Lords Sitting of 22 February 1876

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Patents for Inventions (15).
PATENT LAWS AMENDMENT BILL.

  BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in presenting a Bill for the amendment of the Patent Laws, said, that their Lordships might recollect that last Session a Bill for the amendment of the Patent Laws passed through their Lordships' House, and went down to the other House of Parliament; but the state of Public Business at that time made it impossible to carry it through. By their Lordships' favour, he was permitted, when introducing the Bill, to explain at great length its objects, and he certainly should not think of trespassing now on their Lordships' indulgence by any lengthened statement:—but he was anxious, in asking permission to read the Bill a first time this Session, to state that there would be found in it two important provisions differing from the former Bill. They were these:—The proposal of the Bill of last Session was that there should be in future two classes of Letters Patent for inventions, the one to remain in force for a period of 14 years—the present term—the other for an invention which might not seem deserving" of so long a period, for the shorter term of seven years. He still thought it would not be an undesirable arrangement that there should be a distinction of that kind, having reference to the subject-matter of the invention. However, he had found many objections raised to that proposal by persons much concerned with patents; and they suggested so strongly that it would lead to uncertainty or to litigation, as to whether an invention should be entitled to seven or to 14 years' protection, that he had thought it right to omit that provision and to propose that patents should be given a protection for the uniform term of 14 years. The other alteration was of a different kind. In the Bill of last Session it was proposed, as the machinery for carrying it out, that the granting of Letters Patent should be under the direction and superintendence
  664
  of the Commissioners of Patents; that under them there should be Examiners of Patents, who should carefully examine as to the sufficiency of the specifications, and ascertain whether any previous patent had been granted for the same inventions. And then it was proposed that another class of persons—the Referees—not connected with the Patent Office, persons engaged in scientific pursuits, or conversant with the applied sciences, might be resorted to in the consideration of any particular patent, for the purpose of giving advice upon it. Here again he found considerable unwillingness to accede to an arrangement of that kind. On the one hand it was said that the services of persons sufficiently competent to give the required advice could not be obtained, except at a price that would be disproportioned to what would be the cost of the patent; and on the other, that great jealousies would be aroused by the selection of persons called upon to pronounce upon patents about to be brought before the public. "With respect to that part of the Bill, therefore, he had thought it best to confine its machinery to the Commissioners of Patents, and, under them, the Examiners, the regular officers of the Patent Office. These were the two principal points in the new Bill to which he had now to ask their Lordships to give a first reading.
  Bill for consolidating with Amendments the Acts relating to Letters Patent for Inventions presented; read 1a; and to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday the 7th of March next. (No. 15.)

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS—REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.—LEGISLATION.—QUESTION.
LORD COTTESLOE, according to Notice, asked the Lord President to inform the House, if in his power to do so, When the Report of the Royal Commission on Accidents on Railways will be presented; and, whether the Government propose to introduce any Bill or Bills on the subject during the present Session? The subject of loss of life at sea had engaged no small share of the attention of the House of Commons during last Session and the portion of the present Session which had already elapsed. It might not be that the loss

665
of life by a single railway accident was so great as that caused by the sinking of a ship at sea; but if the calamitous results of railway accidents were regarded in the aggregate he doubted whether they would not be found quite as appalling as the accidents which occurred on the sea. Their Lordships' House had already shown how sensible it was of the importance of the subject, because it was on an Address agreed to and presented by their Lordships in 1874 that the Royal Commission to inquire into the regulation and working of railways, and to report on the best means to be adopted for the prevention of accidents was appointed. He thought, however, that when that Commission was appointed few, if any, of their Lordships anticipated that two years would elapse without a Report from them. It now, however, appeared to be not improbable that yet another year might pass before the Commission reported. He by no means wished to undervalue the magnitude of the task entrusted to the Commission, and he could quite understand that the appointment of its Chairman (the Duke of Buckingham) to the office which he now filled in India had caused a delay. No doubt an elaborate Report would be presented, and Parliament might expect to see a comprehensive measure founded on that Report; but all this would take time, and there was the probability that railway accidents which might be prevented would continue to occur in the meantime. It was clear enough, therefore, that the proceedings of the Commission were not fast enough to meet the urgency of the subject. He could not but think that the Royal Commission, if directed to do so, might be disposed to make a preliminary Report on which a Bill dealing with the most pressing necessities of the case might be prepared and passed into law during the present Session.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, that nobody could be insensible to the importance of the subject. The appointment of the Royal Commission was a proof that Parliament and Her Majesty's Government felt its importance; but, as his noble Friend admitted, the subject was a very large as well as a very important one. The absence from this country of the noble Duke the Chairman of the Commission had no doubt retarded its proceedings;
666
but it must be remembered that in order to obtain full information and arrive at sound conclusions, the Commissioners had been obliged to take evidence over the whole country. In the temporary absence of Lord De La Warr, who had succeeded the Duke of Buckingham as Chairman, but who was now abroad, Lord Aberdeen was acting as Chairman, and the Commissioners were proceeding with their Report. All the evidence had been closed; but he could not hold out any hope that the Report would be presented this side of the Easter Recess. He could not agree with the noble Lord (Lord Cottesloe) that a preliminary Report from the Commission as a basis for legislation would be desirable. It would be impossible to expect any Department of the Government to undertake the preparation of a Bill on imperfect information, and it would be no less unreasonable to ask Parliament to legislate before it was put in possession of the matured views of the Commission and of the evidence on which those views had been formed. He could, however, assure the House that the greatest care was taken in the preparation of the Report, and that there would be no unnecessary delay in its production.

ARMY—THE MARTINI-HENRY RIFLE.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  THE DUKE OF ST. ALBANS, in rising to put the Question of which he had given Notice, with respect to alleged defects in the Martini-Henry rifle, said, he was afraid from all accounts that we were somewhat in the case of the epitaph—"I was well, I would be better—here I am." He was afraid we had exchanged a fairly good weapon in the Snider for the Martini-Henry, and that it had not realized the expectations formed of it. This was no Party question—it would be difficult, if one wished it, to know who to blame. The military authorities were relieved of the responsibility of choosing the arm they required by a Committee being appointed, and though the Government had been a long time in discovering the defects, yet their predecessors adopted the rifle. It was of the highest importance that the weapon supplied to the English Army should be the very best that could be procured, and it would doubtless be a vast disappointment to the country,

  667
  after the large sums expended, if it was found that we had not a perfect arm; but it would be better to look this in the face, if it was not so, rather than leave our soldiers with a weapon in which they had no confidence. He hoped, however, that the reports he had heard would prove to be exaggerations. He spoke under contradiction from the illustrious Duke, and from the noble Earl the Under Secretary of State for War (Earl Cadogan), but he was told on good authority that between 60 and 70 of the Martini-Henry rifles had become unfit for service in a battalion of Guards alone during the last Autumn Manœuvres, and he believed complaints were received last year of the rifle from various foreign stations. But what was most important was the despatch of Lieutenant Hinxman, from Malay, describing the rifle in the first and only time it had as yet been used in action. He said—
  "I "was much disappointed with the new rifles. When they got hot the extractor became jammed, and eight or 10 of my men told me their rifles were useless, so I told them to take the wounded men's rifles."
  Now, if the Martini-Henry was ineffective against foes, it seemed also to be somewhat dangerous to friends. It seemed that a small quantity of sand or dirt getting into the lock would make the pull a hair-trigger. It was not pleasant to know that the man standing behind one had a hair-trigger, but it was doubly unpleasant if one knew that it was not only a hair-trigger, but one which necessarily must stand at full-cock. Might he ask any of their Lordships what would be their feelings if they were asked to join a shooting party who were to go over rough ground and through fences, and who were carrying guns which only could stand at full-cock? From no wish to embarrass the Government, but as sharing the general anxiety which was felt on this important subject, he begged to ask. Whether any reports have been received during the past year with respect to defects in the Martini-Henry Rifle; and, if so, whether there is any objection to lay such Reports on the Table; and to state the steps (if any) which have been taken, and the estimated cost per rifle of rectifying the defects complained of?
  EARL CADOGAN, in reply, said, that reports had been received during the
  668
  past year with reference to defects in the Martini-Henry rifle, and there was no objection to lay those Reports on the Table of the House. Among these complaints some referred to the sighting, some to irregularity of pull, others to the difficulty of extracting the emptied cartridges in certain cases, and, in isolated instances, to the weapon going off in the act of closing the lever. It was found also that the pull could be injured by a small amount of dust or dirt getting between the shoulder of the trigger and the trigger-plate, and that by the insertion of a piece of paper or other foreign substance, the trigger might be converted into a hair-trigger, and so the rifle might go off; unexpectedly and cause accident. No such accident had occurred at Enfield since the manufacture of those rifles was commenced there, though, of course, an immense number of rounds had been fired at Enfield with them. But the possibility of the occurrence had been deemed so serious that in October last a Conference of Officers had met to consider the matter, and, on the suggestion of the Superintendent of the Small Arms Factory, they came to the conclusion that a plan of counter-sinking the shoulder of the trigger and a slight additional improvement in the details of the manufacture of the weapon would afford a remedy for the danger. At a meeting of the Conference of the same officers in January it was recommended that the necessary alteration should be made in the weapon. This alteration would cost only 3s. for each rifle; it did not affect the principle, nor would it involve the return of the rifle into the factory. With regard to "half-cock"—which some persons considered a source of danger rather than of safety—the Conference, after much deliberation, did not recommend it. He had had a letter sent to him by Colonel Close, written by Lieutenant Abbott, whose name their Lordships would remember in connection with the murder of Mr. Birch, in which that officer said—"I wish my father to tell Colonel Close that the Martini rifle did very well." With respect to the extraction of the emptied cartridge, that was found to be the result of neglecting to extract the case immediately after firing, as, when the weapon cooled, the metal of the chamber contracted and held it fast; but by a new drill regulation, re-

  669
  quiring the soldier to extract the spent cartridge after firing, that difficulty would be avoided. The Martini-Henry rifle had been chosen for the British Army, after a long and anxious deliberation, by what he thought he might fairly call representative Committees. A sum of £1,400,000 had been already spent on the manufacture of that arm and the ammunition necessary for it, and therefore it was most desirable to render the weapon perfect by remedying any deficiencies. The analogy sought to be drawn by the noble Duke from the epitaph he had repeated to their Lordships hardly existed in this case, because the dead man had called in the physician when he was perfectly well; whereas, as regarded the Martini rifle, it was found to be necessary from real defects to call in the physician. But if, as was believed by competent authorities, its defects could be remedied, he thought their Lordships would be disposed to think it was the duty of the Government to do their best to make it a complete success.
  EARL GREYconcurred with the noble Earl who had just addressed their Lordships that after so much money had been expended on the Martini-Henry rifle, the Government ought to try and make it a satisfactory weapon; but he still more concurred with his noble Friend the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) when he said we ought to look the matter in the face, and whatever we might have spent upon Martini-Henry rifles, we ought not to be afraid to ascertain whether they really were open to the objections urged against them. If they were, we were bound to give them up, and ought not to leave the British soldier with any but the best weapon. It was said that after a number of shots had been fired from the Martini-Henry rifle, the recoil was such as to interfere with the correctness of the aim. Information on this and other points in connection with the weapon would be very desirable for Parliament.
  THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEsaid, he could repeat what had been said by his noble Friend the Under Secretary of State for War—that the introduction of the Martini-Henry rifle had not been undertaken hastily by the late Government. From 1866, when General Peel advertized for the best breech-loading
  670
  weapon for the British Army, there had been almost incessant inquiries into this subject, and it was not until their conclusion that the Martini-Henry rifle had been adopted, with the full concurrence of the Commander-in-Chief, by the late Government. The reports of a large number of regiments, as to the performance of the Martini-Henry rifle, were highly satisfactory; and he believed it was stated on good authority that its recoil was not greater than that of the Snider and other rifles. As against the Report of Lieutenant Hinxman there was the unqualified approval of the naval officer of the expedition. As to the statement of his noble Friend (the Duke of St. Albans) that the military authorities were relieved of responsibility by the appointment of Committees, he differed from that view. The responsibility lay with the military authorities. As to the objection that there was no half-cock, to meet that it had been recommended that there should be a locking bolt, but the illustrious Duke did not think that desirable.
  THE DUKE OF CAMBRIDGEsaid, he thought it would be very difficult to adopt any view in opposition to that of the Committees, which had gone into all the details of this question and had seen the Martini-Henry rifle under all the advantages and disadvantages of actual trial—the results of course the military authorities could only take on their dictum. Under these circumstances, responsibility must rest on the Committees as to which was the best arm. Had he been a member of the Conference he thought he would have been in favour of recommending a half-cock. Being something of a sportsman, he knew something of the apprehension felt by those who were in the immediate neighbourhood of persons who were apt to carry their fowling-pieces on full-cock. He certainly did not think a bolt would do. He certainly should prefer an arm that had a half-cock, if it was possible to have one equally efficient with that arrangement, to the Martini-Henry without it. The theory was that breech-loading arms ought not to be loaded until they were about to be used, and therefore that not much danger need be incurred. Formerly, when individual men had not to make charges or rushes, there was not the same difficulty; but now, when a man was left so much to

  671
  his individual action, there was more danger in intrusting him with a loaded musket on full-cock. But to gain so many advantages as are now sought for we must submit to certain disadvantages. No doubt there had been complaints of the Martini-Henry rifle going off in some cases without the trigger having been touched; but it was said that this might be completely prevented in the manufacture of the weapon. As to the recoil, he believed that the complaint of the objectionable amount of recoil had been caused by the butt having been made too long, which prevented the soldier from getting it up close to his shoulder. In all cases, whenever a new arm was adopted, it would be found necessary, after actual service, to make adjustments and improvements. There must be a trial of the weapon in actual service. Firing a number of shots at Enfield was a very different thing from giving the rifles to ordinary men to be knocked about. It must be remembered, too, that the capability of men to handle and take care of their weapons greatly differed, and that small mishaps were sure to occur. He was satisfied, however, that the arm was a good arm. As to the difficulty of extracting the emptied cartridges owing to the shrinking of the barrel, that showed how difficult it was to foresee all difficulties of detail. At first it had not been thought necessary to order in the drill regulations that spent cartridges should be extracted immediately after firing; but as such a regulation had since been made, that difficulty was not likely to occur again. With respect to the armitself, he thought it right to say that 100 different kinds of weapons were produced when it was first submitted to competition. A certain number of those were withdrawn by the manufacturers themselves; a certain number were set aside, the best were selected, and of these the Martini-Henry was finally adopted as the best shooting arm that could be had.
  VISCOUNT CARDWELLhoped their Lordships were not understood to be debating the question whether the British soldier ought to be armed with the best possible weapon:—at whatever the cost the British soldier should have that weapon. He hoped, also, that they were not debating as to who was responsible for the adoption of the Martini-Henry rifle. He shrank from no responsibility in con-
  672
  nection with it. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would lay on the Table the results of the experiments which had been made within the last few months, that they might know whether this was—as he believed it to be—or was not the best weapon supplied to any army in Europe. He did not altogether agree with the illustrious Duke that the responsibility belonged to the Committee which had recommended it. As regarded the history of this rifle, in March, 1867, a most important and valuable Committee, consisting of some of the greatest rifle shots in the Kingdom and of some experienced soldiers, were appointed to inquire into the matter. They took a long time in their examination, and did not report till after he had come into office as Secretary for War, which he thought was an interval of two years from the time of their appointment. But the Government of which he was a Member did not act on the Report of that Committee. They assembled at the War Office some of the most experienced soldiers of this country. They recommended that 200 rifles should be made at Enfield and issued to the troops for trial. They were tried not only in this country, but in India, the Cape, and Canada. Well, when the reports came in the Committee was re-constituted, and Lord Elcho, who was Chairman of the Council of the Volunteers at Wimbledon, and the President of the Society of Civil Engineers were added to the Committee. The question was again considered by that Committee, who made their Report—again most favourable to the Martini-Henry. But the Government did not act on that Report. They assembled another body of most distinguished soldiers. This body again recommended the Martini-Henry rifle; it was approved by the Board of Admiralty; it had the high sanction of the illustrious Duke, and it was not until after all these things that it was adopted by the late Government. But it was not they only that had adopted it, any more than it was they who appointed the original Committee, because his right hon. Friend the present Secretary for War, he was told, went most carefully into an examination of the subject, and, having done so, largely increased the orders which the late Government had given for making them. He also took steps for issuing the rifle to the Infantry.

  673
  But the real question was not the history of the case. The real question was the character of the arm. If the Martini-Henry was not the best, they were not justified in continuing it. He hoped that we should not rely upon the newspaper reports, of which the noble Earl on the cross-benches had spoken, inserted very likely by disappointed inventors; but that we should be put in possession of the official reports made by the School of Musketry at Hythe and the regiments which had tried it.
  EARL CADOGANsaid, he had not troubled their Lordships with any remarks upon what he understood had been unanimously conceded—the great superiority of the Martini-Henry rifle as a weapon of precision. He could not promise to produce the Papers asked for by the noble Viscount (Viscount Cardwell) without consulting the Secretary of State for War, but he had no doubt he should be able to produce them. He might state generally that the Reports which had been received were of a most satisfactory character, and bore out the description of this arm as the best that could be produced.
  House adjourned at a quarter past Six o'clock, to Thursday next, a quarter before Five o'clock.