HC Deb 11 July 1853 vol 129 cc85-6

Order for Committee read.

MR. COWAN

wished to know if there was any objection to make it imperative on patentees to lodge specifications at Dublin and Edinburgh?

The ATTORNEY GENERAL

said, he only proposed at the present time to go into Committee pro formâ, in order that the numerous alterations might be printed. In answer to the hon. Member for Edinburgh, he must inform him that the requirement suggested would entail upon patentees a great deal of expense, and therefore was open to serious objection.

MR. WHITESIDE

said, he must complain that this Bill would interfere with an Act passed only last Session for the amendment of the patent laws, upon which great pains had been bestowed, and that the Amendments altered it essentially, and made it utterly ineligible and utterly unworkable. He protested against such a system of legislation, and should object to proceed any stage at that hour.

MR. BOUVERIE

said, it was most unusual to object to go into Committee pro formâ.

MR. WHITESIDE

would ask whether it was quite usual to send a Bill to Members to read, and when they came to go into Committee to say, that was not the Bill, but it was quite a different Bill altogether?

COLONEL DUNNE

said, he objected to the system of centralisation so apparent in the measure.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL

said, that there was a clause in the Bill which would meet the hon. and gallant Member's objection. He would also state that it was the intention to make all specifications lodged in Dublin evidence for all purposes; but it would be a saving of expense to the patentee if printed duplicates were sent to Dublin from the Patent Office here instead of manuscript copies.

House in Committee.

Bill considered.

House resumed; Committee reported.