§ Sir William Molesworthpresented a Petition for an alteration in the tolls upon Steam Carriages plying upon common roads. The hon. Baronet stated, that the petition was from Mr. Goldsworthy Gurney, a gentleman well known to the scientific world, and the first person who succeeded in effecting locomotion by steam on common roads. With much patience and perseverance he had overcome the various mechanical difficulties which had been previously considered by all scientific men, except Dr. Wollaston, as absolutely insurmountable. This Gentleman complained, that the Legislature had thought fit to insert, in numerous Road Bills, clauses putting tolls amounting to prohibition on steam-carriages; the consequences of which had been, that the public had been deprived of the best and cheapest means of locomotion, and that the petitioner himself who had sacrificed his time, profession, and fortune in the pursuit, without obtaining the just reward of his important discoveries, had been much injured. The causes which led to the prohibitory enactments were these:—The first long journey performed by Mr. Gurney's carriage was from London to Bath and back. In 1831, the carriages ran between Gloucester and Cheltenham for four months, during which period they carried three thousand persons, and ran four thousand miles; the average rate of speed was ten miles an 204 hour; the fare—with a profit to the proprietor—was one half the fare of ordinary stage coaches; there occurred no accidents or delays from failure of machinery. The agricultural interest became alarmed at his success, and reasoned in the following lucid manner:—Steam-carriages, it was said, would soon supersede carriages drawn by horses; horse-labour would be discontinued, and, consequently, there would be a proportionate diminution in the demand for oats; farmers would be ruined; rents would fall. To avert these anticipated evils, Mr. Gurney's carriage was violently stopped by the trustees of the Cheltenham road, and Road Bills were hurried through both Houses, imposing tolls upon steam-carriages of from ten to twelve times the amount of the tolls levied upon four-horse coaches. Mr. Gurney petitioned the Commons, and a Committee was appointed to investigate the subject, which heard the evidence given on the subject by the first authorities. In consequence of the Report of that Committee, a Bill was brought in to alter the tolls, which Bill received the sanction of the House, but was rejected by the wisdom of the Upper House. It had been objected to steam-carriage locomotion on common roads, that the weight of the engine and manner in which the wheels produced locomotion would destroy the roads, and that the noise and smoke of the engine would be a public nuisance. An extract he would read from the Report would show, that the opinion of the Committee was, that such a description of locomotion was not only perfectly feasible and worthy of adoption, but that all the objections then made were groundless. The Report said—"Sufficient evidence has been adduced to Convince your Committee. 1. That carriages can be propelled by steam on common roads at an average rate of ten miles per hour; 2. That at this rate, they have conveyed upwards of fourteen passenrts; 3. That their weight, including engine, fuel, water, and attendants, may be under three tons; 4. That they can ascend and descend hills of considerable inclination with facility and safety; 5. That they are perfectly safe for passengers; 6. That they are not (or need not be, if properly constructed) nuisances to the public; 7. That they will become a speedier and cheaper mode of conveyance than carriages, drawn by horses; 8. That as they admit of greater 205 breadth of tire than other carriages, and as the roads are not acted on so injuriously as by the feet of horses in common draught, such carriages will cause less wear of roads than coaches drawn by horses; 9, That rates of toll have been imposed on steam-carriages, which would prohibit their being used on several lines of road, were such charges permitted to remain unaltered." This summary would convince the House of the impolicy of continuing the prohibitory tolls, by means of which the nation would for a time be deprived of the advantages which would necessarily result from employing inanimate instead of animate power. It might be confidently predicted, that steam-carriages would roll upon all the roads of the kingdom, when the names of those whose ignorance and petty interests had induced them to oppose this all-important invention would be forgotten. That in a country which owed its superiority to the successful application of mechanical skill and invention—whose inexhaustible supplies of fuel enabled its inhabitants, by means of inanimate power, to work cheaper than any other nation on the earth, to whom, consequently, the facilities of locomotion were of the utmost importance—that, in such a country, prohibitory tolls on steam-carriages should exist, was a circumstance of which an enlightened Legislature might well be ashamed. There was a peculiar hardship in Mr. Gurney's case arising out of the law of patents. Any experiments performed by an individual in public became the property of the public, unless he had previously obtained a patent for them, and he could not insert them in any subsequent specification. The bringing an invention into practical operation required considerable time; many alterations and new difficulties occurred in bringing general principles into use, and these must be gradually removed. Thus the inventor, if he waited till he had perfected his invention before he applied for a patent, ran the risk of having the fruit of his talent and labour snatched from him, or if he first took out a patent, he had to sacrifice a portion of the duration of that patent in making the necessary experiments, or be debarred from reaping the exclusive advantage of those experiments. Mr. Watt expended the whole duration of his patent in making the necessary trials of his steam-engine; Government granted him a renewal of his patent, in considera- 206 tion of his expenditure of time and capital. Mr. Cartwright's case was precisely the same. But Mr. Gurney, whose invention held an equal rank in the scale of utility, had been dealt far differently with, and he had been debarred from reaping, at the hands of the public, the just reward of his discoveries. Mr. Gurney's experiments being necessarily made in public, he had been obliged to take out a patent before he made a single trial. His patent was dated 1825. In 1831, the prohibitory duties had been laid on, and thus, unless they were repealed, Mr. Gurney's just and reasonable expectations would be annihilated; in a few years, his patent would expire; the public would reap the benefit of his inventions; but the inventor would be a ruined man. This was an injustice which he confidently trusted would not be sanctioned by a Reformed Parliament. The hon. Baronet then read the petition, which detailed the facts related by the hon. Baronet.
§ Sir George Cayleysupported the petition, and said, he considered Mr. Gurney a very ill-used man. He had, it appeared, sacrificed a lucrative profession, five years' toil, and a fortune of 30,000l., in perfecting his invention, the advantages of which to the public were incalculable. Yet not only was his patent virtually suspended, but others had attempted to set up carriages on his principle to his prejudice, which, in connection with the legislative suspension of his patent, had occasioned an opinion, that his invention was a practical failure, although, in point of fact, it was an eminently successful one. By Parliament, he had been wronged, and by Parliament he ought to be redressed. Mr. Gurney was the only man who could fully lay claim to the introduction of locomotion by steam on common roads, and for such a beneficial invention, he deserved the highest reward the country could bestow. Dr. Lardner, one of the first authorities on such subjects, fully admitted the extent of Mr. Gurney's claims. The apprehension of the agricultural interests was an absurd fallacy. The constant increase of population would find them a ready market for all their produce; and it should be recollected, that the food consumed by the million of horses employed in drawing carriages would suffice for the support of eight millions of human beings. A celebrated political economist, not then in his place, had declared that the boon con- 207 ferred on England by the invention was equal to the annexation to this country of an island as large as Ireland without the encumbrance of its population. The donor of such a boon then should be hailed with delight and gratitude; he would most cordially support the prayer of the petition.
§ Mr. Jephsonsupported the petition. Mr. Gurney was a man entitled to the best consideration of the House. His invention would be of incalculable advantage to the country.
Mr. Wallacealso supported the petition. He had travelled often in the steam-carriage on Mr. Gurney's principle, the property of Colonel Macerone, and such was its smoothness and easiness of Motion, that though going at the rate of sixteen miles and a-half an hour, he could shoot a pigeon flying, from the coach, though somewhat out of the knack. Another coach on Mr. Gurney's principle ran daily between Glasgow and Paisley with the utmost security, speed, and safety.
§ Mr. Cayleyalso supported the petition. The neglect of talent and public services had been the disgraceful characteristic of the old Parliament; it was incumbent upon the new Parliament to remove such a disgrace. Mr. Gurney's singular talent and public services entitled him to the best consideration and encouragement of the House.
§ Mr. Petereulogised Mr. Gurney as a man of great merit, whose public services should meet with signal encouragement.
§ Petition to lie on the Table.