business as a going concern. 

A supply undertaking was able to avoid the provisions of the Act if it could either 

obtain consent for the erection of overhead mains or run its mains along private property 

202 

Friedell1986 

Smithsonian Institution


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




such as the railways. An important instance was Crompton’s undertaking at Kensington 

Court where the mains were laid in subways that linked all the houses on the estate. 

Edison’s agent, Johnson, also availed himself of this loophole with an installation at 

Holborn Viaduct. 

The Edison Lighting Company wished to install a pilot system in London, but the 

prospects of gaining parliamentary approval for the enterprise were not good. Edison 

had fallen out with W.H. Preece, Engineer to the Post Office and was also on bad terms 

with J.H. Puleston a Member of Parliament who had invested $10,000 in the Automatic 

Telegraph Company, an early venture of Edison’s. Edison had met Puleston when he 

visited the United States in 1879, and had told him he would try to help them recover 

his money. When the incandescent lamp became a success, Puleston expected Edison to 

honour his commitment. Edison, however, backed down, contending that he had 

offered only to use his good offices on Puleston’s behalf. Puleston was unconvinced 

and felt that Edison had welched on the deal. 

Faced with potential opposition from the English establishment, Johnson 

discovered that he could circumvent the legislation by locating his lighting system in 

High Holborn, which was strategically placed in a prominent location in central London. 

The street was served by tunnels that carried 

the gas and water supply for the houses and 

street lamps on the viaduct. From the 

tunnels a hole opened to each house and 

lamp post. 

“Thus you see with one station in a 

Building on the viaduct we could run 

to the right 2 blocks & to the left 5 or 6 

= Light all the street lamps – a 

Handsome Bridge and 4 Buildings 

called the Bridge Towers – this making 

a magnificent street display and then 

run into as many private shops as we 

chose-two Railway Stations, two 

Hotels, a church etc etc – & never dig 

out a brick or come to the surface at all 

– thus saving in Labor and time-saving 

the necessity for applying to the City or 

Parliament.” 

Letter from Johnson to Edison Jehl 1941 

Fig. 4.112 Edison’s pilot generating station at 

57 Holborn Viaduct (1882) 

203


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Johnson filed a petition with the City Sewer Commission for a temporary 

installation which was to be financed by Drexel-Morgan, which owned the British 

Edison rights. By not requesting permits for a permanent installation, Johnson avoided 

the onerous conditions which attached to such works. To obtain permission to light the 

Post Office, Johnson made overtures to Preece. He persuaded Edison to settle his 

differences with Preece, a move which met with success. 

The Edison exhibits on the Holborn Viaduct and at the Crystal Palace opened in 

mid-January. High Holborn started with only a few hundred lamps, but more were 

gradually added – 400 at the Post Office alone – until finally nearly 3000, fed by two 

Conot 1979, p190 

Jumbos, were connected. 

After the passing of the Act, there was a rush for licences and provisional orders, 

but few of the proposed schemes were actually put into effect. The local authority 

purchase right was a major factor discouraging investment, but it was reinforced by a 

general industrial recession in Britain in the mid 1880s. 

In November 1884 a deputation comprising Sir Frederick Bramwell, 

R.E.B. Crompton, Robert Hammond, J.S. Forbes, and other influential figures in the 

electrical world, called on the President of the Board of Trade to lobby for changes to 

the legislation including repeal of the purchase clause. After abortive attempts 

sponsored by the distinguished scientist Lord Rayleigh and by Viscount Bury, the 

Government then introduced a third bill which passed into law as the Electric Lighting 

Act, 1888. 

The new bill was brief, having only five clauses. It retained the Local Authority’s 

right of purchase but extended, to 42 years, the period after which the purchase right 

could be exercised. The purchase price was to be based on the value of the business as a 

going concern. Local authority consent was a pre-requisite of the grant of a Board of 

Trade licence. The act specified that a licence or an order did not confer a monopoly 

and, finally, brought existing overhead lines under the control of the Board of Trade. 

Although the Electric Lighting Acts do not confer any monopoly, only one order 

was granted in each provincial town. Lip service was paid to “potential competition” by 

reserving the right of the local authority to consent to the grant of further orders. In 

London, however, the Board of Trade encouraged competition between two companies in 

204


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




each borough – one employing alternating current and the other direct current – except 

where local authorities applied for orders, when competitive systems were not thought 

necessary. 

After the 1888 Act there was a rapid growth in electricity supply schemes but 

doctrinal constraints resulting from technological ignorance and political dogma 

hampered progress. The economics of electric lighting were thought to be similar to those 

of gas lighting. Garcke 1907,p22 and no concession was made to the fact that gas could be 

stored in gasometers without appreciable loss, and production was able to proceed at a 

steady rate regardless of fluctuations in demand whereas electricity has to be generated as 

and when required. Generating plant had to be of sufficient capacity to cope with the peak 

load and thus lie idle for most of the day since the use of electric power for traction and 

cooking was not developed at the outset. 

In London, electric lighting service areas were delineated by the borough boundaries 

and it was also stipulated that the powerhouse should be erected within that area. No 

amalgamation of undertakings was permitted. This resulted in such incongruous effects as 

the St James’s and Pall Mall Electric Lighting Company having to put its generating 

station at the side of St James’s Square and the City Company having to promote a 

Parliamentary bill to place its generating station on the south bank of the Thames. 

Garcke 1907, p38 

Early UK Legislation Influencing Regulation of the Electrical Industries. 

1847, 1871. Gasworks Clauses Acts laid down general conditions under which gas 

supply could be organised. 

1868. Telegraph Act authorised the Post-Master-General to acquire undertakings from 

telegraph companies 

1869. Telegraph Act made it illegal for anyone except the Post-Master-General to transmit 

telegrams for payment. Attorney General v The Edison Telephone Company of 

London Limited(1880) decided that telephone was covered by Telegraph Acts. 

1870. Tramways Act authorised the construction of Tramways by a Provisional Order 

granted by the Board of Trade and confirmed by Parliament. Applicants under this 

Act were compelled to obtain the consent of the Local Authority. The tenure was 

limited to twenty-one years, at the end of which or each succeeding septennial period 

the Local Authority was entitled to buy so much of the undertaking as was within its 

area, at the then value of the properties suitable to and used for the undertaking, 

without any allowance for past or future profits or any other consideration whatever. 

1875. Public Health Act gave Local Authorities absolute control of the layer of subsoil 

under the streets for purposes of water supply, drainage or public lighting. Deeper 

subsoil belonged to the owners of the adjoining property. 

1879. Playfair Select Committee set up to consider the need for legislation to regulate the 

supply of electricity. 

205


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




1882. Electric Lighting Act made the essential principles of the Tramways Act, 1870, 

applicable to electricity supply. 

1888. Electric Lighting Act amended the Act of 1882 by extending the period of tenure 

to forty-two years and improving the terms of compulsory sale to the Local 

Authorities 

1896. Light Railways Act. Under this Act an Inquiry before the Light Railway 

Commissioners was substituted for the procedure under the Tramways Act. The Act 

gave no power of veto to Local Authorities, and contained no purchase clause. The 

Act stimulated the promotion of Electrical Tramways, but it was in most of these 

cases interpreted in the spirit of the Tramways Act. 

1898. Joint Committee of both Houses presided over by Lord Cross. This Committee 

recommended that powers should be given for the supply of electrical energy over 

areas including the districts of several Local Authorities, and suggested that the usual 

conditions of purchase by Local Authorities did not apply to such undertakings, that 

the tenure of forty-two years was none too long, that the terms of purchase should be 

reconsidered, and that the power of veto by Local Authorities should be amended. 

1900. Several Special Acts were passed authorising Power Supply Companies to operate 

over large areas. 

1903. The Supply of Electricity Bill, was introduced by the Board of Trade. The object 

of this Bill was to remove some of the restrictive features of the general Electric 

Lighting Acts, but the Bill, though re-introduced several times in subsequent years, 

has not been proceeded with. 

1909. Electric Lighting Act finally liberalised power supply by permitting the Board of 

Trade to authorise the establishment of companies without further recourse to 

Parliament 

4.7.15 Competition Law 

“Combinations have their roots in the nature of social industry and are normal in their 

origin, their development and their practical working. They are neither to be deprecated by 

scientists nor suppressed by legislators. They are the result of an evolution, and are the 

happy outcome of a competition so abnormal that the continuance of it would have meant 

widespread ruin. A successful attempt to suppress them by law would involve the reversion 

of industrial systems to a cast-off type, the renewal of abuses from which society has 

escaped by a step in development.” 

J.B. Clark 

American Economic Association 1887 

“If we will not endure a king as a political power, we should not endure a king over the 

production, transportation, and sale of any of the necessaries of life.” 

Senator John Sherman 

Whilst, in Britain, monopolistic industries were controlled by direct regulation, in 

the USA legislation was aimed against combinations in restraint of trade. As in the Old 

World, political feeling against private monopoly waxed during the latter part of the 

nineteenth century. The movement had its roots in the farming community which felt 

itself squeezed between the rapidly falling prices which it received for its produce and 

the firm prices of the goods it needed to buy. Neale 1970, p12 The cause of these adverse 

trading conditions was based in the trusts or monopolies which were being established 

in consumer goods industries – fuel oil, sugar, matches, linseed oil, whisky and others. 

206


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The farmers were, however, a strong political lobby and organisations like the 

National Grange and the National Farmers’ Alliance pressed for control of the railways 

and of monopolies in general. Congress outlawed rate discrimination by the railways in 

the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 and this was followed in 1890 by the Sherman Act 

which was directed against combinations and trusts in general. The main aim of the 

politicians was to satisfy public demand for action against private monopoly and this 

was reflected in the manner of presentation of the measure. 

Economists wanted to retain the advantages of both combination and competition, 

whilst Sherman himself expected the courts to distinguish between “lawful 

combinations in aid of production and unlawful combinations to prevent competition 

and in restraint of trade.” The American Senate of the time was drawn mainly from the 

ranks of lawyers who assumed that, in the wording of the Sherman Act, with its blanket 

prohibition of restraint of trade, they were codifying the various distinctions between 

lawful and unlawful restraints and combinations that the courts had already made in 

common law. ‘Restraint of trade’ was a phrase which had a technical and well 

understood meaning. It did not include every restraint of trade, whether healthy or 

injurious. The expectation was that the courts would outlaw the rough and ‘unfair’ 

competitive methods of the big trusts and loosen their exclusive hold on their industries, 

but would not prevent consolidations aimed at more efficient large-scale production, nor 

even some restrictive agreements designed to avoid ‘destructive’ competition. 

The main advance of the Sherman Act lay in administration of the law, as it put 

teeth into the law of restraint of trade. Most common law actions on the subject arose 

when one party to a restrictive contract sought to enforce it, and the harshest remedy that 

a court could apply was to declare the contract void and unenforceable because of its 

restrictive features. This did nothing to stop people making such contracts. The 

Sherman Act, on the other hand, made them a crime punishable by fines and even 

imprisonment, and thus brought against the trusts the threat of federal police action. 

The Act also required and empowered federal law officers, on behalf of the public at 

large, to institute equity proceedings against violations. The legal risks facing 

monopolies and combinations thus became much more imposing than previously. 

207


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Act made it clear that the means by which restraint of trade was brought about 

was immaterial. Whether the vehicle was a contract, the formation of a trust or a 

holding company or simply market power, the Act was still to apply. This was 

important because, at common law, private litigation was much less likely to be 

effective, or indeed to arise at all, when the restraint was caused by concentration of 

business power than when it arose directly from the terms of a contract. 

Initially, there was little activity resulting from the Act and the federal government 

did nothing by way of enforcement. A commonly held view was that the provision for 

private, triple-damage actions and industry’s supposed fear of publicity, would 

encourage businesses to observe its provisions. Not until 1903 were specific funds 

voted to the Department of Justice for the tasks of enforcement. Very few cases were 

initiated by the Government and, of those that were, six of the first seven were lost in 

the courts, including cases against the whisky and sugar trusts. 

In 1903, under the administrations of Theodore Roosevelt and Taft, a period of 

much greater activity commenced. A Supreme Court decision, in which a railway 

merger organised by famous and powerful eastern financiers was successfully 

challenged by the administration, attracted popular acclaim. The associated publicity 

helped greatly to establish antitrust as an instrument of public policy and lay the 

foundations for actions against the major oil and tobacco trusts in 1911. 

In the American electric lamp industry, the domination of General Electric had 

grown to such an extent that on 3 March 1911, the Department of Justice brought 

proceedings under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act in the Northern Ohio Circuit Court 

against General Electric and thirty-four other companies Bright 1949, p156 National and its 

lamp-making and part-producing subsidiaries, Westinghouse and its lamp-making 

subsidiary, Corning Glass Works, a few small lamp makers which not part of the 

National organisation, the York Electric Machine Company, the Dwyer Machine Com- 

pany, the Libbey Glass Company and the Phoenix Glass Company. 

The federal government’s case was powerful. The role of National was presented 

to the public as that of a competitor to General Electric, although, in fact, it was a 

subsidiary company. The price-fixing and market-sharing agreements with 

Westinghouse, with National, with the members of the Incandescent Lamp 

208


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Manufacturers Association, and with other lamp producers were attacked as restraining 

trade. The accumulation of patents on improvements in machinery and production 

processes as well as on detail improvements in lamp design and on improvements in 

filament materials enabled General Electric and its group to create a sufficient barrier to 

prevent competitors entering the market after the basic carbon-filament lamp patent had 

expired. The acquisition of patents by General Electric and National cornered the 

market in tantalum and tungsten lamps. These companies also reinforced their position 

by contracts with dealers, tying the distribution of carbon lamps to the new metallic- 

filament lamps. General Electric also insisted on retail price maintenance for both 

carbon and metal-filament lamps and used its market power to make preferential 

agreements with the glass, base, and machinery manufacturers. 

Although a defence was initially filed on 5 June 1911, the position was quickly 

reviewed the response being withdrawn and a consent decree accepted on 12 October 

1911. The other defendants also acquiesced but denied that they violated the law. 

Between the filing of the government complaint and the handing down of the court 

decree, General Electric exercised its option to purchase the 25 per cent of the common 

stock of National which it did not already own. The 1896 Westinghouse and General 

Electric cross-licensing agreement also expired during that interval, on 30 April 1911. 

Each company still retained specific patent licences, however, including the licence 

granted by General Electric under patents covering the metal filament lamps. 

The consent decree provided that the General Electric Company absorb National 

and its subsidiaries completely into its own business. As a result the Cleveland 

properties of National were re-named the National Lamp Works of General Electric and 

later became the headquarters of General Electric’s lamp department. After the changes, 

General Electric served 80 per cent of the US lamp business in its own name and owned 

a principal lamp-glass supplier and the only lamp-base producer. 

Price and market-sharing agreements with Westinghouse and other lamp 

manufacturers were to be discontinued, and exclusive agreements with manufacturers of 

lamp-making machinery and glassware were proscribed. A further provision prohibited 

the fixing of resale prices, the imposing of conditions bearing on resale, or 

209


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




discriminating against purchasers who did not buy carbon lamps from the manufacturers 

of other patented lamps. 

On the other hand, the decree gave almost carte blanche on patent rights. It 

placed no restriction on a manufacturer’s right to acquire patents to bolster his position. 

Patent licenses could specify any prices, terms, and conditions of sale desired, excepting 

only resale prices. 

The consent decree was, however, a paper tiger since the GEM, tantalum, and 

tungsten lamps were rapidly replacing the ordinary carbon lamp. General Electric 

circumvented the prohibition against resale price fixing by developing a new method of 

distribution. As GE retained its patent monopoly over the new types of lamps, the 1911 

antitrust action did not significantly change the situation in the US lamp industry. 

In Britain, no serious action was taken to restrict combinations between the 

lighting manufacturers until the Monopolies Commission investigated the supply in 

1951, leaving the manufacturers free to set their own parameters for development of the 

industry and to increase the barriers for market entry by potential competitors. 

[1915] RPC 202 

4.7.16 Finance 

“...as practical invention ever follows in the wake of discovery, so do the promoters and 

the capitalists pursue the inventor, multiplying his models and extending his achievements 

over land and sea in a thousand profitable projects.” 

R.W. Hirst The Six Panics and Other Essays, (London 1913) p. 227 

“Take no shares in industrial companies, unless fully acquainted with the concern.” 

Erasmus Pinto 

Ye Outside Fools! Glimpses inside the Stock Exchange (1877) 

“The existing state of things with regard to electric light companies is deplorable. 

Company after company is promoted and floated with a huge capital when it is absolutely 

certain that for years to come there will not be legitimate business enough to any per 

centage on a large part of the capital subscribed ... This speculative gambling is a curse to 

true enterprise. Rotten companies, not worth the paper their prospectuses are printed on, 

are always started when the public lose their heads, as they seem to have done now, to the 

loss of the ultimate holders of shares. Companies may be and are brought out legitimately, 

and are worked by honest men. Unfortunately the public will not discriminate ...” 

Electrician, May 1882 

The financial requirements of innovation vary greatly, ranging at one extreme, 

from social capital, which is indivisible and substantial and requires the commitment of 

210


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




a large amount of funds for a long period, down to levels which are financed by credit, 

re-investment or an appeal to the secondary market after assets have been created and 

performance established. Michie 1988, p494 With the former, exemplified by railways and 

electric utilities, competition is limited and the yield is sustained over a long life once an 

enterprise is established. With latter, the cost of entry is low, actual or potential 

competition is great and returns are not guaranteed for long periods, unless protected by 

such artificial barriers as patent rights. These conditions exist particularly at the outset 

of an innovation in manufacturing or distribution. 

Social capital is dependent upon the willingness of passive investors to risk their 

funds and hence reflects the prosperity of the economy and the availability of funds. 

Developments in industry and commerce, on the other hand, may be financed in a 

variety of other ways and are more dependent upon the non-institutional capital market, 

such as individual or corporate savings and the funds of partners, relatives, friends, 

neighbours or business associates. Established firms might manufacture ancillary 

products in response to demand and, dependent on the success of the new venture, a 

change in the emphasis of a business could take place. The profits from one area of 

activity may finance entry into another. Alternatively people with disparate 

backgrounds can co-operate to provide both the expertise and the finance to set up 

production. In such cases finance from other areas of the economy is channelled into 

the new development through individuals and their contacts. A variation on this 

procedure is for a small syndicate to finance the testing and evaluation of a new product 

or process, and then to raise money from the public on the basis of the initial results. 

During the first three-quarters of the nineteenth century there were major 

innovations connected with the application of steam power to a widening range of 

activities in manufacturing, mining, agriculture, transport and urban services. 

Associated with the increase in coal supply was the introduction of a public gas supply 

from 1812. Whilst these developments created potential substitute markets for 

electricity, they also established a barrier to investment as the owners would not wish to 

hazard their existing interests by supporting a competing venture. 

Britain’s successful exploitation of the technological advances of the early and 

mid-nineteenth century reduced the incentive to take up later developments. Excellent 

211


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




rail, telegraph and gas networks and the wide-spread use of steam power, based on 

cheap coal raised the acceptance threshold for the motor car, telephone and electricity. 

Michie 1988, p503 

The production and distribution of electricity require a large initial investment for 

the generating plant, transmission lines, transformer stations and basic installation. By 

1901/2, £27.9m had been expended on electricity supply alone and this had risen to 

£66.5m, by 1913/14. Byatt 1979, p5 Manufacture of electrical equipment, on the other hand, 

did not require substantial amounts of initial capital and expansion could be financed 

through reinvestment and credit, once profits were being generated. 

Within the one technological field Britain lagged at two major aspects. By the 

beginning of World War 1 Britain’s electricity supply was inferior to that of Germany, 

while its electrical manufacturing industry was only half the size. 

There had been an awakening of interest in the possibilities of electricity in the 

mid-nineteenth century, though the bubble had burst when the economics of using a 

battery as a power source became apparent. With the development of the electromagnet 

in the mid-1860s, which occurred simultaneously in Britain, Germany and the United 

States, the conversion of mechanical energy into electricity became feasible. This made 

it possible to generate current on a large scale and at a competitive price and opened the 

way for the development of electric lighting. Britain was abreast of the other nations 

and the investing public provided an adequate source of finance. Around 1880 there 

was a surge of speculative activity with companies being formed to develop both arc and 

incandescent lighting systems and to provide a public supply of electricity. Capital was 

raised mainly from local shareholders who could expect to benefit directly from the 

service to be provided. This was a risky enterprise as many of the companies failed. 

During the mid-1880s, the effects of the 1882 Electricity Supply Act began to bite 

and investment funds dried up. By the end of the decade confidence was returning with 

the repeal or alleviation of its harshest provisions, but the level of investor participation 

experienced in the early 1880s was not matched again. 

The reason was that the physical regulative environment brought in by the 

Electricity Supply Act, 1882 actively discouraged investment. The act not only provided 

for maximum prices but also allowed the purchase of private undertakings by local 

212


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




authorities at break-up value after 21 years. This threat was a major impediment to an 

industry that needed to amortise its high initial capital requirements over a long working 

life. Although the effects of municipal take-over, with inadequate compensation, were 

largely removed in 1888, when the time period was extended to 42 years, a significant 

restriction remained. This was the geographical limitation placed on each company’s 

operations, which were confined to the area under the control of a single local authority. 

Whyte 1904, p22 

This legislation was of little consequence when low voltage dc systems were the 

norm, as the high cost of distribution confined it to small areas. The introduction of ac 

imposed the need for large systems, which could take advantage of economies of scale 

with large central power stations serving extensive areas through high voltage 

transmission lines. The introduction of this system, and the cheap electricity it offered, 

was delayed and impeded by the existing legislation and the obstruction of local 

authorities. In London, for example, a company with strong financial backing was 

formed with the object of supplying the city’s electricity from three large generating 

stations, but this plan was blocked by the various London local authorities. London 

continued to be supplied with electricity from 66 generating stations, with an average 

size of only 3,000 h.p., controlled by 72 authorities. Comparable cities in Europe or the 

United States had single generating stations of up to 70,000 h.p. As local authorities 

usually owned the gas supply companies, the electricity supply legislation effectively 

gave them a means of suppressing competition. 

The British Electric Traction Company possessed both the resources and the 

desire to invest in British electrical utilities but was inhibited by the existing legislation. 

The position was set out by the Chairman, Rivers Wilson, at the annual general meeting 

in 1911. 

“It is not easy to find in this country investments for capital to yield an industrial return, 

and we have great difficulty at the present time in profitably employing our surplus cash 

resources, because we are determined not to extend the business of electrical enterprise in 

this country unless and until we can secure better treatment and better prospects of making 

an industrial profit than is the case at present.” 

The manufacture of electrical equipment was readily accessible to anyone with an 

engineering background and a moderate amount of capital – Ferranti started in 1883 by 

making electric meters in a small workshop and Crompton by producing dynamos. 

213


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Swan financed his initial lighting development with cash from his pharmaceutical 

business and William Siemens established his firm with family finance. 

4.7.16.1 Franchising 

The early arc-lighting companies commenced operating before the incandescent- 

lighting companies, and their modus operandi served as a precedent for the newer light 

source. Most early installations had their own generators and were completely self- 

sufficient. For urban areas it was soon realised that it would be more efficient to set up 

a central power station and use this to supply neighbouring consumers. The first central 

station in the United States was installed in San Francisco in 1879. It was soon 

followed by others, including the Brush Electric Light & Power Company of New York, 

which lighted Broadway with arc lamps in 1880. Each operating company was given an 

exclusive licence for a specified territory under the patents of a manufacturing company, 

the consideration for which was an allocation of stock and a sum in cash to the parent 

company. In addition, the operating company purchased its equipment from the parent 

company or its affiliates, yielding another source of profit. 

4.7.16.2 Stock market shenanigans 

In the UK, as in the USA, the Brush company formed small subsidiaries, based on 

local central stations, which it then proceeded to float. These offerings were 

enthusiastically taken up by investors mesmerised by anything to do with electricity. 

This phenomenon became famous as the ‘Brush boom’. Kynaston 1994, p340 Among these 

companies was Metropolitan Brush, licensed to work the patents of Brush arc lights in 

the London area and launched in May 1882 by H. Osborne O’Hagan, the company 

promoter. 

“There was such a rush for the shares as had never been seen before in Lombard Street, 

the whole street being blocked by the crowd pressing to get to the bank to pay in their 

applications. Many gave up the attempt, contenting themselves with posting their 

applications in the nearest pillarbox. The capital was enormously oversubscribed, all the 

well-known City names being amongst the list of subscribers, and the shares, which on 

allotment were to be £3 paid, were on the day of the issue of the prospectus dealt in on the 

London Stock Exchange at £7 per share, or £4 premium. It was no wonder that Dick, Tom, 

and Harry put in applications in the hope of getting an allotment of a few shares…” 

“So far so brilliant, from a company promoter’s point of view anyway; but the awkward 

fact was that a handful of powerful bears on the Stock Exchange had decided that the Brush 

system was worthless and therefore were determined to force down the price. Their chosen 

instrument was the Jablochkoff Electric Light and Power Company, brought out in late May 

214


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




and reliant on what O’Hagan sincerely believed to be an inferior system of arc lighting. The 

Brush bears not only pushed up Jablochkoff shares to a big premium, but also went on a 

wrecking campaign.” 

“Rumours were actively circulated that there was nothing in the Brush system which 

would prevent a hundred rivals from entering the field and sharing the business with them. 

It was also put about that already the Brush system had been discarded in several places and 

one of its rivals substituted. The word went round, ‘See what has happened in Paris’. No 

one knew what had happened in Paris, and no one inquired. It all helped to frighten 

speculators, and with a vigorous campaign against the Brush, Hammond, and Metropolitan 

shares, the bubble burst, the shares tumbled down many points in a week, and the 

Metropolitan Brush shares, which were a few days before selling at £4 per share premium, 

could not be sold at par. This was one of the worst slumps I have ever witnessed, for the 

speculating public were just as anxious to get out of their shares as a week or two before 

they had been anxious to acquire them, so that in a fortnight the shares of the Brush and 

Hammond Companies stood only at a small premium, although it was known that they had 

in their treasuries large sums for which they had sold their licences, and which would be 

distributed amongst the shareholders.” 

“These abused companies were just a few years before their time.” 

H. Osborne O’Hagan 

Leaves from my Life (1) pp118-124 

In this period, many enterprises were floated. Few of the ventures survived, and a 

long-term legacy of mistrust was bequeathed to the whole British electrical industry. 

The situation is epitomised in Alexander Siemens’ presidential address to the Institution 

of Electrical Engineers. 

“However much other causes may have contributed to delay the development of 

electrical engineering, it is clear that the principal one must be looked for in the exaggerated 

expectations that were raised, either by ignorance or by design, when the general public first 

seriously thought of regarding electricity as a commodity for everyday use.” 

“At that time the promoters of electric companies preached to the public that electricity 

was in its infancy, that the laws of this science were totally unknown, and that wonders 

could be confidently expected from it. There was a short time of excitement to the public 

and of profit to the promoters; then the confidence of the public in electricity was almost destroyed, 

and could only be regained by years of patient work.” 

Alexander Siemens 

Presidential Address to the I.E.E., 1894 

4.7.16.3 Patents as a source of finance 

“You know that we are possessors of patents, and I suppose a large measure of our 

prosperity will depend on the validity of those patents. This is the second concern in which I 

have been concerned in which the investments have turned largely on the possession of patents 

– the telephone and the business of electric lighting – and I have arrived at one conclusion, that 

anyone who stakes his money on a patent is a fool.” 

Chairman’s address to the Fourth Annual General Meeting 

Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company Limited 

9 August 1887 

“Patent rights, like patent medicines, are never quite safe unless they are worthless. The craze 

which possessed the investing public a few years back appears to have not yet been exorcised. 

Every now and again there is put on the market some mysterious new discovery which is to 

give to Electric Lighting industry the fillip it is supposed to be in need of. In reality it needs no 

such artificial aid, but if it did, the very worst thing that can happen to it will be a revival of the 

mania for buying patent rights at fabulous prices.” 

The Electrician 19 Aug 1887 p314 

215


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




4.7.16.3.1 William Siemens 

The economics of the patent system in Victorian Britain are exemplified by the 

experiences of Sir William Siemens (1823-1883) who, as Carl Wilhelm Siemens, an 

itinerant engineer, arrived in London from Hamburg in March 1843. Siemens was the 

fourth of eight sons born to a middle class Hanoverian family. Following his early 

education in a commercial school in Lübeck and an industrial school in Magdeburg, he 

enrolled in the University of Göttingen, where he studied physical geography, technology, 

mathematics, physics and chemistry. He also spent some time in the magnetic observatory 

of Wilhelm Weber. 

Siemens’ parents died in his youth, and the course of his education and early 

industrial career were strongly influenced by his eldest brother Ernst Werner, with whom 

he enjoyed an extremelyclose relationship. 

He emigrated to England early in 1843, bringing with him a new process for 

electro-deposition of silver which he and his brother Werner had developed. His aim 

was to patent the technique and to exploit it commercially in the United Kingdom. 

His experience was related in a presidential address given many years later to the 

Midland Institute. 

Pole 1888, p44 

After attaining some promising results, a spirit of enterprise came over me so strong 

that I tore myself away from the narrow circumstances surrounding me, and landed at the 

East End of London with only a few pounds in my pocket and without friends, but an ardent 

confidence of ultimate success within my breast. 

I expected to find some office in which inventions were examined into, and rewarded 

if found meritorious, but no one could direct me to such a place. In walking along Finsbury 

Pavement I saw written up in large letters, “So-and-So” (I forget the name), “Undertaker,” 

and the thought struck me that this must be the place I was in quest of; at any rate I thought 

that a person advertising himself as an “Undertaker” would not refuse to look into my 

invention, with the view of obtaining for me the sought for recognition or reward. On 

entering the place I soon convinced myself, however, that I came decidedly too soon for the 

kind of enterprise there contemplated, and finding myself confronted by the proprietor of 

the establishment, I covered my retreat by what he must have thought a very lame excuse. 

By dint of perseverance I found my way to the Patent Office of Messrs. Poole & 

Carpmael, who received me kindly, and provided me with a letter of introduction to Mr. 

Elkington (the proprietor of an electro-plating factory in Birmingham). Armed with this 

letter, I proceeded to Birmingham to plead my cause with your countrymen. 

In looking back to that time, I wonder at the patience with which Mr. Elkington 

listened to what I had to say, being very young, and scarcely able to find English words to 

convey my meaning. After showing me what he was doing already in the way of 

electroplating, Mr. Elkington sent me back to London in order to read some patents of his 

own, asking me to return if after perusal I still thought I could teach him anything. To my 

great disappointment I found that the chemical solutions I had been using were actually 

mentioned in one of his patents, although in a manner that would hardly have sufficed to 

enable a third person to obtain practical results. 

216


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




On my return to Birmingham I frankly stated what I had found. ……… It was agreed 

that I should not be judged by the novelty of my invention, but by the results which I 

promised, namely, of being able to deposit with a smooth surface 30 penny-weights of 

silver upon a dish cover, the crystalline structure of the deposit having theretofore been a 

source of difficulty. In this I succeeded; and I was able to return to my native country and 

my mechanical engineering a comparative Croesus. By dint of a certain determination to 

win, I was able to advance step by step up to this place of honour, situate within a gunshot 

of the scene of my very earliest success in life, but separated from it by the time of a 

generation. But notwithstanding the lapse of time, my heart still beats quick each time I 

come back to the scene of this, the determining incident of my life. 

Elkingtons’ attitude towards Siemens was somewhat equivocal. They warned him 

about potential infringement of their patent on gilding and denigrated Siemens’ process. 

They accused him of asking too high a price, but ultimately offered him employment 

and underwrote a patent application GB Pat 9741/1843 on his process and offered him 

facilities to develop it at their plant. In due course they purchased the patent rights for 

£1600, less £110, the patenting fees. 

The inference is that there was merit in Siemens’ idea and that Elkingtons took 

good care to acquire the know-how that was an essential accompaniment to put the 

invention into practice. 

Siemens next conceived a regulator Pole 1888, p52 which replaced the conventional 

governor of a steam engine. It was based on an independently rotating shaft which was 

maintained at constant speed and served as a standard on which the load-bearing shaft’s 

speed could be based. 

Encouraged by his easy success with the electroplating inventions, Siemens 

essayed to sell the patent rights entirely for the huge consideration of £36,000. He 

quickly discovered that he had no takers for this proposition and endeavoured to license 

the patent. However, this strategy also failed. 

As an inducement to get manufacturers to try the idea, Siemens and his partner 

Woods, had machines made and offered them for trial. To puff the product, Woods 

presented a paper on the machine and its advantages to the Institution of Civil 

Engineers. This approach was more successful and the invention achieved some 

recognition. However, the venture was not profitable. Siemens used up most of his 

personal resources and borrowed heavily from friends and relatives to finance an 

ambitious overseas patent filing programme which did not achieve significant returns 

either. 

217


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Siemens also developed a printing process which met with no greater success and 

he spent the first three years of his residence in England promoting these two inventions. 

His initial achievement gave Siemens an exaggerated view of the significance of these 

subsequent inventions. Despite failing to find purchasers, he still expected that an 

attempt to work them himself would be easy, and largely remunerative. 

In essaying to introduce his own ideas and those of his brother, Siemens achieved 

a degree of fame, and other people approached him to introduce their inventions. As a 

result, Siemens set himself up as a technology transfer agent, a role which usually 

implied finding money to promote the ideas. 

Amongst the innovations with which he dealt was a process for the manufacture of 

artificial stone invented and patented by Frederick Ransome of Ipswich. William 

Siemens devoted much time to its exploitation in the United Kingdom, while his brother 

Werner actively endeavoured to introduce it on the Continent. The process became well 

established, but the two Siemens did not make any profits from their efforts. 

Eventually William Siemens abandoned his speculation with inventions and 

undertook some engineering work in connection with the expansion of the railway 

system, which at that time was growing rapidly. 

He had studied the theory of heat, and had kept pace with current practice. 

Pole 1888, p68 This led him to believe that work on improving energy efficiency might 

prove lucrative since there was waste of heat, in almost all manufacturing and industrial 

processes. In the spring of 1847, whilst working on the condenser of a steam engine, he 

conceived a method of recovering some of the waste heat. He arranged for the 

construction of a test model which gave sufficiently promising results to justify filing a 

patent application and encouraged him to extend the process to condensers usable for 

salt production. 

He offered to sell a one-third interest in the English and Scottish patents to an 

engineering firm for a consideration of £1000, plus a royalty which would be payable to 

the person who produced his prototype, if they would be prepared to develop and exploit 

the invention. After some persuasion, the firm agreed to take the idea on, but decided to 

retain Siemens as a consultant at a salary of £400 pa in order to acquire the essential 

218


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




know-how. Later, a Belfast mining company agreed to try the equipment for salt 

production, but there was no indication of any development resulting from this venture. 

success. 

Siemens filed further patent applications on the principle, but did not achieve any 

In 1852, Siemens devised a novel water meter which found immediate acceptance. 

Pole 1888, p108 To publicise the invention, he read a couple of papers before the Institution of 

Mechanical Engineers. Subsequently, his meter was not only adopted extensively in 

many towns in England, but it also excited much attention on the Continent and in 

America. He patented improvements in November, 1856, in December’ 1860, and in 

March, 1867, but his initial design proved adequate for the needs of the industry. 

From the outset, the invention generated royalty income from the outset, which 

rose to more than £1,000 p.a. for the UK alone, and stayed at that level for many years. 

This income from the water meter relieved Siemens of the pecuniary anxieties which 

had beset him ever since he emigrated to England. 

4.7.16.3.2 Joseph Wilson Swan 

Swan’s first exposure to the patent system was in 1864 when he patented his newly- 

developed carbon process, preparing and filing the specification himself. GB Pat 503/1864 This 

was the forerunner of some seventy inventions which appeared under his name in the 

Swan 1929,p39 

Patent Office Register. 

In developing the carbon process, the observation of 

the indurating effect upon gelatine of chromium salts suggested to him the application of 

this reaction for the tanning of leather. GB Pat 330/1866 Amongst Swan’s other photographic 

inventions was the invention of “bromide printing paper,” now in universal use, as a 

means of exceedingly rapid printing by artificial light. Bromide paper was first proposed 

GB Pat 2968/1879 

and patented by Swan in 1879. 

Swan paid his first visit to the Continent in June 1867, where he sold the foreign 

rights in the carbon process to Messrs. Braun of Dornach, in Alsace-Lorraine, who used it 

to reproduce many of the famous masterpieces in chalk and monochrome from the 

continental picture galleries. This alerted him to the commercial possibilities of patents 

and when, later, he had developed and patented his carbon filament lamp, his first thoughts 

on commercial exploitation overseas were to sell the patents. 

219


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




himself. 

“ The patent business is all in a perfectly unsettled state. There are no new enquiries 

from likely buyers of the patent for France (£40,000 had been offered, but this offer was 

refused by the agents.) but plenty of enquiries for lamps, and, the most serious question is 

waiting to be debated, namely, whether in face of the demand for lamps we should begin lampmaking 

in France. We are asked to make an offer for lighting the Grand Opera for three 

years.” 

Eventually he decided that the most profitable course was to set up in manufacture 

With the USA, however, the picture was different and, in 1881, Swan sold his 

American patents to the Brush Company of Cleveland, USA, and his assistant Swinburne 

went out to help set up the manufacture of the Swan lamp there. The intention of the 

Brush Company was to carry on the lamp manufacture in conjunction with the 

manufacture of the Brush secondary battery which it was then endeavouring to perfect. 

This battery, however, never became a commercial success, and the manufacture of Swan 

lamps in America faded out. 

4.7.16.3.3 Nikola Tesla 

Nikola Tesla, a brilliant Serbian electrical engineer who had emigrated to USA 

from Croatia, obtained a post in Edison’s laboratory in the spring of 1885. His hard 

work came to Edison’s notice, giving Tesla an opportunity to suggest many ways in 

which the dynamos could be improved in design to operate more efficiently. Edison, 

ever mindful of the value of increased efficiency, offered him $50,000 if he could make 

good his proposals. 

Tesla went to work, re-designing the dynamos, substituting more efficient short 

cores for the long-core field magnets used in the current models and providing 

automatic controls. When the new machines met his predictions, Tesla asked to be paid 

what he had been promised. Edison then reneged on the deal, passing it off as an 

example of American humour. Tesla did not appreciate the joke and resigned 

O’Neill 1944, p63 

immediately. 

During his time with Edison, Tesla had acquired a considerable reputation in the 

electrical engineering community. As a result, a group of financiers offered to back him 

and form a company under his name. Tesla viewed this as an opportunity to produce his 

alternating-current system but the promoters had other ideas. They wanted him to 

220


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




develop a practical arc light for street and factory illumination. He complied with their 

wishes and achieved the task in about a year. 

Tesla took his remuneration mainly in shares in the company. When the project 

was successfully completed, he was eased out of the company. At this stage, he found 

that the value of shares in companies without a track record of earnings was minimal. 

He found that he was unable to cash in his investment and had, once again, been 

cheated. 

For the next year Tesla was forced to work as a manual labourer, in order to make 

a living, but, during the winter of 1887, he struck up a friendship with the foreman of 

the gang who, too, had fallen on hard times. Tesla talked about his inventions and his 

ideas for the use of alternating current. O’Neill 1944, p65 This acquaintance introduced him 

to Mr. A.K. Brown of the Western Union Telegraph Company who put up some of his 

own money and interested a friend in joining him in Tesla’s project. This money 

financed the Tesla Electric Company, and in April, 1887, established a laboratory not far 

from Edison’s workshop. 

As soon as the new company opened its laboratories, Tesla started the 

construction of various pieces of electric machinery which he had conceived 

theoretically in Budapest, some five years earlier. 

He produced three complete systems of alternating-current machinery – for single- 

phase, two-phase and three-phase working – and made experiments with four- and six- 

phase currents. Each system included generators, motors for producing power from 

them and transformers for raising and reducing the voltages, in addition to the necessary 

control apparatus. 

To obtain patent protection, Tesla’s patent attorneys, Duncan, Curtis & Page, filed 

a single application covering the entire system and all of its constituent dynamos, 

transformers, distribution systems and motors, six months after the laboratory opened 

and five and a half years after Tesla had made his rotary magnetic-field invention. 

The Patent Office, however, objected on the grounds of lack of unity of invention 

and insisted that it be divided out into seven separate applications. There was no 

significant prior art and the patents were granted quickly. Their publication drew the 

attention of the world to Tesla’s époque-making ideas. O’Neill 1944, p68 He was invited to 

221


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




deliver a lecture before the American Institute of Electrical Engineers on May 16, 1888, 

in which he presented the theory and practical application of alternating current to 

O’Neill 1944, p72 

power engineering. 

George Westinghouse, head of the Westinghouse Electric Company in Pittsburgh, 

who had made a fortune out of the exploitation of his own inventions, recognised the 

tremendous commercial possibilities presented by Tesla’s discoveries and the vast 

superiority of the alternating- over the direct-current system. He resolved to make an 

offer for his inventions and contacted Tesla in his laboratory shortly after the American 

Institute of Electrical Engineers’ lecture. Westinghouse had no inhibitions as he was 

not, like Edison, committed to the dc system. 

The deal was made quickly. Westinghouse offered a cash sum of one million 

dollars plus a royalty for the alternating current patents. Tesla requested one dollar per 

horsepower. Westinghouse agreed and the matter was settled. He retained Tesla to 

oversee the establishment of the technology at his Pittsburgh factory for a year. 

After a year of wrestling the production problems, Tesla decided to return to his 

own laboratory, despite an offer from Westinghouse of a salary of twenty-four thousand 

dollars a year, one third of the net income of the company and his own laboratory, if he 

O’Neill 1944, p75 

would stay on and direct the development of his system. 

The establishment of the new electrical supply industry based on the Tesla patents 

placed great demands on capital during a period in which the USA was entering a period 

of commercial and financial depression. This, together with his patent conflict with 

General Electric, meant that Westinghouse had over-stretched his resources and he was 

forced to re-structure his organisation. The Westinghouse Electric Company was forced 

to merge with the US Electric Company and the Consolidated Electric Light Company, 

the new unit to be known as the Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company 

and, as a pre-condition, Westinghouse was urged to re-negotiate his royalty agreement 

with Tesla, with a view to putting the finances on a sounder footing. 

Westinghouse strongly objected but could not over-rule the financiers 

Westinghouse met Tesla in his laboratory again and explained the situation. Although 

contractually he was in a strong position, Tesla wished only to see his alternating current 

system made available to the world. He therefore agreed to Westinghouse’s request and 

222


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




abandoned his entitlement to a royalty, a gesture which, it has been estimated, cost him 

some $12m. 

In 1895, Tesla’s uninsured laboratory was completely destroyed by fire and, 

together with it, the bulk of Tesla’s wealth. O’Neill 1944, p121 Both the company’s and 

Tesla’s individual resources were reduced to almost nothing. Tesla himself had some 

income from German patent royalties on his polyphase motors and dynamos, which was 

sufficient for his personal needs, but not enough to enable him to maintain an 

experimental laboratory. 

The head of the Morgan banking group which developed the hydroelectric station 

at Niagara Falls, using Tesla’s polyphase system, was familiar with Tesla’s reputation 

and was prepared now to arrange for the formation of a new company which support 

Tesla’s experiments. He offered to subscribe one hundred thousand dollars of the 

proposed half-million dollars of capital stock of the company. 

Tesla accepted an initial instalment of forty thousand dollars and proceeded to set 

up a new laboratory four months after the fire. This sum was sufficient for him to be 

able to keep actively engaged in research for about three years. He was not sufficiently 

interested in the commercial aspects of the business to pursue the funding which would 

have put him on a sound footing, being concerned mainly in getting his experiments 

well under way rather than worrying about future financial needs. 

4.7.16.3.4 Maintenance of profits 

Following the development of metallic filaments, the major British companies 

reached an agreement on prices and market share. British Thomson-Houston, Siemens 

and the General Electric Company, who were the owners of a large number of patents 

relating to incandescent lamps with metallic wire filaments, pooled their patents and 

collectively controlled the industry. In 1912, the patentees and their licensees formed 

themselves into a ring or trust, under the name of the Tungsten Lamp Association. By 

March 1915 this consisted of the following companies:- 

General Electric Company Ltd., London 

British Thomson-Houston Company Ltd., Rugby 

Siemens Brothers & Co. Ltd., London 

223


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Edison and Swan United Electric Light Company Ltd., London 

British Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company, Manchester 

Stearn Electric Lamp Company Ltd., London 

“Z” Electric Lamp Manufacturing Company Ltd., London 

Electrical Company Ltd. London 

Foster Engineering Company Ltd., Wimbledon 

Philips Electric Lamp Company, Eindhoven, Holland. 

The members of the Tungsten Lamp Association operated under the pooled patents 

and maintained prices for the retail sale of lamps at agreed levels. Licences were available 

to all comers who agreed to abide by this undertaking. Royalty levels were exemplified by 

those paid by Ediswan – 10% for lamps sold in the UK and 5% for lamps exported. 

To enhance their profits the manufacturers required their dealers to give an 

undertaking not to sell below specified list prices, with the result that the price of a lamp 

with a drawn tungsten filament was considerably higher in Britain than it was abroad. 

At this time a carbon filament lamp consumed about 4 watts per candle power, a 

tantalum lamp about 1.5, an extruded, sintered tungsten filament lamp 1.35, and a 

malleable tungsten filament lamp 1.25. The malleable tungsten filament lamp had a much 

greater durability and dominated the market, having about a 90% share. It was sold in the 

UK at 2s 6d to 2s 9d, whilst the cost of manufacture was about 4d, of which the filament 

accounted for, at most, ½d. The carbon filament lamp was sold at prices between 1s and 

6d, the latter being equivalent in light output to a malleable tungsten filament lamp costing 

2s 6d. The price of lamps in Germany, where the patents were in force, was 1s 9d, but in 

Holland, where there were no patents, it was only about 10d. The market was constrained 

by price, smaller households not being able to afford electric lighting and there was 

sporadic litigation to bring into line the smaller companies which tried to plough an 

independent furrow. 

Around the turn of the century, attention turned to materials other than carbon for 

fabrication of the filament. Von Welsbach developed a lamp based on sintered, 

extruded osmium and the technique was subsequently extended to other metals, notably 

tantalum, molybdenum and tungsten 

224


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Von Bolton, of Siemens, filed a patent application on a filament based on a ductile 

tungsten wire but he did not disclose an operative method of producing it. Just and 

Hanaman filed an application for a method of producing an extruded tungsten filament 

and, despite their later date of application, were able to prove priority of invention with 

the date of their British and French applications. They were finally granted a 

fundamental American patent on 27 February 1912, while the applications of Kuzel and 

von Bolton were denied. 

An independent American inventor, John Allen Heany, of York, Pennsylvania, 

also laid claim to the invention of the tungsten filament. He had been working for many 

years with a variety of materials and filed an application covering the tungsten filament 

on December 29, 1904. In 1908 it was discovered that Heany’s patent attorney and a 

Patent Office examiner had falsified Patent Office records to place Heany’s priority 

ahead of Just and Hanaman and other workers. On indictment, the attorney and the 

Patent Office examiner were convicted of conspiracy, forgery, and the destruction of 

official records. Heany was acquitted, although he had been aware of the criminal acts 

of the others. Due to this fraud, the patents which had been issued to Heany were 

subsequently annulled and all his pending applications rejected. 

General Electric had set up its own research laboratory and was aware of the 

commercial importance of tungsten filaments. In an attempt to corner the exclusive 

American rights for the production and sale of tungsten-filament lamps, GE started, in 

1906, to buy the American patent applications of all the contending European inventors, 

in order to be sure to obtain the one which would ultimately proceed to grant of a patent. 

They paid $100,000 to the German Welsbach Company for rights on its tungsten- 

filament inventions. In 1909 they paid $170,000 to the Bergmann Elektrizitäts-Werke 

of Berlin for an option which they later exercised on the American rights for all the 

company’s applications covering incandescent lamps and their methods of production. 

GE also bought the patent applications and inventions of Just and Hanaman for 

$250,000 and of Kuzel for $240,000. 

General Electric even secured in 1904 an option on the work of Heany, which was 

relinquished when it became apparent that he had produced nothing of value. The total 

cash payment for the patent applications was $760,000. This proved an excellent 

225


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




investment since, in 1907 alone, as a result of its monopolistic position, GE recovered a 

premium of around 75¢ per lamp on sales of 500,000 lamps. 

As in Britain, the pattern of organisation of the industry which was established by 

these early patent conflicts prevailed virtually unchanged until the middle of the 

twentieth century. 

4.7.17 Marketing 

4.7.17.1 Learned Societies 

A frequently-adopted way of “puffing” new ideas was to deliver a discourse on the 

subject to the relevant learned society. Thus William Siemens presented a paper on his 

new water meter to the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 

226 

Pole 1888, p108 

Similarly, 

when Joseph Swan was trying to generate interest in the incandescent lamp, he 

embarked on a lecture tour, starting at the Literary and Philosophical Society of 

Newcastle, where he gave his first, dramatic demonstration. In this exercise he was 

repeating an experience of his youth, when his own enthusiasm was triggered by a lecture 

and demonstration of the electric lamp given by W.E. Staite at the Sunderland Athenæum. 

Swan 1929, p23 

4.7.17.2 Pathfinder installations 

Amongst those whose interest was aroused by Swan’s lecture were Sir William 

Spottiswoode, a Fellow of the Royal Society, and Sir William Thomson (later Lord 

Kelvin). Spottiswoode commissioned one of the earliest installations for his private 

residence. 

Swan personallysupervised an installation at the house of Sir William Armstrong, at 

Cragside, near Rothbury, which employed the first hydroelectric generating plant in the 

country, the motive power being obtained from a waterfall in the grounds. Lord Kelvin’s 

Scottish home was also lit by Swan, who invited his distinguished customer to act as 

honoraryconsultant to the new company. 

The part played by influencers is illustrated by the role of Captain J.A. Fisher, R.N. 

(afterwards Admiral Lord Fisher of Kilverstone) who dined with Sir William 

Spottiswoode, and was highly impressed by use of Swan’s lamps to illuminate the dinner- 

table. Captain Fisher enquired of Swan concerning the possibility of installing electric


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




lighting in his new ship, the Inflexible. In response, Swan’s representative, Henry 

Edmunds was despatched at once to Portsmouth to give a demonstration.. 

“At Portsmouth I was met by Captain Fisher, who took me over the Inflexible, and invited 

me to lunch at his club ; he had arranged for a demonstration in a shed in the dockyard, which 

had been darkened for the purpose. It had two parallel bare copper wires suspended by strings 

from the ceiling, passing outside to a searchlight-dynamo driven by a semi-portable engine, 

controlled by signals between two bosuns, one inside the shed and the other outside. The 

seamen communicated by whistle, and the speed of the engine was carefully adjusted so that 

the incandescent lamps ran brightly without being distressed. At that period we had no fuses, 

no voltmeters, no ampère-meters, and practically no switches; and it requires no little care to 

get proper adjustment.” 

“At last we got our lamps to glow satisfactorily, and at that moment the Admiral was 

announced. Captain Fisher had warned me that I must be careful how I answered any 

question, for the Admiral was of the stern old school, and prejudiced against all new-fangled 

notions. The Admiral appeared, resplendent in gold lace, and accompanied by such a bevy of 

ladies that I was strongly reminded of the character in H.M.S. Pinafore, with his sisters, and his 

cousins and his aunts. The Admiral immediately asked if I had seen the Inflexible. I replied 

that I had.” 

‘Have you seen the powder magazine?’ 

‘Yes! I have been to it.’ 

‘What would happen to one of these little glass bubbles in the event of a broadside?’ 

‘I did not think it would affect them.’ 

‘How do you know ? You’ve neverbeen in a ship during a broadside!’ 

“I saw Captain Fisher’s eye fixed upon me, and a sailor was dispatched for some guncotton.” 

“Evidently everything had been already prepared, for he quickly returned with a small teatray 

about two feet long, upon which was a layer of gun-cotton, powdered over with black 

gunpowder. The Admiral asked if I was prepared to break one of the lamps over the tray. I 

replied that I could do so quite safely ; for the glowing lamp would be cooled down by the time 

it fell amongst the gun-cotton. I took a cold chisel, smashed a lamp and let it fall. The 

company saw the light extinguished and a few pieces of glass fail on the tray. There was no 

flash, and the gunpowder and gun-cotton remained as before. There was a short pause, while 

the Admiral gazed on the tray. Then he turned and said to Captain Fisher, ‘We’ll have this 

light in the Inflexible.’ ” 

Henry Edmunds 

Reminiscences 

Edison, too, followed a strategy of installing lighting systems in the homes of the 

famous, although, in his case, those considered to be of importance were J. Gordon 

Bennett, owner of the New York Herald and the banker J.P. Morgan,whose house was the 

first home in New York to be illuminated with incandescent lamps. Morgan’s biographer 

gives an account of some of the difficulties which had to be faced. 

“A cellar was dug underneath the stable which stood on Thirty-sixth Street in the rear of 

the house, and there the little steam engine and boiler for operating the generator were set up. 

A brick passage was built just below the surface of the yard, and through this the wires were 

carried. The gas fixtures in the house were wired, so that there was one electric light bulb 

substituted for a burner in each fixture. Of course there were frequent short circuits and many 

breakdowns on the part of the generating plant. Even at the best, it was a source of a good deal 

of trouble to the family and neighbors. The generator had to be run by an expert engineer who 

came on duty at 3:00 p.m. and got up steam, so that at any time after four o’clock on a winter’s 

afternoon the lights could be turned on. This man went off duty at 11:00 p.m. It was natural 

227


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




that the family should often forget to watch the clock, and while visitors were still in the house, 

or possibly a game of cards was going on, the lights would die down and go out. If they 

wanted to give a party, a special arrangement had to be made to keep the engineer on duty after 

hours.” 

Although the Morgan installation could, by no 

means, be described as trouble-free, the mere fact that New 

York’s leading banker used electricity to light his home 

yielded huge publicity dividends. Edison also elicited the 

services of Sarah Bernhardt who was acting in New York 

at the end of 1880. She paid a visit to Menlo Park after a 

performance and Edison arranged that, when she arrived, 

only a single oil lamp would be burning. As she entered, a 

switch was thrown and the area was brilliantlyilluminated. 

She was greatly impressed and thereafter acted as a 

publicist for Edison and his inventions. 

4.7.17.3 Exhibitions 

No opportunity was lost in bringing electric lighting before the public gaze. 

International exhibitions were organised in Paris in 1881 and London in 1882. Ambrose 

Fleming, the inventor of the diode valve, who was then a young man, has left an 

eyewitness account of the impression created by the display of lighting 

Edisonia 1904 


Edison lighting exhibit 

at Crystal Palace (1882) 

“The first opportunity given to the public of seeing 

electric incandescent lighting on a large scale was at the 

Crystal Palace Electrical Exhibition, which was opened in the 

spring of that year (1882).” 

“Large exhibits were made by Edison, Swan, Maxim, and 

other inventors of incandescent lamps and, in particular, 

Edison showed all the details of his appliances for the public 

supply of electrical energy by meter for domestic lighting.” 

“Even after the lapse of thirty-eight years the writer has a 

clear recollection of the great novelty and beauty of this 

Edison exhibit at the Crystal Palace, including, amongst 

other things, a large, cone-shaped pendant electrolier, 

carrying a brilliant equipment of incandescent lamps, and a 

screen bearing an artificial vine in metal work, the grapes on 

which were represented by Edison glow lamps in glass 

shades of floral shape and various colours.” 

J.A. Fleming Fleming 1921, p159 

228 

Jehl 1938 


Sarah Bernhardt recording 

on the phonograph in Paris


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




The Paris Exhibition, held in the Palais de l’Industrie in the Champs Elysées in the 

latter part of 1881 provided the first comprehensive display of the electric light. All of the 

Swan 1929, p79 

major competing arc and incandescent lighting systems were on display. 

In America, Edison’s exhibits featured a Negro attendant with a lamp mounted on 

the top of his helmet and fed by wires which passed through his clothes. His shoes had 

points to make contact with a power supply through the carpet of the exhibition stand, 

causing his lamp miraculously to light up as he handed out leaflets. 

On another occasion, in 1884, as part of the Blaine-Logan presidential campaign, a 

battalion of men, each with a lamp on his helmet, marched down Fifth Avenue. The 

lamps were supplied, from a steam engine and 250-lamp dynamo mounted on a large 

truck, by means of wires leading to connection blocks at regular intervals. Each marcher 

had a flexible cord which ran up his sleeves and out at the collar to the lamp. As the men 

Jehl 1941, p1000 

marched, they screwed their connector into the next block. 

4.7.17.4 Advertising 

A significant feature of Edison’s marketing strategy was the use of “knocking copy” 

against competing products. The Edison Electric Light Company produced periodic 

bulletins for its salesmen, which gave glowing reports of their new installations whilst, at 

the same time, casting aspersions on the characteristics of gas. A typical example 

described the store of F.B. Thurber & Company, wholesale grocers. 

“ … a long narrow room over seventy feet in length and lighted only by windows at each 

end. In this room more than fifty clerks do clerical work all day. The heat from gas has 

proved injurious to health, and the gas light has proved injurious to eyesight. This room is 

now lighted by one of our isolated plants and the injurious effects of gas are entirely removed.” 

Explosions and other accidents with 

gas were highlighted, whilst pseudo- 

scientific reports emphasised the virtues of 

electric lighting. Theatre acoustics were 

alleged to be improved since “a layer of 

heated gases act as a screen for sound, 

hence the volumes of hot fumes arising 

from the old gas footlights obstructed and 

229 

Jehl 1941 

Fig. 4.115 Torchlight parade (1884)


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




marred, to some extent, the voices of the singers.” In another bulletin short-sightedness 

Clark1977, p144 

was attributed to the heat emanating from gas mantles. 

A major technological development during the penultimate decade of the nineteenth 

century was the introduction of alternating current for transmission of power. Until the 

invention of a practical alternator by Nikola Tesla, all electricity generated by chemical or 

mechanical means had been direct current. Edison, in particular, was wedded to the old 

system, even when it became apparent that ac possessed significant economic advantages. 

The tactic he adopted was similar to the one he had used against gas – rubbish the 

opposition and play upon the latent fears of the consumer. Every accident that could 

rightly or wrongly be attributed to alternating current was publicised by the direct current 

party. 

Edison published articles decrying the use of alternating current for any purpose. 

Passer 1953,p171 

Fig. 4.116 Knocking copy from Edison 

“The electric lighting company with which I am connected purchased some time ago the 

patents for a complete alternating system and my protest against this action can be found upon 

its minute book. Up to the present I have succeeded in inducing them not to offer this system 

to the public, nor will they do so with my consent.” 

North American Review Nov 1889 p632 

230 

Jehl 1941


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




He also indulged in political lobbying, supporting a proposed law to limit electric power 

supplies to 800 volts, which would, effectively, have removed alternating current’s 

economic advantage, whilst placing no constraints upon his own operations. 

Although they eventually lost out to the superior economic and technological 

advantages of alternating current, the Edison interests managed one further punch below 

the belt. Harold P. Brown, a former Edison laboratory assistant, bought three of 

Westinghouse’s alternating current generators in May 1889. With great publicity, 

gruesome experiments were carried out, using the electric power to kill animals of ever 

greater size (although stopping short of the elephant that was proposed as the ultimate 

demonstration.) Finally, the alternators were resold to the prison authorities and it was 

announced that future executions in Auburn State prison, Sing Sing, and Clinton would be 

carried out by electrocution. On 6 August 1890 William Kemmler became the first 

Clark1977, p161 

murderer to meet his death in this way. 

4.7.18 Market Organisation 

At the outset, the lighting industry consisted of a number of small independent 

manufacturers. Over the years, this evolved into an oligopoly in the United Kingdom 

and, effectively, a duopoly in the USA. The key factor in the transition was the 

powerful patent monopoly resulting from the broad claims granted on the Edison tar 

putty filament patent. A potentially vulnerable position in the UK was shored up by 

means of a strategy which Edison had adopted on other occasions – combination with 

his principal competitor. He joined forces with Swan to form the Edison and Swan 

United Electric Light Company, which, in subsequent litigation, played down Swan’s 

contribution to the development of the lamp in order to strengthen the position of the 

earlier-filed Edison patent. In USA, by steam-rollering the opposition, Edison achieved 

a similar dominant patent position. This was consolidated in 1892 by the merger with 

Thomson-Houston to form General Electric. Westinghouse, the remaining US player of 

any significance, was neutralised by means of a cross-licensing deal which carved up the 

market between them. 

231


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




In Germany, the market was initially more competitive since the ambit of Edison’s 

patent was narrower in that territory. Competition was eliminated by means of a formal 

cartel which shared out the market to protect profits. 

4.7.19 Communication – diffusion of Knowledge 

Transfer of knowledge during the formative period of the lighting industry was not 

much less efficient than nowadays. Technical matters excited great interest and lectures 

at places such as the Royal Institution and provincial centres like the Midland Institute 

and the Sunderland Athenæum received popular support. Technologists formed 

themselves into learned societies for the exchange of views and, (to judge by the 

discussions which followed some of the more avant-garde papers) preservation of the 

status quo. National newspapers carried detailed reports of technological developments 

and the litigation associated with the growth of lighting even figured in their letters 

columns. There was free movement of technical experts – Ambrose Fleming was 

scientific consultant to the Edison and Swan United Electric Light company, whilst 

James Swinburne was hired by a succession of companies. Maxim was not averse to a 

little, albeit overt, industrial espionage and poaching of competitors’ employees (Böhm) 

to further his commercial interests. 

A vigorous technical press gave detailed technical information on new 

manufacturing processes with, for example, serialised articles in The Electrician by 

James Swinburne on the fabrication of carbon filament lamps and its peripheral 

processes. Leading-edge products were shown at international exhibitions where they 

were available for all to inspect. 

4.8 Influences on the development of the incandescent lamp industry 

The key to the development of the incandescent lamp industry was Volta’s invention 

of the voltaic pile which, for the first time provided a reliable source of continuous electric 

current. Humphry Davy, during his tenure of the Royal Institution, was provided with a 

powerful battery composed of these cells and, with this, he demonstrated the electric arc, 

the incandescent filament and the luminous gas discharge, precursors of the three main 

technological paradigms for conversion of electrical energy to light. 

232


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




A latent demand for electric lighting had been created by the luminous flame. 

Before artificial lighting became economically viable with the development of coal gas 

and the batwing and fishtail burners and the portable kerosene lamp, the workman had 

been constrained by the availability of daylight. He rose with the sun and retired at dusk. 

The gas flame was not an efficient source of light. It relied on incomplete 

combustion to create illumination – the gas mantle was not invented until towards the end 

of the nineteenth century. The gas itself was smelly and potentiallyexplosive. There were 

therefore many incentives to replace it provided a sufficiently cheap alternative could be 

found. 

Although the battery provided a source of steady current, the primary cell 

consumed zinc, which was an expensive fuel. A cheaper alternative became available 

when Gramme and others invented dynamos for conversion of mechanical energy into 

electricity. The power of steam generated by combustion of readily-available coal, or of 

water flowing from high reservoirs could then be harnessed. 

As soon as electricity was viable, it was used to drive the carbon arc lamp. Early 

developments, such as hard carbons made this practicable and refinements such as a 

clockwork mechanism for automatically maintaining optimum spacing of the arc could 

be established using extant technology. Moving parts were eliminated when 

Jablochkoff introduced his “Candle” and this might have proved to be a fruitful line of 

development had the arc not been displaced by the incandescent filament. Improvement 

to the arc lamp went on long after its successor was established – a manifestation of the 

well-known “sailing ship” effect. 

The arc lamp was noisy and it produced a huge amount of light – far more than 

was necessary for domestic purposes. “The subdivision of the light” therefore became 

an objective for researchers in this field. Davy and others had experimented with 

incandescent wires as a source of light. Platinum was the most widely used because it 

did not oxidise when heated in air, although other noble metals were pressed into 

service. These materials were, however, not satisfactory because the temperature at 

which they became white hot was very little below their melting points. With the poor 

regulation of early power supplies and non-uniformity of wires due to crude metallurgy, 

this meant that filaments frequently fused and failed. 

233


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Heinrich Göbel was the first inventor to make a working light from a refractory 

material – carbon. His lamp exhibited many of the characteristics of the later devices of 

Swan and Edison. It had a glass envelope and a carbon filament burning in a vacuum. 

However, Göbel lacked the skills of communication and commerce necessary to crown 

his invention with success. Edison and Swan, on the other hand, in their very different 

ways, were able to marry their skills with those of others to exploit the invention 

effectively. 

The carbon filament lamp was the direct result of the combination of 

improvements in vacuum technology effected by Sprengel and others with the 

serendipitous discovery of the technique of “running on the pumps” for removing 

adsorbed gases which had previously been a source of destruction of the carbon. Once 

Edison and Swan had shown the way, many others, including Lane-Fox, Maxim, 

Sawyer and Man were immediately able tread the same path. Intellectual property rights 

were the tool by means of which the pioneers were able to suppress the competition. 

Edison and Swan demonstrated the truth of the adage “United we stand” by combining 

their resources to turn a weak patent into one that was invincible. They exploited the 

common law system of precedent to establish a monopoly which remained absolute 

until their original patents expired. By this time patterns of trade had been firmly 

established and the market was closed to newcomers. 

Swan demonstrated the truth of the statement that a little knowledge is a 

dangerous thing. On the basis of his previous experience of the patent system, he 

delayed filing an application on the carbon filament lamp. As a result, his rival Edison, 

who operated on the principle of file first and enquire later whether the invention is 

patentable, pre-empted important features of Swan’s patent. 

Edison believed strongly in a vertically-integrated manufacturing system. He set 

up plant to make all of the components of his lighting system, from generators to supply 

cables and meters. His philosophy persisted in his successor company, General Electric, 

up to the end of the twentieth century. 

Patent protection bred complacency. The metal filaments which superseded the 

carbon filament were developed by third parties who were trying to break into this 

lucrative market. It was of little avail. The market power resulting from being first in 

234


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




the field permitted the original companies to purchase the new technology, whilst 

retaining their market dominance. 

Swan and Edison represented opposite ends of the spectrum of the process of 

innovation. Swan would select his goal and work steadily towards it, picking off useful 

peripheral ideas such as the miners’ lamp and artificial silk along the way. He believed 

in the keiretsu method, harnessing the independent resources of fellow workers 

including Crompton and C.W. Siemens. Edison, on the other hand, adopted a scatter- 

gun, bull-in-the-china-shop approach. He squandered the profits of the quadruplex 

telegraph on trying unsuccessfully to develop a sextuplex version. Although his initial 

attempt at “subdivision of the light” was based on a meticulous study of the economics 

of gas lighting, he financed expensive expeditions to seek natural sources of 

carboniferous fibres without any consideration of the prospects of an adequate return. A 

large number of his inventions failed, lacking a sound technological foundation, whilst 

many of those which succeeded, did so mainly because of manufacturing and market 

power. He failed to recognise the importance of alternating as opposed to direct current 

and was unsuccessful in developing wireless communications although he had all of the 

necessary inventions to hand. As well as being the inventor of the carbon filament 

lamp, the phonograph and the quadruplex telegraph, he was also the proponent of the 

odoroscope, the tasimeter, the pyromagnetic generator and vacuum “preservation” of 

meat. His most significant innovation was of the concept of the industrial research 

laboratory, although he viewed it merely as an extension of his personal skills, 

frequently taking the credit for the work of others. His career exhibited a classic 

Gaussian profile of the propensity to invent, peaking in his early thirties and tailing off 

with increasing age, with subsidiary peaks corresponding to new enthusiasms and 

troughs resulting from extraneous distractions. 

Von Welsbach’s contribution to the improvement of gas lighting through the 

invention of the rare-earth-charged gas mantle, with its vast increase in efficiency over 

the batwing and fishtail burners, delayed the universal adoption of electric lighting. It 

also led directly to Nernst’s development of an electric analogue. This could well have 

spawned an alternative train of development, a different phylogenetic tree, but another 

of von Welsbach’s inventions, the extruded, sintered osmium filament lamp, set in 

235


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




motion the introduction of other refractory materials, tantalum and tungsten which 

exhibited a greater luminous efficiency and product life. Stanley Mullard’s Point-o-lite, 

a sealed tungsten arc lamp, might also have been the source of another fruitful line, had 

it appeared three decades earlier. Both Nernst’s and Mullard’s inventions demonstrate 

the significance of felicitous timing as a component of success. 

The course of litigation demonstrated another important plank of innovation 

strategy — the choice of the most suitable opponents and venue for litigation. Edison 

and Swan had separately patented important elements in the manufacture of the carbon 

filament lamp — the use of a vacuum, an all-glass enclosure, a thin carbonised filament. 

In opposition, they could have destroyed one another. They therefore settled their 

differences and combined to litigate against third parties. In common law jurisdictions, 

an increasingly invincible series of precedents was built up against weak opponents. 

The combination of deep pockets, multiple actions and retention of the leading 

advocates was employed to ensure victory. In jurisdictions where there was an 

inquisitorial system of justice, they did not prevail and the corresponding market 

became fragmented. 

In most territories, markets evolved into oligopolies, often with overt cartels, such 

as the British Electric Lamp Manufacturers Association. The Phoebus Organisation, 

controlled by the US General Electric Company regulated international trade. Early 

competition law was ineffective against these trusts. Indeed, the strong industry which 

they engendered was viewed with favour in Germany and Britain. 

Evolving public attitudes to private monopoly were a major influence on the 

international structure of the electrical industry. The choice of an inappropriate 

precedent — the Tramways Act 1870 — for the first Electric Lighting Act to control the 

installation of infrastructure for generation and distribution of electricity in the UK set 

back British industry ten years and allowed US and German rivals to gain a 

commanding lead. It was only the creating of international cartels and the existence of 

the imperial preference that permitted British companies to play a subsequent part on the 

world stage. 

Finance was not an important influence. Although needs ranged from the modest 

requirements of experimenters like Swan to the social capital for the creation of the 

236


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




infrastructure necessary to establish the embryonic electricity industry, the greed of 

speculators ensured that resources were forthcoming. Marketing techniques were 

relatively unsophisticated, but the modern exponent of this art would recognised the use 

of public figures, exhibitions and learned societies to mould opinions. Some 

approaches, such as Edison’s use of his rival Westinghouse’s alternating current 

generator to power the electric chair, as a means of promoting the use of direct current 

would now be viewed with disfavour. 

4.9 Conclusion 

Early forms of artificial lighting, through the medium of discrete sources, such as 

the fire brand, tallow dip and candle, stretched back into pre-history. The motive force 

behind the first paradigm change – from the individual flame to the continuous 

illumination of the centrally-produced coal gas – was purely economic. It used, in an 

entirely predictable manner, only those technological resources which were already 

available. Financial returns were assured and capital was therefore forthcoming. On 

two occasions, inventions reinforced this paradigm. The first was the dilution of coal 

gas using petroleum-vapour-enriched water gas, which reduced input costs, and the 

second was the introduction of the gas mantle, which delayed the move to electric 

lighting. 

When limelight was invented, a decade after the introduction of coal gas, it 

provided the prospect of a great increase in luminosity, but this could not be harnessed 

because conventional gas burners did not give a hot enough flame unless they were 

supplied with pure oxygen to aid combustion. No viable means of generating this 

oxygen was available. (At that time, pure oxygen was produced by relatively costly 

chemical processes rather than the present-day technique of fractional distillation of 

liquefied air.) In any event, pure oxygen when mixed with coal gas is potentially 

explosive and, for safety reasons, would probably not have been acceptable. Indeed, if 

modern safety criteria had been prevalent at the beginning of the nineteenth century, it is 

questionable whether gas would have been taken up as a universal energy source. 

Sixty years elapsed from Drummond’s invention of the limelight burner before a 

clever and resourceful inventor – Carl Auer von Welsbach – devised a means of 

237


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




harnessing the luminosity of refractory oxides. His gas mantle, which was impregnated 

with, inter alia, [radio-active] thoria, found immediate acceptance and remained in 

general use for another seventy years or so. There is no apparent reason why this 

invention could not have been made forty or more years earlier, if someone had decided 

to carry out research into improved burners to raise the temperature of refractory oxides 

in coal gas flames sustained by air rather than pure oxygen. The time and environment 

were ripe. It was only the invention that was lacking. The inference is that the 

problems of gas lighting technology did not attract sufficiently smart thinkers. 

The genesis of electricity as a power source was serendipitous, but it required 

Volta’s perspicacious interpretation of Galvani’s observation, to turn the discovery into 

a viable innovation. Volta’s ideas, in turn, needed a receptive environment – which he 

sought in London rather than his native Italy – to provide the resources for the 

discovery, development and dissemination of basic forms of electric lighting. 

The drawbacks of gas – including poor luminosity, hazardous operation and 

pollution – created a strong latent demand for a better alternative. The first to be 

developed was the arc, which could be made to operate reasonably satisfactorily using 

extant technology developed in a logical, extrapolative manner. The negative features 

were that it was noisy, that the level of light from an individual burner was very high, 

that the spacing of the electrodes required continual and precise adjustment and that it 

was very sensitive to variations in the electrical power supply. 

The incandescent filament, the principle of which was established by Davy at the 

same time as the arc light, overcame these problems, but its immediate take-up was 

inhibited by the unsuitable properties of available materials – noble metals, such as 

platinum and iridium did not oxidise, but melted if they were overheated; carbon did not 

melt but oxidised, even when encapsulated in a sealed chamber. Early workers who 

tried carbon did not succeed until Sprengel’s and Geissler’s more efficient vacuum 

pumps for creating better vacua and the serendipitously-discovered technique of 

“running on the pumps” solved the latent problem of occluded gases. This was the last 

step in the jigsaw. The floodgates opened and other potential makers were able to 

commence manufacture. 

238


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




Patents were the key to control of the market. Combination of Edison’s and 

Swan’s resources to assemble a portfolio of key inventions created a dominant position. 

Patterns of trade established by this monopoly persisted after expiry of the patents. 

Innovation followed the classical Schumpeterian model. Eventually, a paradigm- 

changing invention came from without, but the market power of the original 

monopolists enabled them to acquire the substitute technology. 

Once the incentive was created by Swan’s and Edison’s invention of the carbon 

filament lamp, there was no insuperable obstacle to the establishment of the massive 

infrastructure needed to support this innovation. Vertically and horizontally integrated 

business models were equally appropriate for this development. Problems were solved 

as they were encountered, over a very short time interval, by using adaptations of 

existing technology on an ad hoc basis. Sometimes this created long-lasting de facto 

standards. 

Swan worked selectively towards his goals but Edison adopted a scatter-gun 

approach, throwing money at problems. Edison’s concept of an industrial research 

laboratory enabled him to maximise his efforts. He missed many opportunities through 

lack of focus, but created many more as a result of his free thinking. His propensity to 

invent changed through his life, following a skewed gaussian distribution. 

Edison’s and Swan’s differing methodologies were equally successful in initiating 

innovation. Edison, however, did not hesitate to punch below the belt if it would help 

him to achieve his objectives. He also consumed more resources, both physical and 

mental. Swan, on the other hand, always adopted a strictly ethical approach. The 

former’s more robust stance succeeded better in business. If one contestant adopts a 

“no-holds-barred” attitude and the other is playing by the rule book then clearly the 

former will be at an advantage. 

The conduct of litigation demonstrated another important plank of innovation 

strategy – the choice of the most suitable opponents and venue for litigation. Edison 

and Swan had both patented the important combination of elements in the manufacture 

of the carbon filament lamp – the use of a vacuum, an all-glass enclosure and a thin 

carbonised filament. In opposition, the two patentees could have destroyed one another. 

They therefore settled their differences and combined to litigate against third parties. In 

239


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




common law jurisdictions, an increasingly invincible series of precedents was built up 

by initiating proceedings against weak opponents. The combination of deep pockets, 

multiple actions and retention of the leading advocates was employed to ensure victory. 

In jurisdictions where there was an inquisitorial system of justice, they did not prevail 

and the corresponding market became more fragmented. 

In most territories, markets evolved into oligopolies, often with overt cartels, such 

as the British Electric Lamp Manufacturers Association. The Phoebus Organisation, 

controlled by the US General Electric Company, regulated international trade. Early 

competition law was ineffective against these trusts. Indeed, the strong industry which 

they engendered was viewed with favour in Germany and Britain. Absence of a patent 

system in Holland and Switzerland permitted small manufacturers to establish 

themselves, but, in the long term, they were either absorbed by larger businesses or 

joined them in an oligopolistic market. 

Direct regulation can have a disproportionate influence on a developing industry. 

An infelicitous choice of legislative precedent which, although reflecting public 

attitudes, did not take sufficient account of the need for adequate financial return and 

almost strangled the juvenile British electrical industry at birth. 

Once the regulatory regime was structured satisfactorily, finance ceased to be an 

important influence. Although needs ranged from the modest requirements of 

experimenters like Swan to social capital for the creation of the infrastructure necessary 

to establish the electricity industry, the greed of speculators ensured that resources were 

forthcoming. Marketing techniques were relatively unsophisticated, but the modern 

exponent of this art would recognised the use of public figures, exhibitions and learned 

societies to mould opinions. Some approaches, such as Edison’s use of his rival 

Westinghouse’s alternating current generator to power the electric chair, as a means of 

promoting the use of direct current would not accord with modern ethics, but were 

effective in achieving publicity. 

The dissemination of Davy’s findings stimulated research elsewhere and led to 

improvements in battery technology, but energy produced in this way could not supplant 

that produced by coal as it was three orders of magnitude more costly. In 1831, Faraday, 

Davy’s successor at the Royal Institution, discovered a means of converting mechanical 

240


05/04/2006 19:34:00 




energy to electricity and hence of harnessing the low cost and ready availability of coal, 

but it was another forty years before a reliable dynamo was developed. The move from 

battery to generator as a source of electric current was analogous to the paradigm shift 

from the candle to the gas flame – from a discrete to centralised power supply. 

Advances in power sources led to improvements in lighting. Better light sources 

created a demand for more electric power and the two paradigms advanced in a stepwise 

manner. 

Von Welsbach’s contribution to the improvement of gas lighting through the 

invention of the oxide-charged gas mantle, with its vast increase in efficiency over the 

bats’ wing and fishtail burners, led directly to Nernst’s development of an electrical 

analogue. This could well have spawned an alternative train of development, a different 

phylogenetic tree, but another of von Welsbach’s inventions, the extruded, sintered 

osmium filament lamp, set in motion the introduction of other refractory metals, 

vanadium, tantalum and tungsten, which exhibited a greater luminous efficiency and 

product life. Stanley Mullard’s Point-o-lite, a sealed tungsten arc lamp, might also have 

been the source of another fruitful line, had it appeared three decades earlier. Both 

Nernst’s and Mullard’s inventions demonstrate the need for felicitous timing as a 

component of success. 

One major paradigm shift, from direct to alternating current, was conceived 

theoretically and reduced to practice by a “great man” (Tesla). He combined with a 

“man of vision” (Westinghouse) who had the resources to bring the idea to fruition and 

the experience to transfer the technology effectively. Although it evoked a Luddite 

reaction in Edison, this negative response was no more effective in delaying progress 

than a similar reaction was in delaying the transition from a cylindrical to a disc-shaped 

sound recording medium some years later. 

Two further conclusions may be drawn from this case study. Firstly, although it is 

not always possible to transfer technology between paradigms, the possibility of success 

justifies the attempt, and secondly, old technologies never die, they just survive in niche 

applications. 

241

4. First case study – the subdivision of the light - HM Treasury

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?