§ Sir O Mosleyrose to move that the Select Committee to whom had been referred Messrs. Fourdrinier's petition on the subject of the renewal of his patent for the making of paper should be revived. He could have wished that it had been in his power to have entered upon the subject at large, because he was very confident that he could have made out the very strongest case in support of the claim for compensation on the part of the inventor of the machine by which the improved manufacture was effected. But in consequence of a private communication which he had from Mr. Speaker, it appeared that in that right hon. Gentleman's opinion the Committee had exceeded the power which was originally confided to them, inasmuch as they had used a certain word in their report which they were not empowered to use. He begged however to state in justice to the Committee, that had inadvertently fallen into the error pointed out by the Speaker. The reference made to the Committee was to consider how far the petitioner's case was borne out in evidence, the prayer of the petition being that the period of the patent should be extended to him. When, however, the question came under the consideration of the Committee, they found that the public had been so long in possession of this valuable invention, that it would be impracticable to accede to the prayer of the petitioners; and they, therefore, thought that it was only an act of justice towards them to recommend that some public compensation should be made to them for the benefit which the public had derived from their invention. In doing this, the Committee certainly exceeded the power which was implied in the question referred to them. Having made this short statement, he thought it would be better to confine him- 1493 self to the motion which he was about to make, which was, that the House should be pleased to revive that Committee, when the objectionable words would be struck out of the report, and the proper terms introduced, in order that the subject might be brought forward for debate in this House. The hon. Baronet moved accordingly.
§ Mr. Mackinnonas Chairman of the Committee in question had the honour of drawing up the report which was considered informal, and which was afterwards corrected by his hon. Friend who had just spoken. The particular word objected to, namely, "compensation," was inserted in the report by himself. It was impossible for him now to state to the House what were his reasons for making that report. He considered that it was advisable for him to abstain from doing so for the moment, and reserve any observations which he had to make till the Committee should have sat again, and altered the word "compensation" to that of "consideration." He could not, however, help thinking that the mere insertion of the word "compensation," instead of "consideration," in the report, hardly called for the revival of the Committee; but as it appeared to be the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman in the chair that such a word as "compensation" could not be tolerated, he was ready to submit and defer to that opinion. He wished it to be understood, however, that there was nothing in the whole of the report which was not unanimously acceded to by the Committee, and that at the time of preparing that report he was wholly unaware that it was informal to use the word "compensation" instead of "consideration."
§ The Speakerobserved that the present question was a very material one, so far as regarded the regularity of the proceedings of the House. A petition had been presented by Messrs. Fourdrinier for compensation. It was held by the House that no such petition could be received without the King's consent, and that consent having been refused, the petition was withdrawn. A second petition was then presented by the same parties, praying for an extension of the patent. A Committee was appointed for the purpose of considering the prayer of that petition. That Committee made a report, in which they had not confined themselves to the prayer of the petition, but had gone into the consideration of compensation to the petitioners. That was a report which the House could not receive. The course of proceeding then, was that which had been suggested by the hon. 1494 baronet; namely, that the Committee should be revived, in order that they might make a report in conformity with the petition referred to them.
Sir G. Clerkregretted that any difficulties in point of form should impede the bestowal of a public reward on persons who were so eminently entitled to it. Some few years ago Mr. Merton, the inventor of a machine for drawing up vessels on a slip, received a considerable sum from Government, in consequence of the favourable Report of a Committee, though this was made without the previous consent of the Crown, his case being, that up to within a year of the expiration of his patent his invention had not attracted public attention, and had consequently been of no benefit to him. The Committee reported against an extension of his patent, but in favour of a pecuniary testimony and this recommendation was acted upon.
§ Committee revived.