§ Considered in Committee.
§ (In the Committee.)
§ [Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
§ Clause 1:—
§
Amendment proposed—
In page 1, line 10, after the word 'Act,' to add the words 'or in any case where the Judge decides that a patent should be revoked.'"—(Mr. Rawlinson.)
*THE CHAIRMANruled that if the Amendment went beyond Section 92 of the 1907 Act it was out of order.
§ MR. CARLILE (Hertfordshire, St. Albans)drew attention to the fact that forty Members were not present.
§ MR. SHACKLETON (Lancashire, Clitheroe)Oh, let us get on with the work.
§ House counted; and forty persons being found present—
§ THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir W. ROBSON,) South Shieldssaid that the Amendment was of a far reaching character and went beyond the scope of the Bill.
§ MR. RAWLINSONsaid he would not press his Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Bill reported without Amendment.
§ Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
§ CAPTAIN CRAIG (Down, E.)hoped that the Government would give some explanation, first of all, as to why it was necessary to add so soon to the Patents and Designs Bill; and secondly, as to the certain clause in the old Bill which required amendment.
§ SIR W. ROBSONsaid that the Question of the hon. Member was a very reasonable one. The Bill was introduced merely to make good a draftsman's mistake in the Act passed last year consolidating; the Patents Acts—a mistake so easy to make that it was very hard to attach any great degree of culpability to anybody. The result of that mistake was to deprive litigants of a right of appeal in cases where the patentee was alleged not to be the first inventor, where the inventions was alleged not to be new, where there was allged to be no subject matter for a patent, and in a whole group of important cases of that character as to which the Government never intended to restrict the right of appeal. All that this Bill now did was to explain 267 that the Consolidation Act of 1907, Section 92, was not to have that undesirable effect.