§ Mr. WRIGHTasked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. R. W. Bates, formerly assistant to Mr. Lambourne at the M.M.O.P., and now with Sir A. Churchman, who has applied for a patent for an annular low temperature retort, based on the Tozer annular retort; whether Mr. R. W. Bates was frequently, in the course of his official duty, at the Battersea works supervising tests in, and had access to all the details of, the Tozer retort; whether unrestricted permission was given to Mr. R. W. Bates by the head of his Department to apply for this patent, and whether Mr. Bates, in preparing his application, used Government time and materials; and whether he will now grant the inquiry asked?
§ Mr. KELLAWAYMr. Bates has applied for and has been granted a patent for an improvement in vertical retorts. I am advised that it is a combination which has nothing in common with the claims for the Tozer intermittent retort except that both relate to the same general class of apparatus. Mr. Bates' duties were as described, and he had access to such details as can be observed when the plant is in use and when standing. The permission given to apply for the patent was not unrestricted; on the contrary, the Government have the right of free user and assignment. The improvement to existing forms of intermittent annular vertical retorts was worked out for the use of the Department to which Mr. Bates belongs, and so was done during ordinary working hours with Government materials. As I am satisfied that the sanction to Mr. Bates application for a patent was granted by the head of his department in a proper manner, I do not see the necessity of holding any inquiry.