John Allen Heany

Biography
The history of the electric incandescent lamp can be described by way of the many biographical sketches of inventors and contributors. Today very little is written about the subject of this writeup because of an undesirable event that occurred in the time frame of about 1907-1911. However, if we refresh our memories of the happenings of the time, as well as later, it is possible to appreciate the outstanding contributions that that one individual made to society. The person of interest here is John Allen Heany.

The early lamp work of Heany consisted of designs of an arc lamp as well as oxide materials for the light emitting part of the incandescent lamp. Regarding Heany's incandescent lamp work, a writeup by John W. Howell²² will be presented verbatim. Howell was one of Edison's early workers and was highly respected as an engineer and patent witness. A Report of the Commissioner of Patents for the Year 1911 can be read online to give an official view of the events of the day. It deals with the case of Everding, Barton and Heany. Everding was a patent attorney in Philadelphia, Barton was an Assistant Examiner in the Patent Office and Heany was an inventor. Everding and Barton eventually were sent to prison whereas Heany was acquitted.

To construct a more complete picture of John Allen Heany it is necessary to look beyond the year 1915 to unveil, as well as appreciate, his total work output, which will be apparent in the issuance of patents in his name. This goal is easier said then done, however, as this writer was not able to come up with much material online, aside from patents, to present this updated view.

The Allen Case

Chapter I
"In September, 1904, John Allen, an inventor, made a deal with some officers of the General Electric Company. He said he had invented a new filament. The company agreed to pay his laboratory expenses while he developed his invention. We also gave him apparatus and baked some filaments for him. In December, 1904, he told us he had finished his work and had filed his patent applications. So in the last week of December, 1904, I went to his laboratory at York, Pa. He explained his invention to me and showed me the filaments. His invention was making an oxide filament - a Nernst filament - which was a conductor when cold and would start without requiring to be heated. He accomplished this by mixing very fine tungsten powder with the oxide. About the middle of January, 1905, he brought a number of his filaments to Harrison. We put them in lamps and exhausted them. In his presence we measured their characteristics on a photometer. At moderate temperature these filaments disintegrated and discolored the bulbs while we were measuring them. They were no good and Allen went home disgusted. He wrote to me asking me to send him the lamps we had tested. I did so, but kept one - a good sample. This one I put in my lamp cabinet.

Chapter II
In 1908 a patent was issued to Allen. It described some construction details of a tungsten filament lamp. The drawings in the patent showed details which, to my mind, represented the state of the tungsten filament lamp in 1907. The date of application for the patent was January, 1905, the very time we were testing oxide filaments for Allen. So I felt sure the patent as issued had not been filed in January, 1905. This patent stated that it was a division of another application which Allen had filed December 29, 1904 - the very week I had visited Allen in his laboratory at York, where he was making oxide filaments - and that the December 29 application described and claimed lamps with filaments of pure tungsten. So I felt sure something was wrong with this patent. I then wrote to our patent department at Schenectady, telling them my suspicions and asking them to send some one to examine the papers relating to this patent in the Patent Office. (After a patent has been issued all the papers in the Patent office relating to it are open to inspection by anyone.) Our patent department sent a man, who examined all these papers, and he reported they were O. K. No changes had been made since the application was filed in January, 1905. I then wrote again, asking if the drawings in the patent had been changed since it was filed. Another man went to the Patent Office and reported that the drawings in the patent had not been changed, but were just as they were filed in January, 1905.This satisfied our patent department that the patent was O. K., but I was not satisfied. So I saw Mr. Rice and told him the story and asked him to send the best expert he could to examine every detail of the papers in the Patent Office. He did send such an expert. In the meantime the officers of Allen's company were trying to sell the patent to the General Electric Company for half a million dollars. Our expert found everything connected with the case in perfect order, all dates and stamps on the application papers agreeing perfectly with those recorded in the records of the Patent Office. Everything seemed O. K. Then he observed a watermark on the paper on which the patent application was written. It bore the name of the Whiting Company. He made a tracing of this watermark and took it to the office of the Whiting Company. There he learned that paper with that watermark was first made in 1906, and yet it was officially stamped by the Patent Office January, 1905. He got from the Whiting Company an affidavit stating that that watermark was first used in 1906. This affidavit was taken to the Commissioner of Patents in Washington and the matter left in his hands. The Patent Office examiner, who had charge of the division in which this case was, Allen, and Allen's patent lawyer were arrested and brought to trial charged with fraud. At the trial the examiner and lawyer pleaded guilty, and they testified that Allen knew nothing about the fraud. Allen also said he knew nothing about it, but there was plenty of evidence that he did know about it. The jury was composed of both white men and negroes. They acquitted Allen and convicted the others, who were sent to jail.

Chapter III
Allen's application of December 29, 1904, which was still in the Patent Office, naturally came under suspicion. An examination showed evidence of fraud in it also. So the Commissioner of Patents started proceedings to investigate this application, and Allen was ordered to show cause why his application should not be condemed as fraudulent. Allen replied that he had been guilty of no fraud, and that he could prove that he had made tungsten filaments and lamps at the time he claimed he had. The Patent Office proceedings were like a regular court trial. The Assistant Commissioner of Patents sat as judge, and lawyers representing other inventors who claimed that they had invented the tungsten filament were present at the hearing and could cross-examine the witnesses.

Allen had a witnness named Simon, a glassblower, who tesified that he had made a large number of tungsten filament lamps for Allen in November and December, 1903. He brought into court about two dozen real tungsten filament lamps, which he testified were made by him at Allen's orders in 1903. He said he had taken these lamps to his home and had kept them there ever since. The lamps were all numbered. Simon also produced two notebooks, one a pocket notebook in which he had notes of each day's work, the other a large notebook which had been kept in Allen's office and in which Simon had copied each morning the entries made the previous day in his pocket notebook. These books described the making of the tungsten lamps which he had. Each day's entry in each book was carefully dated. Simon also produced the written orders which Allen had given him, directing him how to make each of the lamps. These orders were written on sheets from a pad which was perforated, so the sheets could easily be torn off. These were also dated November and December, 1903. The details of these lamps showed to my satisfaction the state of development of the tungsten lamp in 1908, and I felt sure they were not made in 1903.

Simon was a good witness and his testimony worried our lawyers a good deal, for, if true, it proved very conclusively that Allen had made tungsten filament lamps in 1903. Then we called Mr. Osborn, the "Examiner of Questioned Documents," to Washington to examine Simon's notebooks. He looked over the pocket notebook and said the entries had not been made day by day, but had been made in three sittings. Then he examined the book page by page. The pages were all dated - November 17, 1903; November 18, 1903, and so on. Then one was dated November 21, 1908, and he found two other pages dated 1908 - plainly and unmistakably. On cross-examination Simon insisted these dates were 1903, although they did look like 1908. The Commisssioner of Patents looked at the dates and took Simon and his lawyer into his private office. After they returned to the court room the commissioner said: "Mr. Simon, have you anything to say?" Simon stood up and said: "I made those lamps in 1908 on orders from Allen." They sent for Allen. When he came into court and heard what had happened, he acted like a wild man. He said Simon was a liar, that the lamps were made in 1903, and that his written orders to Simon, which were there, proved it. We got from the court one of the leaves from the perforated pad on which Allen's orders were written and sent a man to York, Pa., where Allen's work had been done, to see what he could learn about it. He found the stationer who had made the pad. He knew it by an imperfection in his perforator. His books showed that he sold the pad to Allen in 1906, and that he had bought that perforating machine in 1906. This stationer was an honest seeming man, and he brought his books to Washington and testified that he made the pad in 1906.

Allen had other evidence to prove that he had made tungsten lamps in 1903. He produced a photograph of a lamp which he testified he had made in January, 1905, and which had been tested in Harrison by Mr. John W. Howell. It was a photograph of one of the lamps which I had tested for him, but I testified that the filament was not tungsten. It was exactly like the lamp I had kept when I returned the other to Allen in 1905. I produced this lamp. In my lamp and in Allen's photograph the platinum wires which led the current through the glass and which extended inside the lamp to support the filament were only about one-quarter the size or area of the filament. If this filament was, as I testified, an oxide filament which had a very high specific resistance and required a small current to heat it, the small platinum wire was anple to carry the current that the lamp required; but, if the filament was tungsten, a low-resistance metal, the current required to heat it would melt the thin platinum before the filament gave light. I made a tungsten filament lamp of the same dimensions as shown in Allen's photograph, and when I passed current through it in the court room the filament did not get red hot, but the platinum wires did get red hot, proving that the lamp in Allen's photograph did not have a tungsten filament. So Allen's application was declared fraudulent and the Commissioner of Patents presented evidence to the grand jury, which indicted Allen for perjury and subornation of perjury. When the case was called for trial, they could not find Allen and he has never been brought to trial..."

An exhibit from the Everding trial is shown below⁴:

The early work by Heany on the arc lamp was honored in 1904 by the Franklin Institute with the awarding of The John Scott Award. Then, in 1907, Heany received the Elliott Cresson Award for his development of a fireproof insulated wire. An appreciation of Heany's inventing abilities can be achieved with a listing of his issued patents. Some of the patents issued to Heany follow in the section below.

A verbatim obituary of John Allen Heany, as it appeared in the New Haven Register²⁴ follows:

"John A. Heany, Long Ill, Dies in Hamden Home

Industrialist and Laboratory Head Famed for Many Inventions
John Allen Heany, inventor, vice president of the Heany Industrial Ceramics Corporation and president and treasurer of the Heany Laboratory, Inc., (whose shop) is on Whitney Avenue in one of the buildings of the old Whitney Arms Co., near Lake Whitney, died last evening at his residence, 223 Santa Fe Avenue, Hamden, after a long illness. His age was 69.

He is survived by his wife, Mrs. Ethel Tyrrel Heany, and by a daughter by a previous marriage, Mary Elizabeth, wife of Lt. Comdr. James Michael Kane 3d, U. S. Navy, now on duty in the Electronics School, Treasure Island, Calif.

Born in Philadelphia
Born in Philadelphia, he was educated in the public schools there. For three years he was assistant in the department of physics, and also professor of mathematics in the Philadelphia Central High School. Afterward he was professor of physics in New York City College and professor of bacteriology at the University of Pennsylvania.

After leaving educational fields, Mr. Heany devoted himself to his many inventions and their promotion. Prior to coming to Hamden, 25 years ago, he was established in Philadelphia, then New York, Washington and Jersey City. He has to his credit 30 manufacturing organizations producing under his patents.

Valuable Inventions
Some of the pertinent inventions covered by his patents include the Tungsten lamp, the closed self-starter and the closed circuit ignition and lighting systems for automobiles, which are licensed on every car. The lighting systems are also used on railroad cars. Others of his inventions include high voltage electric welding, which is almost universally used and radio tubes, which permitted the use of radio sets by plugging in on the electric light line instead of utilizing storage batteries.

Mr.Heany was awarded two medals by the Franklin Institute of Philadelphia on lighting and insulated wire. The asbestos insulated wire, used by several manufacturing concerns in this country was also one of his inventions. During World War I, Mr. Heany worked on gas masks and synchronizers for the United States Government.

Developed "Heanium"
His latest commercialized invention "Heanium" is now being manufactured with success by the Heany Industrial Ceramic Corp., at the Whitney Avenue plant. Mr. Heany was a member of Genesee Lodge No. 174, A. F. & A. M., of Flint, Mich., and was a 32d degree Mason. He also belonged to the Shriners in Detroit, Mich., and the Elks Lodge of Philadelphia.

Mr. Heany died before giving to the world what he claimed to be his greatest discovery, the Ionic reduction of metals and about to be commercialized. Another important invention is a synthetic jewel on which he started working in 1923.

Arrangements for the funeral, it was announced, have not been completed."

Although the date of passing of Mr. Heany is established as 28 September 1946, his date of birth has not been positively determined by this writer. Dates of 15 March 1876, 15 March 1877 and April 1876 have been reported. The obituary that appeared in the New Haven Register gave his age as 69 at the time of death. This suggests that his birthdate might have been 15 March 1877.

One can determine Heany's whereabouts during his lifetime by looking at the residence locations taken from his United States patents. The locations were: Philadelphia, PA, York, PA, Flint, MI, Jersey City, NJ, Washington, D. C., New York, NY and New Haven (and Hamden), CT.

The presence of Heany in Flint, Michigan is understandable in view of his many patents relating to the automobile. One aspect of Heany's experience in the automotive environment is worth mentioning. William C. Durant (1861-1947), in the early years of the 20th century, was in the process of creating the General Motors organization and in so doing, purchased several small companies. Apparently he thought the Heany patent on the tungsten filament lamp would be worth several million dollars and so he purchased the Heany Lamp Company for seven million dollars in GM stock. Unfortunately for him, the patent turned out to be fraudulent and most of the money was lost.

Acknowledgements
The writer is greatly obliged to Bradley Bullis, of the New Haven Free Public Library, for pointing out that an obituary article regarding John Allen Heany exists in the library's microfilm section. He provided a copy of the obituary with the photograph. He also gave reference to two articles which he found online. I am most appreciative of the efforts of Mr. Bullis. The picture of the Heany incandescent lamp was provided by Jerry R. Westlick, for which the writer is most grateful.