§ MR. LEAKEasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he has read a Petition presented to the House by Mr. Lynall Thomas begging that his claims in connection with the invention and introduction into the services of large rifled guns may be referred to a Select Committee of the House; and, whether he will, in consideration of all the cir- 359 cumstances of the case, accede to an investigation, as prayed for by Mr. Thomas, and thereby terminate a litigation which appears to have impoverished that gentleman without securing for him the compensation awarded by a special jury in the suit of Thomas v. the Queen tried before the Chief Baron in February 1877, and amounting in full to £8,790 11s. 6d.?
§ MR. CHILDERSSir, I asked my hon. Friend to postpone until to-day this Question, which he originally put down at short Notice for the 25th of July, and I have thus been able to read carefully the shorthand-writer's notes of the trial before the late Lord Chief Baron in February, 1877, and the arguments and judgment of the Divisional Court of Queen's Bench in June, 1877. The facts are, shortly, these. Mr. Lynall Thomas claimed to have originated certain improvements in heavy ordnance, and he sought to have certain expenses, incurred in 1854 and subsequent years, reimbursed to him, together with a payment for the value of his invention. After repeated refusals on the part of successive Secretaries of State, he commenced proceedings at law against the War Department, and in March, 1877, obtained a verdict for £6,500, a portion of the expenses which he stated he had incurred, and was entitled to recover, under a contract with the War Office. In June, 1877, the War Office applied to the Full Court to set aside the verdict on the ground that no such contract existed, and that the verdict was against the evidence, and the Full Court unanimously decided that no contract existed so as to entitle Mr. Thomas to prefer any claim against the Crown, and they let it to Mr. Thomas to appeal. He has not appealed, and the judgment is, therefore, final. My hon. Friend now asks me whether I will accede to an investition of the subject by a Select Committee of the House of Commons. I regret that I cannot consent to this course. Mr. Thomas has, in my opinion, no claim, legal or equitable, on the Exchequer; and if, out of compassion for him, a Committee were appointed to review the decisions of the responsible Ministers of the Crown, commencing in 1860, and of the High Court of Justice four years ago, the House would be called upon by the shoals of speculative inventors who have made claims on the War Office and 360 Admiralty to extend the same compassion to them, and it would be difficult, if not impossible, to refuse them what was granted to Mr. Thomas.