§ ADMIRAL FIELD (Sussex, Eastbourne)I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is true that the Treasury have consented to grant the sum of £2,000 only to Admiral Colomb as a reward for his labours in adapting the system of flashing lights as a means of conveying signals in manœuvring Fleets at night; whether he is aware that the Admiralty in 1858 awarded Mr. Redl, an Austrian, £1,500 for his proposed system of cone signals for the Fleet, which failed on trial; and that the Treasury awarded recently £25,000, and £1,000 per annum for 10 years, to an officer for a range-finder; and whether, in view of the services rendered to the Fleet by a system which has been endorsed with the high approval of Admirals Commanding in Chief, viz., H.R.H. the Duke of Edinburgh, Sir Phipps Hornby, Lord Alcester, Sir Thomas Symonds, and many others, their Lordships will again make representation to the Treasury so as to ensure further recognition of this officer's valuable services to the country?
§ *LORD G. HAMILTONThe question of my hon. and gallant Friend is based on the idea that we are now remunerating Admiral Colomb for his valuable invention of 20 years ago, but that is not the case. The Government of the day then paid the gallant Admiral a sum of £1,000 in recognition of his labours, and the matter was considered closed. The Government did not then purchase 803 any invention or patent rights, neither did they acquire any monopoly of the us3 of the system of flashing signals. From that time until now the Government have paid, as ordinary users of the invention, a contract price, agreed upon with Admiral Colomb, for the supply of certain patented articles, and the use of these articles is not confined to the British Navy. The Government do not admit any further claim on the part of Admiral Colomb; but, looking to the very great and enduring value of his invention, they are prepared to offer for his acceptance a sum of £2,000, as a further voluntary recognition of his merits. It is true that rewards have been paid of larger amount to other inventors, but it is impossible to weigh at the time one invention against another; and, moreover, the circumstances accompanying the grants in the cases referred, to in the question are dissimilar to those in the case of Admiral Colomb. The latter had taken out a patent for his invention, and had virtually the monopoly of supplying the apparatus; while in the former cases the inventors had practically sold their inventions to the Government, and parted with all rights and advantages connected therewith.