Commons Sitting of 25 July 1851

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2° Patent Law Amendment; Canada and New Brunswick Boundary.
Reported.—Emigration Advances, Distressed Districts (Scotland); Representative Peers for Scotland.
3° Administration of Criminal Justice Improvement.

STEAM NAVIGATION BILL.
Order fur Committee read.
MR. ANDERSONwould suggest that as the Bill had been considerably altered, it would be expedient to postpone the further consideration for a week.
Mr. LABOUCHEREsaid, that a postponement for a week would be fatal to the chance of the Bill passing this Session. It was important that it should pass, to prevent the prevailing overcrowding of steamboats, as well as to regulate their machinery, &c. The Bill had been considered very
carefully upstairs by a Select Committee, who bad given it a great deal of attention. To postpone its passing this Session, would be a public evil of no slight magnitude.
House in Committee.
Clause 1 agreed to.
Clause 2.
MR. HENLEYwas fearful that inspection and approval of officers by Government officers, would go far to release the owners from responsibility.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, this was not the first time that a survey of vessels had been authorised. It was at present confined to the machinery; but as each owner had the power of choosing his own surveyor, the system was very inefficient. By establishing authorised surveyors, this evil would be remedied.
Clause agreed to; Clauses 3 to 47 inclusive agreed to.
Clause 48 (not to extend to ships of war or foreign vessels).
MR. HENLEYwished to know why it was that foreign vessels were not to be included in the Act? Why should not the French and Belgian vessels running across the Channel be subject to revision?
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, that it would be impossible to include foreign vessels. The whole machinery of the Bill was made to apply to English vessels only. He had never heard of any case in which the Channel steamers, plying between Belgium or Franco and England only, were overcrowded.
MR. HENLEYsaid, the Bill proposed to tax the owner of British vessels four, six, or eight guineas a year for surveying, whilst foreign vessels were let off without any charge whatever.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, that foreign Governments were equally particular in looking to the safety of their vessels. In the United States of America, experience had shown that as soon as we passed the Passengers' Act, the Government of the United States immediately passed a similar law with regard to its own vessels, as it found a decided preference given to English vessels.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, that the Act intended to make the owners alone responsible, and that it would be impossible to reach foreign owners.
MR. W. WILLIAMSwould support the proposition to include foreign vessels.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, if the hon. Gentleman the Member for Oxfordshire (Mr. Henley) would frame a Clause embodying his views, he could bring it up on the report, although he (Mr. Labouchere) would not pledge himself to accept it. He feared that the Amendment proposed would impede the passing of the measure, as alterations would have to be made all through the Bill.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLapprehended that if foreign vessels were to be included, the States to which they belonged would retaliate, and tax our vessels.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he should propose to omit the latter part of the Clause.
Amendment proposed, page 18, line 9, to leave out from the words "Ships of War," to the end of the Clause.
Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 38; Noes 13: Majority 25.
Clause agreed to.
Mr. MUNTZmoved the insertion of a Clause of which he had given notice. It was useless, he said, to pass a law to compel the supervision of machinery so long as the engineer had it in.his power to endanger the lives of all the passengers by tampering with the safety valve. A great number of accidents had happened in consequence of the negligence and recklessness of engineers in this respect. In the case of the Cricket, it was notorious that the safety valves had been tied down for seven days together. The case was the same with the Glasgow, where the care-

1533
lessness of the engineer had led to the accident. Nothing could secure the public until they were relieved from the effect of this carelessness.
Clause—
"And be it enacted, That from and after the first day of January, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-two, it shall not be lawful for any Steam Boat to go to sea, or to steam upon the rivers of the United Kingdom, without having a safety valve upon each boiler, free from the care of the engineer, and out of his control and interference, and also subject to the approval of the Surveyors acting under this Act."
Brought up, and read 1°.
MR. LABOUCHEREdeclined to agree to the Clause, although he admitted the necessity of having two safety valves. He did not think, however, that Parliament ought to set a precedent by legislating as to what description of machinery should be used in steam vessels, and he would therefore oppose the Clause.
MR. SPOONERwould support the Clause. The argument of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade amounted to this—that it would be improper for Parliament to prescribe what was safe. Why, that was the whole principle of the Bill.
MR. LOCKEthought it would be a dangerous precedent to interfere with the management of steam engines; as they would lead parties to suppose that they were relieved from the responsibility which properly attached to them. He believed an additional safety valve could do no possible harm; but the Committee could not stop with such a recommendation, and their interference would ultimately do much more harm than good.
MR. EDWARDSentreated the hon. Member for Birmingham to persist in pressing his clause to a division; for if ever a subject was brought before Parliament requiring legislation, this was one. True, the clause had reference only to boilers used in steam navigation; but if once passed into law, a case was made out which would apply equally to engine boilers employed in factories, where serious calamities were of constant occurrence. In his own borough one of the most dreadful on record happened last year, where a mill was literally blown to atoms, and numbers of its inmates perished on the spot, possibly in consequence of the want of that which this clause was directed to remedy. It was certainly high time for the Government to interfere, and he was convinced that some strict supervision was
1534
required as a security to the lives of the parties who at present were so entirely at the mercy of the engineer.
MR. MUNTZsaid, he had been endeavouring to carry this improvement for the last ten years; and the Government had always opposed him. He felt that he should not be doing his duty to society if he did not press his Amendment, and therefore he should take the sense of the Committee upon it.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the said Clause be now read a Second Time."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 37; Noes 13: Majority 24.
Clause agreed to.
House resumed; Bill reported as amended.

PATENT LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL, in moving the Second Reading of the Patent Law-Amendment Bill, said, that for some time past complaints had been made, as to the delay, the uncertainty, and the expense attendant upon the granting of patents, and it was impossible to deny that those complaints had considerable foundation. The consequence was that much inquiry and discussion on the subject had taken place. A Committee had been recently appointed by the other House of Parliament, and, in pursuit of its labours, the matter had been fully canvassed, and the result was that a Bill had been sent to them by that House for their adoption. That Bill adopted as its fundamental principle that patents for inventions should be granted to persons who contributed useful inventions and discoveries for the benefit of society. He was aware that an opinion had been expressed by individuals whose opinions were entitled to considerable weight, but who still formed only a small minority amongst those whose attention had been directed to the subject, that patents might be altogether dispensed with: in that opinion, however, he (the Attorney General) for one could not concur. Every person must admit that it should be the object of legislation to develop to the utmost possible extent the discoveries of those inventors that were calculated to contribute to the wants, comforts, and enjoyments of mankind; and though it might be true that the desire of benefiting their species, and obtaining the praise and approbation of their fellow-men, would be a

1535
strong motive and incentive towards inventing that which they required, still any person having an acquaintance with human nature must admit that such motives and inducements would be less efficacious than the hope and desire of individual reward. It seldom happened that those discoveries were made by the possession of great and scientific knowledge, or by a happy inspiration alone; they were generally the results of much labour, long experience, and were often accompanied with great expense. When, by time, labour, and experiments, inventions were brought to maturity, they still required a large outlay of capital, and a long period of time, to introduce them amongst the public, for whose benefit they were intended. If there was no inducement held out to a discoverer but that his invention would be useful to society, and if he were to look solely to motives of a disinterested character, it was quite clear they would not have one-half of the discoveries that were now constantly brought forward. This Bill proceeded upon this principle, namely, that where persons invented things that were new and useful to society, they should have the reward which the Patent Laws gave. As an inducement to others to invent, it was considered that the most appropriate mode of giving that reward, would be by giving them a monopoly for a limited period, in the invention they had made. Thus, without drawing on the public purse (except in a modified mode, by which the patent would enable the patentee to derive a benefit), the reward would become commensurate to the value of the invention. This Bill dealt with the mode in which the object of granting patents should be carried out. Some persons had lately started the notion that there should be no inquiry as to whether a man should have a patent or not. It was said they should allow a man to claim an invention as novel, and that on registering that invention he should without inquiry be entitled to the patent rights, and to maintain them against the rest of mankind. It seemed to him (the Attorney General) that they ought to pursue a different course. They ought to guard the public against the assumption of rights to which the individual was not entitled in case his invention was neither new nor useful; they should guard other inventors that had preceded him, and protect them by a cheap process, without driving them into expensive litigation for the protection of their rights. Now, that being so, he came to
1536
the next question. By what mode or system were they to determine the question whether or not a person was entitled to the rights which he would have under a patent? They were all agreed that the present system was bad. Its great vice was its costliness. As the matter now stood, every application for a patent must pass through seven different stages, or go through so many different public offices. Every applicant petitioning for a patent had his petition, in the first instance, referred to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, by whom it was submitted to the law officers of the Crown. The law officers then referred it back to the Secretary of State for what was called the Queen's Warrant. Having obtained that, the applicant was then referred to the Patent Office, for the Queen's Bill; thence he was sent to the Signet Office, for the Signet Bill; thence to the Privy Council Office, for the Privy Council Bill; and thence to the office of the Great Seal, where the warrant was eventually made out for the issue of the patent. In passing through each of those seven different stages, a certain amount of fees were to be paid; and yet five at least of those stages were wholly useless. The cost of taking out an ordinary patent in England at present amounted to 94 l. 15 s. In addition to that, if a man wanted to extend his patent to Scotland, he had to go through five other offices in Scotland, at an additional expense of 63 l. If, again, he was desirous of applying his patent to Ireland, he had five other offices to through in that country, involving a further outlay of 119 l.; making the whole cost of taking out his patent in England, Scotland, and Ireland, no less than 276 l. 15 s. If there happened to he two persons interested in the patent, the additional fees consequent upon that circumstance, raised the sum on the whole to very nearly 300 l. Now, by the present Bill, it was proposed to sweep away the greater part of those fees, and to have one common patent for the three Kingdoms, by which means the trouble and expense consequent upon taking out a patent hereafter would be most materially reduced. The Bill also proposed to give an inventor this additional advantage, namely, to divide the sum total which he would have to pay on taking out his patent into three separate payments, of which the smallest would be made on the granting of the patent, the next at the end of three years, and the

1537
last and largest at the end of seven years. This would give poor men an opportunity which they did not at present possess, of protecting inventions till such time as they might be able to derive advantage from them, and at a cost adapted to their means. At present the great majority of patents taken out fell to the ground, and produced no fruit to the patentee. By this Bill it was proposed, in the first instance, that the cost of the patent should be limited to 20 l., with an additional 5l. for stamp duty. At the end of three years—the interval being spent by the patentee in testing the value of his invention in public, or in obtaining the assistance of capitalists in carrying it into operation, he might have a renewal for four years more, on payment of 40 l. and 10 l. stamp duty. He then obtained a patent for seven years. At the end of that period, if the patent was calculated to be beneficial to the public, and therefore beneficial to the patentee, he could extend his right for seven other years, by paying an additional sum of 80 l., and a further stamp duty of 20 l. Therefore the cost of obtaining the patent would be lowered from 300 l. to 175 l., the payment of which would be distributed over a period of seven years; but in the course of time they would be able, after that compensation had been got rid of, to lower the expense of taking out a patent considerably further than they felt warranted in doing in the first instance. The next consideration was with respect to the tribunal which was to determine whether a party
was entitled to a patent or not. The House was aware that hitherto the solution of that question had rested entirely with the law officers of the Crown. Two great objections had been taken to the existing tribunal, and he thought those objections were well founded, constituted as that tribunal was at present. It was said, in the first place, that that tribunal was a secret one. That was a great objection, but the secrecy did not arise from the will or inclination of the law officers, but from the necessity of the case. It arose in this way. The rights which were acquired under a patent dated from the period when the patent was granted. The report of the law officers on the merits of the invention was made at an early stage of the proceedings. It was the object, therefore, of the inventor that, until his patent was sealed, no one but himself should know what was the nature of his invention. On the other hand, a party opposing the invention on
1538
the ground of want of novelty, or that he had a prior claim to its discovery, had a right to appear before the law officers and state his case. The unavoidable result was that the law officers were obliged to hear each of the parties separately with closed doors, lest, in the event of the inventions turning out to be dissimilar, the principle of each man's invention might be discovered to the other, or to the world. Nothing could exceed the anxiety' shown by the rival applicants on those occasions lest the tribunal should disclose, by the questions which they put, their respective inventions. As they were about to abolish five out of the seven stages through which applicants must now pass, there would be compensation to be given to certain parties; and this obliged them to take a large margin at starting. To remedy that state of things, the Bill proposed to enable a man, at the same time that he applied for a patent, to lodge in the office of the Commissioners to be appointed under its provisions a provisional specification; that was to say, a statement corresponding with that which was now required by the law officers—which provisional specification was to state the precise nature and the general features of the invention. As soon as he had deposited that provisional specification, it was proposed to give him protection for six months, or in certain cases for nine months. He would then be at liberty to use his invention before the public during that time. Whether that would be a desirable thing, he (the Attorney General) would then not stop to inquire. It was also proposed to require a man objecting to a patent to lodge his objection with the Commissioners beforehand, There would likewise be an open tribunal, and the parties would be heard before one another, by which arrangement all secrecy would be done away with. There was another objection to the existing tribunal, namely, the incompetency, the almost unavoidable incompetency, of the law officers to decide questions involving intricate and nice points in mechanics, chemistry, and general science. It appeared to the Government that the best mode of proceeding would be to constitute a board of examiners, consisting of persons having a reputation for scientific knowledge, to whom, in the first place, the provisional specification should be referred, and who would be required to report as to its propriety, and on the question of conflicting rights, in cases where such

1539
should arise, to the law officers of the Crown. He was happy to say that on that point the expenses would not be increased. The law officers of the Crown were perfectly willing to make a personal sacrifice in that respect, in order that the public might obtain the full benefit of the proposed arrangement. With regard to the provisional specification, the six or nine months' protection which would be afforded to the patentee would enable him to take his invention into the market with a view to obtain the assistance of capitalists in carrying it into practical operation—a benefit which under the present system was wholly impossible. The Bill also provided for the proper classification of all patents, for the transcription and publication of all specifications, and for a register of patents and of proprietors, which might be inspected by the public from time to time. At present it often happened that when a man had devoted his time, his patience, and his money to an invention, and imagined that he was on the eve of reaping the fruits of his labours, he found that some one else had anticipated him, that a patent was already in force for the particular invention he had made, and that therefore all his labour and expense went for nought. Now, in order to avoid this, two provisions were introduced into the Bill; and it was also provided that when recourse was had to a court of law, the court entertaining the question should be invested with an equitable jurisdiction, so that a court once seized of the matter would be entitled to decide it on equitable principles, without putting the parties to the expense of further litigation. There was another clause, with respect to which he had some doubt, namely, one which provided, where an invention had been practised in a foreign country, that that circumstance should be fatal to any patent right with regard to it in this country. As the law now stood, it did seem inconsistent that a man who discovered that in some foreign country a particular invention had been brought into use, by bringing that invention to England should acquire the same rights as if he had been the original inventor; and that, if the latter should come to this country to obtain a patent, his right should be defeated by the fact that some person had come here before him, and taken out a patent in respect to it. The provision to which he had referred would remedy that injustice. For his part, he should have preferred that a man
1540
who brought to this country an invention which had been practised abroad, should acquire some right, but not a right equal to that which ought to be given to the original inventor. The object of any patent law ought to be to introduce for the benefit of this country all inventions which could possibly be had, whether they had originated in this or any other country. He had now stated the general principles of the Bill; and although it might be said there was still more to be done for the patentee, and that the Government was now only dealing with the mode in which the law regarding patents was administered, he could not help thinking the House would agree with him that they were making progress in the right direction—that the law would be greatly improved—and that the expense now attendant upon obtaining patents would be materially diminished.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."
MR. J. L. RICARDOsaid, the House had some reason to complain of the manner in which this subject had been treated by the Government. He submitted that there ought to have been no legislation on the subject of the Patent Law until they had thoroughly investigated the question in all its complicated bearings. Hon. Members were called upon to affirm its principle before they had time to digest the evidence on which it professed to be founded. In another place two Bills had been introduced on the subject,
one by an independent Member of the Legislature, and another by the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. Those Bills were referred to a Select Committee, and the result was, that another Bill, quite distinct from those two, had been submitted to the House. The hon. and learned Gentleman (the Attorney General) said that the fundamental principle of this Bill was to encourage that which the Vice-President of the Board of Trade had stated to be a principle to which he was opposed, namely, the affording facilities for obtaining patents. The hon. and learned Gentleman said, the fundamental principle of the Bill was to give a stimulus to inventions; and the way in which he gave a stimulus to inventions was by granting a monopoly for a certain number of years, to the prejudice of the public. The hon. and learned Gentleman pretended to reward the inventor by means of a

1541
monopoly; but he (Mr. Ricardo) contended that no monopoly was granted to the inventor at all, for not only was he to encounter as great a competition as before, but he was liable to be attacked on every side by his competitors, and subjected to immense expense in defending his patent. He (Mr. Ricardo) did not mean to defend the present system at all. From the Attorney General down to the official denominated "Chaff-wax," the whole system was an abomination which ought to be done away with. He was supported in those opinions by Mr. Lloyd, Mr. Cubitt, Mr. Brunel, and the present right hon. and learned Master of the Rolls, who all agreed with him in thinking that the whole principle of the patent system was bad, and ought to be abolished. All the great inventions and discoveries by such men as Liebig, Brunei, and Stephenson, were made without any encouragement from patents; and it was only small inventions in the making of sealing-wax, great coats, or paletots, that seemed to require the protection of a patent. Such inventions as those of paper, of glass, of printing, were all made without the stimulus of patents. A great deal had been said in that House about the monopoly of landowners; but he thought they should carry out the principle a great deal further, and apply it to the question now before the House.
MR. MACGREGORwould vote for the second reading of the Bill, reserving his objections to the details for the Committee. It was disgraceful to this as a commercial country that its patent laws were so cumbrous, and that the expenses of procuring patents were so enormous. In this respect we contrasted unfavourably with the legislation of France and of the United States. He differed altogether with the hon. Member for Stoke-upon-Trent (Mr. Ricardo) as to the principle of patents. He denied altogether that a patentee was a monopolist. A man had as perfect a right to ownership in the production of his own intellect as to any other property which he might be possessed of. He further believed that society would be a great loser by the abolition of the whole principle of patents.
MR. LABOUCHEREwould not have interfered in this discussion, after the full and lucid statement of the hon. and learned Attorney General, but for the observations made by his hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent. His hon. Friend had complained of the delay in the introduction of this Bill. He was afraid, looking back to
1542
the manner in which the Session had been passed, that it would have received but a scanty consideration at any earlier period. But in his opinion the delay had been advantageous; for there never was a measure which had been marked by more care in its preparation and arrangement. A most unobjectionable Committee of the other House had gone into a most complete inquiry in regard to it, and had examined those witnesses who were the most capable of affording extensive and accurate information on the subject. It was true that some members of that Committee, among others his noble Friend and Colleague (Lord Granville), had come to the same conclusion as that at which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ricardo) had arrived, namely, that, as an abstract question, the whole principle of the Patent Laws was false and erroneous; but, after a full investigation, the decision of the Committee was, that in the present state of opinion in Parliament on the matter, and in the present condition of the patent laws, inflicting serious practical evils upon the community, it was expedient to have this Bill passed into law with the utmost speed. He (Mr. Labouchere) would express no opinion upon the abstract question. He entertained a high respect for the views of his hon. Friend, backed as those views were by such eminent authorities as Mr. Brunei, Mr. Cubitt, and his right hon. and learned Friend the Master of the Rolls. But, our present Patent Laws being a reproach to the legislature, it would be the grossest injustice to the public not to attempt an alteration, and to wait until public opinion was ripe for such a sweeping alteration as that which his hon. Friend proposed. There were particular reasons to be found in the events of the present year in favour of this measure. It was well known that there was a large number of valuable inventions displayed in the Great Exhibition—that these inventions had been provisionally registered by their proprietors for one year—and that, in order that they might be fully protected, they would have to be again registered next year, as the law-stood, at a very great expense. He thought that every Member of the House would agree with him that it was but fair to provide economical facilities for the protection of these parties. There was another merit in the Bill, which ought greatly to recommend it. It took the Colonies altogether out of the scope of our patent laws. At present colonial legislatures

1543
could grant patents, and the consequence was, that patents were procured in England and the colonies for the same thing, leading to a double system, and to extreme litigation and confusion. A remedy for this evil had long been wanted, and was now supplied. He hoped that the House would remember the outcry which was raised for such a Bill as this at the beginning of the Session. This Bill might be defective, but at any rate it was a practical step in the right direction, and would be attended with immense benefits. It had received the approbation of many hundreds of persons interested in patents, and such of the details as were objectionable could easily be remedied in Committee. The introduction of this Bill came with peculiar grace from his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General, who would be deprived of a considerable portion of his emoluments by it.
SIR DE LACY EVANSgave his sanction to the principle of the Bill, and would therefore vote for the second reading. He did not agree with his hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-upon-Trent as to the evil arising from patents; and as his hon. Friend was the proprietor of about thirty-seven patents, he ought, in consistency with the argument he had addressed to the House, to throw them all up and present them to the public.
MR. ROUNDELL PALMERthought that the House would have approached the consideration of this measure under more favourable circumstances if it had been more accurately informed as to the exact views of the parties by whom it was introduced, upon the principle of the patent laws. The hon. and learned Attorney General had intimated an opinion that the principle was a good one; but the right lion. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, in more cautious language than that used by a noble Lord (Earl Granville) in another place, had suggested a disbelief in the value of the principle. It was, therefore, impossible to say upon what ground the Government went in this measure. He (Mr. Palmer) dissented from the views of the hon. Member for Stoke-upon-Trent (Mr. Ricardo), and assented to the view taken by his hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General. It was as complete a fallacy as ever was uttered to say, that the grant of a patent was the concession of a monopoly for a certain number of years, to the prejudice of the public. The public was only asked to pay
1544
fairly for fourteen years for an invention which they could never have got but for the inducement of the patent, the whole of the public at the end of the fourteen years being enabled to compete on equal terms with the inventor. The class who contributed by their ingenuity and their inventive genius to the happiness of mankind were a special class, and they would never apply their minds to the arts and sciences, but for the assurance which they saw in the patent law of an eventual remuneration. The hon. Member for Stoke-upon-Trent had mentioned eminent persons who had been distinguished for great inventions, but who had not sought the protection of patents. The hon. Member said that the inventors of small things required patents, but that the inventors of great and useful things never needed patents. The hon. Member went very far back, instancing old inventions, such as those of paper and glass. But let the House look practically at modern examples. Was Arkwright a useful and great inventor, and did not he possess a patent? Did not Wheatstone claim to be placed among the great inventors? The steam-engine and the electric telegraph were patented inventions, and the steam-engine patents had been productive of great profits to the patentees, while no one would combat the advantages derived by the public. They might look to matters of a much smaller character. Macintosh, who applied India rubber to the arts and conveniences of life, was a patentee. The invention of gutta percha was patented. The steam screw propeller was a patented invention. He might, indeed, say that nearly all the useful inventions of later times had been patented inventions, most of them having owed their origin to men who had devoted their whole lives to the discoveries, and who were entitled to the most ample remuneration through their patents. The exceptions confirmed the rule. One instance of an unpatented invention, whereby undue loss had accrued to the inventor, he could mention. The lightning rods for ships, from which the public had derived enormous benefit, wore invented by a certain constituent of his (Mr. Palmer's) Sir William Snow Harris. He was happy to say that the noble Lord opposite had recognised the merits of William Snow Harris, even before the invention to which he alluded. But he did trust that his merits would be taken into consideration, and receive a

1545
just reward; but as yet he had obtained no remuneration commensurate with the advantage he had conferred upon the community by the application of lightning conductors to ships. Such men as these required the security of the patent laws as a stimulus, and without that stimulus the arts and sciences would be without the impulses which now attended them. These being his opinions in favour of the principle of patents, he thought that the Bill before the House did not go half far enough. If the principle was good, why not grapple with it in the most straightforward way, and carry it out legitimately? He felt no alarm at a probable multiplicity of patents. He did not see why they were not to deal with patents as with copyrights. The author of a literary work got in a simple way all the advantages of his book, holding exclusive copyright of it. The inventor of a design for manufacturing purposes registered his design for 5s.; and if the design was new, he had all the benefit of the novelty for a certain period. This some persons called monopoly; but it was nothing more than a simple equivalent for the exercise of ingenuity. Copyright of the same kind was extended to music, and to works of art of every description. Why not deal in the same way with specifications of inventions for which "patents" were required? Why could not specifications be registered for 5s. as well as designs? Nothing was gained by the process which this Bill, after all, would only modify; and he was indeed ashamed that the proposal was still to compel an expense of 175 l. to an inventor, for a protection for fourteen years. The principle was that the inventor had a right to his patent—it was not a bargain; and why was he not permitted to claim this right in the shortest and simplest way? A patent was so much waste paper if the thing patented was not an absolute novelty. All the expense might be incurred; and if the invention was not new, the law could be resorted to by previous patentees. An invention, at last, must stand upon its own merits; and he wanted to know why it might not stand on its own merits at first, to the avoidance of all this cost? There might be frivolous patents if the cost were done away with. But the principle of the law was not to inquire whether the patent was frivolous, but whether it was new and useful in its degree. He came, therefore, to the conclusion that this Bill might have safely gone much farther; but under the circum-
1546
stances he would not offer any opposition to the second reading.
MR. W. WILLIAMSwished to know from what source the Commissioners who were to award compensation under this Bill were to be paid? As to the necessity of the present measure, no doubt could be entertained about it. He understood there were not less than 700 persons waiting to take out patents under the cheaper plan to be established by this Bill.
MR. MUNTZsaid, he had been for some twenty years engaged in litigation on the subject of inventions; he felt therefore competent to give an opinion upon this subject. He did not consider the Patent Law to have any connnexion whatever with a monopoly. It was a sort of recompense to a man for his ingenuity. No greater blow could be struck against the inventive genius of this country than by the abolition of the law of patents.
MR. ALDERMAN SIDNEYsaid, that one would have thought from the speech of the hon. and learned Attorney General that they were giving up a large proportion of their fees. Now, he did not think that in the year 1852 there would be fewer patents taken out than there were in 1847. And in the latter year he found that the number of patents taken out in England was 498, in Scotland 168, and in Ireland 76, which gave a gross sum of 87,640 l. In the improved state of the law he expected that at least the same number of patents would be taken out next year, and assuming that they were to be had at the reduced cost proposed by this measure, the amount would be not 87,640 l., but, when complete, 129,850 l. In Committee he would be prepared to move amendments which would greatly modify the fees. He thought it a great hardship that an inventor should have to pay 175 l. for a patent for the three kingdoms for fourteen years, when on the Continent it could be had at a very diminished rate of cost; and when the patent was given on the Continent, the patentee was thoroughly protected, and was not, as here, obliged in many cases to defend his patent, generally at a ruinous expense, in a Court of Law. He objected also to the clause which prohibited patents for inventions brought from abroad, and thought that that clause would require, at least, to be modified in Committee.
The SOLICITOR GENERALsaid, the hon. Alderman had misunderstood the operation of the proposed Bill, and had not adverted to the fact that the new scale of

1547
patents was to be a graduated one. The present law required an expense of upwards of 300 l. for a patent for the United Kingdom for fourteen years; but the present Bill proposed that a patent for three years for the three kingdoms should be granted for 25 l. He believed there would be a greatly increased number of patents taken out at that sum; and the advantage of fixing such a period for a patent was, that in the course of three years the inventor would be enabled to ascertain whether his patent was worth keeping, or whether by that time it had not been superseded by some other invention. He believed that a great number of these patents, however useful they might be at first, would be practically useless at the end of three years; and that a considerably diminished number of patents would be renewed for another period of years, which the Bill allowed at a cost of 50 l., thus making a cost of 75 l. for a patent for seven years. As they thus proceeded sifting the chaff, as he might say, from the wheat, it would be found that at the end of seven years a very small number of patents, and those only the really important ones, would be renewed for another period of seven years; and it was on these that the heavy expenses fell. Something had been said about the emoluments reaped by the law officers of the Crown from the conferring of patents; and the hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Alderman Sidney) had talked as if the whole of the 80,000 l. or 90,000 l. that was received from patentees went to the law officers; but he must state that a large proportion of the expenses went for stamps, and a large portion to the Consolidated Fund; and out of the 109 l. that was now exacted as the price of an English patent, not more than 9l. or 10 l. went to the law officers. The hon. and learned Member for Plymouth (Mr. R. Palmer) stated, that patents might be granted like copyrights or the registration of designs, on a fee of five shillings, or ten shillings; but he must state, as the result of his inquiries, that it was not desirable to make patents cheap, or to pass them without examination; and he might mention, as an instance of the evil effects of doing so, the case of a person who took out a patent respecting hack cabs, not because he had really made any positive invention, but that he might afterwards go about annoying the unfortunate cab-drivers, telling them that they had pirated his invention, and so extorting from them ten to twenty shillings a head.
1548
He hoped the House would pass this Bill with as little delay as possible, as he had received daily communications from patent agents, stating that their business was entirely at a standstill till they saw how the House disposed of this measure. He might state that 500 persons had taken advantage of the Act passed last year for the protection of inventions placed in the Great Exhibition. Of course all these persons would not apply for patents. They would have learned from the Exhibition itself, that, in many cases, what they supposed were their own inventions had already been anticipated by others; and that, he thought, was an important advantage, not only of the Exhibition, but of the provisions of this Bill, which protected inventions for six months after the specifications were published before the patent was secured.
MR. WAKLEYwas not quite satisfied that the law here proposed would be the best that could be adopted. He agreed with the hon. and learned Attorney General that it was most important to protect inventions, as it would tend to give a stimulus to inventors. He thought the law of copyright and of patent ought to be the same. He could not understand the difference between the two cases. He saw no reason why a man who invented a piece of machinery should not be protected for the same term as a man who had written a work. This Bill was by no means simple. He trembled at the words "a Board of Examiners." They carried on their proceedings in secret, and he thought it would be better to refer the thing to one man, who should give his decision and his reasons for it in public. The Board might be divided into departments, and the head of each department give his decision and his reasons for that decision in public. Unless this were done, the greatest injustice would ensue. In this matter there was no stauncher protectionist in the House than himself. What did the public do for inventors? They often treated them with scandalous neglect. What was done for Harvey or for Jenner, in his own profession? Jenner's family were absolutely in want; there were no monuments to his memory, and his name was almost unknown in this country. The inventor was entitled to a vested right in his invention.
Bill read 2°.

EMIGRATION ADVANCES, DISTRESSED DISTRICTS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order for Committee read.
House in Committee.
Clause 1.
MR. SHARMAN CRAWFORDwished to call the attention of the House to the great distress existing in the Highlands of Scotland, and would suggest that some measure should be introduced similar to that which had been passed with respect to Ireland.
MR. J. STUARTsaid, that a system of legislation had been introduced with regard to Ireland alone, which ought to be more generally applied. He highly approved of the principle of this Bill. With reference to the distress to which it was intended to apply, a great portion of that distress was in the Western Isles, in which some of the estates were in the hands either of infants or of other parties not precisely of the denomination of owners. He would suggest that, on the third reading of the Bill, an Interpretation Clause should be added to it, showing how its provisions would apply to such cases. He wished to call to the recollection of the Committee a petition he had presented, during the present Session, from a gentleman of the name of Martin, a most intelligent proprietor in Skye, in which, with reference to the mode of repayment of the advances for emigration from the distressed districts in Scotland, it was recommended that some security for such repayment should be taken on the lands assigned to the emigrants in the colonies to which they might transfer themselves. He thanked the Government for having taken up this subject, and hoped the points to which he had referred would engage their attention.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERcould assure the hon. and learned Gentleman that he had listened with interest to the suggestions he had thrown out. No doubt the distress in many parts of the Highlands was deplorable; but he was of opinion that it was not at all so dreadful as it had been represented by some interested parties. It was, however, sufficiently aggravated to warrant the introduction of such a Bill as the present; and he was happy to find that the measure had met the approbation of the hon. and learned Member for Newark, whose suggestions for its improvement in matters of minor detail should be attentively considered. He had no doubt that the works contemplated by the Bill would be attended with advantageous results.
MR. COWANbegged to offer his cordial thanks to the Government for having
1550
brought forward the present measure, and also for the genuine sympathy which they had at all times manifested in the sufferings of the destitute poor in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. He approved of the Bill, and would give it his unhesitating support; but he hoped that the Government would next Session take into consideration the practicability of introducing some alterations in the law of entail, and some modifications of the relations between landlord and tenant, which would supersede the necessity of emigration—a step to which the Highlander was known to entertain the strongest objection.
MR. MACGREGORsaid, that it was not easy to get the inhabitants to leave their native place; but when at the close of the American war some of them emigrated to the banks of the St. Lawrence, they and their descendants became a thriving, and even a wealthy population, and a great benefit to the colony. If they now got land at a cheap rate in the west of Newfoundland, where a good deal of fish was to be had, he thought they would greatly benefit that colony as well as improve their own condition.
MR. WAKLEYshould like to know how the emigration of the bone and muscle of these districts could at the same time improve the colony to which these poor people were sent, and the owners of property in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, from which they were sent. He thought this measure would afford only a partial and insufficient remedy for the distress which existed, and that it would lay the foundation for still greater misery. When there were hundreds of thousands of acres required for grouse and deer, the poor people must have short commons. He thought that an efficient Poor Law would be the best mode of making the owners of land find employment for the poor.
MR. J. STUARTsaid, that the hon. Gentleman was not acquainted with the condition of society in these localities; if he were, he would not speak as he did.
MR. HENLEYwas apprehensive that the position of the incumbrancers might be prejudiced by the contemplated advances.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERconsidered that the security of the incumbrancers would be improved in proportion to the improvement of the estate.
Clause agreed to:—as were the remaining clauses.
House resumed.
Bill reported without Amendment.

METROPOLITAN INTERMENT (ADVANCES) BILL.
Order of Committee read.
House in Committee.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he could not expect the same concurrence as on the last measure which had been under consideration; but the subject was one of great difficulty, in whatever aspect it was viewed. The proposal he had to make was, he thought, the least objectionable that could be suggested, and would leave Parliament in another Session to deal more satisfactorily with the subject than it could be dealt with in the present. He wished to state the whole difficulty. The House would remember that in consequence of reports which made known the disgraceful state of many burial grounds in this metropolis, an Act of Parliament passed, vesting in the Board of Health the charge of providing interment for persons dying within a certain distance. The House was also in possession of a report from the Board of Health stating their views; and it might be remembered that what they thought indispensable was, that they should be constituted a permanent body, and should have, practically, a monopoly of burials, receiving a fee for every person dying in the metropolitan district. The Act provided only for the temporary duration of the Board, and did not give them the complete power which was considered necessary to insure adequate provision being made for effecting the object in view. Till recently there seemed no reason to doubt that the Board of Health would be able to carry out the intentions of the Act. They thought it necessary that they should be in possession of all the burial grounds in the metropolitan district, and they applied to the Treasury, without whose sanction they could not proceed, for powers to purchase all these cemeteries. The Treasury thought that was going faster than was expedient, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) refused his permission. But it seemed that the possession of one or two cemeteries would enable them to close the graveyards in the metropolis, and enable those whose graveyards were closed to obtain burying grounds. There appeared to be not the least doubt that the Board of Health would be enabled to obtain from some of the great insurance companies the loan of the sum they might require. Most positive assurances were given by those companies, who expressed
1552
their readiness to lend money to the extent of 100,000 l. The Board were authorised to engage in negotiations for the purchase of one or two cemeteries; and, finding they could not come to a voluntary agreement with the parties concerned in these, the necessary notices were given with reference to the Brompton and Nun-head cemeteries, and the matter submitted to arbitration. The question as to the sum to be paid was pending before the arbiter, and on his award the transaction would be complete. On the closing of graveyards, in consequence, compensation to churchwardens and others would become due, as well as the interest of the money borrowed for the purchase of the cemeteries. It appeared, however, eventually, that unless the Board of Health could obtain the character of permanence and the monopoly of the burials, they could not give such security as would induce the insurance companies, or other great bodies, to lend the money necessary to carry out the Act of last Session, He very much doubted whether the House of Commons would be inclined to confer those powers; and the question was one of so great importance that it would be neither proper nor fair to make a proposition to that effect at this period of the Session. Under these circumstances, then, what was it possible to do? For in execution of the Act of Parliament the Board proceeded to negotiate for the purchase of these two cemeteries; and unless they had the means at their disposal for paying the sum which might be awarded, great injustice would be done to the cemetery companies with whom negotiations had been held, and the whole Act would be reduced to a dead letter. There might be reasons in another Session for depriving the Board of Health of its executive powers, and reducing its powers to those of a Board of Control, throwing either on the parishes or on districts, or on parties, the charge of providing the means of burial elsewhere. It was utterly impossible, however, to pass an Act of that kind during the present Session. What was the course, then, which met the existing difficulty in the readiest mode? To meet that difficulty, the difficulty of finding the means for paying for these two cemeteries with which negotiations had been commenced (and no future liability, no liability of any kind would be incurred besides that to which the Government were pledged by the proceedings before the arbiter), he must take an outline estimate.

1553
The proposal, therefore, which he believed best, was, that the Treasury should be allowed to advance to the Board of Health the means of paying what sum might be awarded for the purchase of the two cemeteries he had mentioned, that no further expense of any kind should be incurred, and that the whole question beyond the purchase of those two cemeteries should be left open to Parliament for decision in another Session. If that course were not followed, there would be no means whatever of excluding burial grounds from the metropolis. He would take a vote for 137,000 l., which he believed would be considerably more than would be required; but he must, of course, have the means of paying the award of the arbitrator, whatever that might be.
Motion made, and Question put—
"That provision be made, out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, for the Advance, by way of Loan, of such sum, not exceeding in the whole the sum of 137,000 l., as may be necessary for the purposes of the General Board of Health, pursuant to the Act of the thirteenth and fourteenth years of Her present Majesty, chapter 52, The Metropolitan Interments Act, 1850."
SIR BENJAMIN HALLthought the inhabitants of the metropolis had reason to complain that legislation affecting their interests was proposed so late in the Session. The Board of Health ought long before to have known that they were not in a condition, under the provisions of the Act of Parliament, to obtain the sums of money they required. There would not be objection to the expenditure of 14,850 l. during last year had the public been benefited, but they had no knowledge of any good which had resulted from the proceedings of that irresponsible body. There was so much distrust of the Board of Health in the metropolis, that they would not feel disposed to enable the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer to advance this money to be expended under the management of a body which was irresponsible, and from which no good had been seen to arise. If it was necessary to raise this sum, they had the power to levy a rate of a penny in the pound upon the parishes; but they did not do this because they knew there would be a general outcry against it. He had rather sacrifice a sum of money to the cemetery companies as forfeit, than advance this money to the Board of Health. But they had no evidence to show that these negotiations had gone so far that it would be necessary either to
1554
complete them or pay forfeit. He did not impute blame to the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, he believed, had no knowledge of the proceedings. He thought the vote ought to be postponed. There was a Committee sitting upstairs, on a most important subject affecting the metropolis; but, judging from evidence taken before the Committee, as well as from statements in the public journals, it seemed not improbable that they might recommend an amalgamation of such a kind as would place under some control various subjects relating to the metropolis; for instance, interments, water, and sewers.
MR. WAKLEYsaid, that notwithstanding the energy with which the Metropolitan Cemeteries Act had been pressed through the House, yet the old practices prevailed; and it was not known what the Board had done. The Brompton Cemetery was almost in the metropolis, being only about two miles from Hyde Park Corner, yet the object of the Act was to provide that interments should take place at a distance from the metropolis. The whole plan of the Board of Health appeared crude and irregular; nothing was correctly defined, nothing duly arranged. Something effectual might surely be done this Session. A Bill might be passed to prevent intramural interments after one year. That might be done next week. The parishes would immediately make the requisite arrangements for interments. No explanation had been given as to the incomes of the cemeteries on account of which the advances were sought.
COLONEL CHATTERTON: Sir, I beg to call the attention of the Government to 2,000 acres of land at Woking-common, which have been obtained by the above company, whose petition I presented. I am convinced that if they avail themselves of the facilities presented by the company, whose site possessed all the requirements of the Board of Health, and the purchase money for which was only 57,000 l., the arrangements for extramural interments would be so cheap as to render the lavish expenditure contemplated by the grant wholly unnecessary.
MR. JACOB BELLunderstood that it was not the intention of the owners to sell the field referred to in the meantime. He should be exceedingly sorry to see the system commenced of the Board of Health taking possession of graveyards, and he trusted no money would be given by the House for such a purpose.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLwished to hear some hon. Gentleman point out a practical mode of getting rid of the difficulty. The Committee should bear in mind the possibility of some serious epidemic coming upon them, when it would be necessary, as a matter of safety, to close many of the graveyards. In that case, unless other and convenient burying places were within ordinary reach, the consequences to the poor would be very serious. It might be no inconvenience for the rich, who could afford to go to a great distance, or in the case of paupers buried at the expense of the parish; but what would become of the poorer portions of the community, belonging to neither of these classes? The Metropolitan Interment Act provided, that when any graveyard was closed by an Order in Council, there should be some other cemetery put in possession of the Board. It was clear, therefore, that they could not shut up the present graveyards, whatever might be the evils arising from them, unless that part of the Act was followed out. With regard to the Board of Health, the original proposal was that there should be a new Board constituted for the purpose of carrying the Act into effect. But the Government did not think it right to make such new board, with new machinery, and therefore they proposed that the Board of Health should be intrusted with the execution of the Act. This was agreed to; but previously the House was of opinion that a separate board ought to have been established for that purpose.
MR. BRIGHTsaid, the noble Lord spoke of the possibility of an epidemic coming upon them, and then asked what the poor would do when interments had to take place at a great distance from towns? But the noble Lord forgot that the Board of Health's graveyards would be more distant than any now in existence. The Bill before the House gave power to buy all the cemeteries in and about London, and to leave the management in the hands of the Board of Health; but he hoped Parliament would hesitate before it granted any such powers. It would be much better to pay the forfeit incurred by not concluding the negotiations, than to vote away this large sum of 137,000 l. It was quite ridiculous to leave the working out of a great scheme like this in the hands of the Board of Health, which was composed of the Earl of Shaftesbury, Mr. Chadwick, and Dr. Southwood Smith. Men like
1556
these might make very valuable suggestions on sanitary subjects, but it did not follow that they had the qualifications requisite for carrying them out. Enthusiasts on the subject of sanitary reform were not exactly the men best fitted to work out their own suggestions. The noble Lord, therefore, should adopt some mode by which these sanitary schemes would be placed under representative control. There was no end to the expense of boards like the present, and they uniformly led to all kinds of jobbing. He suggested that they should leave matters as they now were, and that next year the Government should come forward with some fitting and comprehensive scheme of management.
MR. FORSTERsaid, he had lived forty years in London, and nothing had given him more pain or disgust than the state of the graveyards.
MR. HENLEYwished to know what advantage they had got from the Bill so hastily passed last Session, when the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer was obliged to come down and ask for 137,000 l.? It was quite evident that nobody had any confidence in the management now going on; then, what was the hurry for so much money? What was to prevent the Board of Health renting sufficient ground for interment purposes, should we, unfortunately, be afflicted with cholera, or some other epidemic? He saw no necessity, therefore, for the present advance.
LORD SEYMOURsaid, if the Act of last year was to be carried out, it was necessary that burying grounds should be provided. If, however, the Committee did not wish to carry out the Act of last Session, then, of course, they would come to the conclusion that additional places of interment were not necessary.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, there was so great a desire in the metropolis to close the graveyards, that there would be no objection to voting any sum of money to purchase ground, provided a proper system was adopted. No necessity had been shown for purchasing the two cemeteries mentioned by the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer, and he must characterise it as a job. What they wanted was a comprehensive scheme for closing all the graveyards.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, the hon. Gentleman was ready to vote any sum of money to close the graveyards. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) proposed to buy two ceme-

1557
teries in order to carry out that object, and the hon. Gentleman refused the money. If he was enabled to buy a cemetery, he could close all the graveyards; if he did not get a cemetery, he could not close one.
MR. D'EYNCOURThad had communications from his constituents within the last few days, in which they expressed the greatest anxiety lest the measure of last year should be altogether abandoned; and he feared, if the Committee negatived the Motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it would appear to the people of the metropolis that the measure was entirely abandoned. He should, therefore, support the proposition of the Government.
MR. LOCKEunderstood the only object for which the money was required was to get rid of the difficulty into which the Board of Health had been led.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, the great difficulty was, how they could shut up any of the graveyards without a vote of this kind. They did not agree to the extent to which the Board of Health had carried their plan, namely, that the whole of the graveyards of the metropolis should be shut up; but, so far as their plan proposed that the graveyards in the crowded parts of the metropolis should be shut up, they agreed with the Board of Health.
MR. BRIGHTwould ask if they could not make arrangements with a cemetery company, and then direct the parties in a parish to apply to that cemetery company? If the Chancellor of the Exchequer got the Vote, he should bring in a Bill to apply it, and he might introduce a Clause empowering the Board of Health, with the consent of the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to close any churchyard where it seemed absolutely necessary to do so. He believed this to be an arrant job, and he should be failing in his duty if he did not protest against it.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, they could not pass a Bill for closing the graveyards without providing compensation.
MR. WAKLEYsaid, a year ago full power was given to raise money to provide extramural interments, and notwithstanding that, nothing had been done. He thought the best way of getting out of the difficulty would be to move that the Chairman report progress.
LORD JOHN RUSSELLsaid, the hon. Member (Mr. Wakley) had stated that nothing had been done for a year, and therefore to satisfy the people the hon.
1558
Member moved that nothing should be done for another year.
MR. REYNOLDSsaid, it was hardly fair for the noble Lord at the head of the Government to taunt him in the early part of the evening with impeding the public business, considering that at that hour (half-past twelve) the House had only got into Committee on the Metropolitan Interment Bill.
The Committee divided:—Ayes 50; Noes 26: Majority 24.
MR. REYNOLDSsaid, he must protest against the Vote as most profligate. This was a Vote from the Consolidated Fund to provide cemeteries for the richest metropolis in the world, whilst every other city was left to provide for itself. There was a talk of a 1d. rate; but nobody believed that that would ever be available. The House of Commons had refused money this Session for charitable institutions in Ireland; and he hoped that this improper application of public funds would not pass unobserved.
The House resumed.
The House adjourned at half after One o'clock.