The Express.
London, England, 1851-08-07 00:00:00

Kr. LABOUCHERE, maiden"( that the house had
already dammed theprovilionsoo=two consecative
%porcine siegme, itionotbs be mid that
lartlegess who emptied the mstmeire were acting the
. of mates. One Part of the dusty of mutes it was pee-
sible they Takla intend to act, via, that of strangling the
bill. (" Ulu," and a laugh) With regard to the colonies,
ikbad *pen suggested by his right boa. Riend'why not
leave cat the colonies, that it rigl part of your
bill, which is to simplify the law in these
countries? He (Mr. Labouchere) adopted that advice,
and now his right hon. friend attacked him for having
done so. He was afraid his right hen. friend was very
diffieolt to please On this subject. He had no' wish to press
the measure against the wish of the house; but he trusted,
notwithstanding the objections that had been urged, that
the measure would be allowed to paw
Sir DE. L. EVANS rea,...tts.d that any obstruction was
offered to the progress of the measure, which was one of
great importance to his constituents. lie thought the right
hon. gentleman (Sir J. Graham) should state whether or
not he was opposed to the principle of the bill ; because, if
it should be lost, the responsibility would rest with him.
(Hear, hear.)
Sir J. GRAHAM did not shrink from the responsibility
of requiring on behalf of the public a full discuaion of the
measure—(hear. hear)—and with regard to the frankness
with which he had expressed his view in consequence of
what had fallen from his right hon. friend the President of
the Board of Trade, he wished it to be understood that he
did not make the speech until the delay was charged by his
right hon. friend 33 arising from vexatious opposition to
the progress of the bill. He denied that charge altogether.
(Hear, hear.) Ile reminded the committee that he had
voted with the government on the previous day in removing
an ambiguity from the bill' His right hon. friend said that
he (Sir J. Graham) objected to the extension of the
bill to the colonies; but all be had said was
that the government having stated it was not
their intention to change the general law as to patents
theme
this bill, it was not absolutely licenser). to deal with the
colonies in it. He had no objection to the alteration in the
18th clause in this respect, but in the 2.lth clause a question
of some difficulty would in consequence arise. But he was
asked was he favourable to the principle of the patent law
as it existed ? That question bad not yet been debated—it
had not been raised on the second reading of the bill. But
they were in an extraordinary position as respected the
manufactures and commerce of this country if they were to
take the government for their guide. On the one hand
they had the President of the Board of Trade pressing
a bill through in which that principle was affirmed ;
and on the other they had the noble lord the Vice Pre-
sident of the Board of Trade declaring against the prin-
ciple of the law of patents altogether. (Hear, hear.)
On the one hand they had the noble lord the Secretary for
the Colonies expressing a strong opinion against the exten-
sion of patents by the law officers of the crown to the colo-
nies, and the Attorney-General taking a different view in
that house. In the crown colonies they would no doubt exer-
cise a dissection, and would prohibit the extension of pa-
tents under the authority of the law officers of the crown ;
and in the representative colonies, where they must pro-
ceed by legislation on the part of the colony, the noble lord
having the power to suspend such legislation, would, to be
consistent, act upon that power. There was evidently not
that uniformity of counsel on the part of ministers in re-
spect to a measure so deeply affecting the manufactures and
commerce of the country which was necessary to warrant
the house in passing the bill without discussion; and there-
fore it was jostifiable in independent members hesitating
before, in a bill Bee the present, at so late a period of the
session, they affirmed the principle of the patent law.
(Hear, hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL believed that the whole
body of the house, with one or two exceptions, had affirmed
the principle that the patent law ought to be maintained, and
if they were to continue the system of patents,the law, being
defective, ought to be amended. The right hon. gentleman
and the hon. member for Stoke-upon Trent (Mr. Ricardo)
had urged that, inasmuch as a party desiring to take out a
patent for England would have to pay for the three king-
dom" the new law would enhance the expense to him.
But the difference was this—the patents not now taken out
for Scotland and Ireland were generally those of the lees
valuable character, which were not productive Metier to the
inventors or to the public. (No, no.) Ile repeated that
the majority of patents taken out for the three kingdoms
were those for valuable inventions which endured, and
these, instead of coating as they did now Me, would cost,
under the new law, but 1751.1.1iis would be the resultofthe
change the bill would effect. The right hon. gentleman
had mistaken what had fallen from his right hon. friend
(Mr. Labouchere), when he supposed he had com-
plained of vexatious opposition. His right honour-
able friend had stated distinctly that he had
no doubt of the Aonafrks and sincerity of the views of hon.
gentlemen opposite, but he called attention to the fact that
if they proceeded to a lengthened discussion of every clause
of the bill, and to a discussion of its principle over and
over again, the obvious result would be the loss of the
measure for the present session. All, he believed, except
the lion. member for Lambeth (Mr. \V. William') were
favourable to the principle of cheapening patents and
simplifying the law in reference to them. Let them carry
out those objects, and leave the other questions to be die.
ceased in another session.
After some discussion, during which the ATTORNEY.
GENERAL said the patent might or might not include the
colonies, according as the interested parties desired, the
clause as amended was agreed to.
Clauses 19, 20, 21, 2'2 and 23 were agreed to.
Clause 24, with the omission of certain words, was
agreed to.
Clause 2.1 was struck out.
Several other clauses were agreed to.
On clause 47,
Sir J. °RAH Aal asked whether the government had
formed any estimate of the gross amount of compenaatioc
to different persons which would have to be paid under
this clause ? lie believed that the days of the patent laws
in this country were numbered; and he, therefore, dreaded
this etatutable recognition of the claims of persons to com-
pensation out of a fund not arising distinctly and specially
from fees. The unfortunate claims of the six chancery
clerks had arisen exactly this way.
The ATTORNEI-GENERAL stated that one-half of
the officers employed in respect to patents would be
absorbed into the offices of the commissioners. The other
half were gentlemen who were paid by salaries, nominally
only receiving fees, which were carried to the public
account ; and these gentlemen would, of course, not be
entitled to compensation.
Sir J. GRAHAM asked again what would be the whole
amount of compensation ?
Mr. C. LEWIS could not give any precise answer. It
was not likely that the amount would be large.
After a few words from Mr. W. WILLIAM 4, who
warned the house against pledging itself to compensation of
the amount of which it was not yet informed.
Sir J. GRAHAM advised the government to reconsider
the point, and to bring up a clause arranging the difficulty
to-morrow (this day) on the report. All he wanted was to
have the fee fund kept distinct.
Mr. LABOUCHERE saw no objection to that course.
Mr. V. SMITH thought that it would be easy for the
government to make a return of the number of persons
who would claim compensation.
After some further conversation the clause was agreed to.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, the house re-
sumed, and the bill was reported with the amendments to
the house.
The Lords' amendments on the Merchant Seamen's Fund
Bill, the Land Clauses Consolidation Act Amendment Bill,
end several other bills, were then considered and agreed to.
Several of the Commons' amendments, on the Law of
Evidence Bill, were reported as agreed to by the Lords.
ARRANGEMENTS AT OPENING AND PROROGA-
TION OF PARLIAMENT.
Lord J. RUSSELL brought up the report of a select
committee appointed to draw up arrangements to be ob-
served on her Majesty requiring the attendance of the
house on the opening or prorogation of parliament. The
report, which was read at the table, recommends that mem-
bers who wish to attend with the Speaker on her Majesty
on these occasions, should intimate their intention the day
previously, and that a ballot should be taken to determine
the order in which members should follow the Speaker,
members of the cabinet, however, having precedence over
other members of the house. The noble lord in movies,
that the report be printed and considered to-morrow (this
day) said it was very desirable to adopt some rules which
would prevent the scramble, confusion, and inconvenience,
which took place on such occasions. Ile hoped that the
house would to-morrow agree to the report.
Mr. V. SMITH was quite of the opinion, that It was des
sirable to prevent, if possible, the confusion which often
prevailed on occasions such as those alluded to. He could
not, however, but regard some of the recommendations of
the report as a complete innovation on former practice. He
did not see why persons arriving in town on the very day
should not have their names inserted in the ballot box. It
was a totally new thing that cabinet miuisters should have
precedence over other members of the h nue. When they
hid gone to attend the corenation, there had been no official
distinction whatever observed.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL inquired how hon. members
would be able to give intimation of their intention to be
present at the opening of the house when many of them did
not sometimes arrive till the very day. He quite con-
curred with the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Smith) that it
was an unusual thing that cabinet ministers should have
precedence on such occasions.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that the coronation was not a
case in point, for in that case places had been set apart for
ministers, as well as other members of the house and each
had found his own seat. In the House of Lords, on the
opening or prorogation of parliament, places were not el-
lotted to ministers, and, therefore, it was necessary they
should have precedence. The point touched upon by the
bon. member (Mr. M. J. O'Connell) had been considered by
the committee, and it had been found that no difficulty
would ensue, for a letter to the clerk would be quite Ina-
cient to insure the name of any hon. member being put
into the ballot-box.
The motion for the printing of the report was agreed to,
and the house adjourned at a quarter before six o'clock.

renew the under-lease, upon any ressewal of the original
lease, the interest of the lessee in such Leda shall no• he
taken by way of purchase under this act, by any seek-
siastical corporation, without the consent in writing of such
salt-lessee provided always, that trash nedeoiseeeeu• net,
puration shall not be prevented from making such punkas*,
nor s:iall their title to any sucklands be defected in respect
of the existence of any such'inder-kaaa, aided the Bahl
corporation shall have had direct notice thereof in writing;
bat the sub-lessee shall, in eases where a sale or exchange
shall have been made without such notice, be entitled to
recover such damages for the loss of the benefit of such
covenant, against the party bound by the covenant for the
loss Litho sustained by hint, us be would he entitled to in
respec of its non-performauce on a renewal by the original
lasses
Some verbal amendments were then made, and the bill
was passed.
PATENT LAW AMENDMENT BILL.
On the house remising itself into committee on this bill,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS observed that the Solicitor-General
bed not yet staled who the parties were who were anxious
that this bill should be pressed through during the present
session.
Mr. LABOUCHERB esid it was not only on behalf of
the exhibitors that be wished to press through the bill in
the present session. With regard to these, however, as they
had protection for one year only, they would lose that OW
tection unless they registered now, and it was of great ist
peetanee to them that they should be enabled to register at
lower charge ; but with regard to the great body of invented,
of this country, he regretted that the house had not hail
more time to ciosider the measure, but he would remind
them that it had received the attentive consideration of •
committee of the other house, composed of noble lords mod
competent to deal with the subject. and though it had law
since altered in some respects, the measure remained who
stantially the same. The amendments which had been M.
troduccd in the Commons amounted rather to a ream
nruction of some of the provisions than to any chugs
in their substance. lie trusted that the house would ad
refuse to proceed with the measure, in order to its being
passed into a law during the present session.
On clause IS being put, after • few words from Mr. Dao.
vu ear.ry and Mr. J.Gaaraa,
Mr. HENLEY naked if there was any objection to •
prove.° for reserving the rights of the crows in the
colonies ?
'the ATTORNEY-GENERAL replied that, with the
view of avoiding unnecessary discussion and delay, it wee
proposed to leave the law with regard to the colonies as it
at present stood; therefore he proposed to omit the wade
having reference to the colonies.
In reply to a question from Mr. J. BELL.
The Al 1 ORNEY-OENERAL stated that persons who
had new patents fur England would be allowed to extend
them to Scotland and Ireland on payment of oue-third of
the whole fees payable under the existing law.
Mice a few words from Sir D. L. EVANi,
Mr. RICARI)O desired to call the attention of those
bon. members who were favourable to cheapening the coat
of patents to the fact that the biU would add to the exist-
ing charges. In 1!46,494 patents bad been granted for
England for three years, at a cost of 931. each; 178 for
Scotland, at a cost of 631. each; and 90 for Ire-
land, at a cost of 1191. each. By the schedule of
the bill the cost of a intent fer the three countries
would be 1751. If he took the whole cost of the 762
patents granted in lain, it would amount to 67,3661., and if
those patents were taken out under the new bill they would
amount to 133,350/. (Hear, hear.) lie wished to know
from the Attorney-General whether there would he any
means by which that result could be avoided, by allowing
the party to take out his patent fur one country instead of
being compelled to take it out for the three at once ?
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The fallacy, as it ap-
peared to him, of his hon. friend's argument was in assuming
that every patent taken out under the new law would pro-
ceed to the last stage. The party would be enabled under
this bill to pay the amount in three sums—that was one
ram in taking out the patent, and the others after-
wards if he should find it profitable to extend
the term. At present about nine-tenths of the patents
ended in nothing, and produced no benefit either to the
public or the inventors. Yet, as the law now stood, the
=venter was obliged to pay the whole charge at once
before he had any opportunity of testing the advantages or
the naults of his patent. It WWI now proposed to proceed
upon this principle. Assuming that the same number of
patents would he taken out for the three years as at present,
and that at the end of that period many of them would be
discontinued, and a very small portion renewed for the
next term of three years, and a still smaller number would
be carried on to the seven years, the aggregate charge
would be considerably reduced. And though it was true,
if every patent were continued to the full term, the
ITV would have to be paid in each case, yet as the
great majority would not he carried on beyond the first
term, the charge would be materially lessened, and espe-
cially in reference to such inventions as conferred no benefit
on the public, or profit to the inventors. Though they
made a man pay for the extension of the patent to the three
kingdoms in the first instance, he believed that would he
found to be an advantage, the the only remain why parties
did not now take out their patents for Scotland and Ireland
as well as England was the great cost.
Mr. HENLEY gathered front the eburvat ion. of the hon.
and learned gentleman that nine-tentlis of the patents taken
out now were good fur nothing ; still it followed that the
remaining one-tenth would se worse off under the new
I law than the old. (Hear, hear.) This admission
of the hon. and learned gentleman's would occasion some
discussion when they came to consider the compensation
clauses. But he would ask the government what was
the prospect of the bill becomiug law this year. It was
understood that; parliament was to he prorogued on Fri-
, dav, and suppling they got through committee to-day, the
third reading could not take place before the day of the
prorogation. lie would appeal to the government whe-
ther they thought it worth while to take up the time of
the house, under each circumstances, with the measure.
Mr. LABOUCHERE had told the house that he at-
tached very. great importance to the passing the hill in the
present session, and the government were most anxious to
is all they could to induce the house to go with them. At
the same time he was quite aware that it was in the power
of hon. members effectually to obstruct the passing of the
measure if they thought fit, and by. availing themselves of
the forms of the house, and repeating over and over 'again
the argument. which hod beta already used and answered,
prevent the possibility of the bill tossing. (Hear.) He
did lint complain of the course the hon. geutleman opposite
was adopting ; he might entertain a strung opinion against
the bill. and might consider himself fully jeudificd
in interfering to prevent its passing ; but what-
ever the hon. gentleman's opinion, he believed
he was right in Raying that the public voice
was generally in favour of the measure. As he hail said,
the bill had nceived the attentive consideration of the
House of Lords; it had been communicated to those who
were interested in it throughout the country, and upon
whom its failure would inflict great disappointment. With
regard to the probability of the other house adopting the
bill in its amended form, it was a matter for the other
house to consider whether they would adopt the Commons'
amendments, or not; but, seeing the great interest th- ma-
jority of the House of Lords attached to the measure, be
believed they would—(hear, hear)—the more so when it
was considered that the alterations which had been intro-
duced did not materially alter the substance of the bill,
though to some extent they tended to diminish the sphere
of its operations. (Hear, bear) He believed if there was
a disposition to do so, there was ample time for the house to
discuss the remaining clauses.
Sir J. GRAHAM remarked that his right lion. friend
seemed to think it was sufficient for him, as a member
of the government, to do his duty in pressing for- ,
ward the bill, without consideriag that it sou equally
incumbent on other members of the house to do theirs in
ascertaining what was the nature of the legislation pro-
posed. (Cheers.) And his right hon. friend had assumed
a tone in his observations as though there had been unfair
obotruction% offered to the progrees of the measure from that
(the opposition) aide of the house. He could safely say
that he had been no party to such obstructions, and having
attended all the discussions on the measure, he was not
swim that anything approaching to unfair obstruc-
tion or vexatious opposition had been offered.
(Hear, hear.) But whatever might be the duty of
his right hon. friend as a member of the government in the
matter, he could not consider that independent member of
that house would be discharging their duty by taking this
bill and passing it with its amendments wholesale the day'
hut one pieceding the prorogation without discussion or'
consideration. (Hear, hear.) Ile would never be a party
to unnecessary obstruction or vexatious opposition for the
mere purpose of delay, but it would be a neglect of duty
it he omitted to urge any objections that might occur to
him in reference to this or any other measure because of the
latenessuf the period at which it was brought forward. (Hear.)
But suppose the bill were taken ;And no objection offered. 'I
It would pass through committee to-day—it must be reported
to-morrow (Thursday) with numerous alterations, it could
not be read a third time until Friday, and then the House
of Lords would have to consider the amendments probably
at a few minutes before the prorogation. It was obvious
that unless the Lords took the amendments without consi-
deration, the bill must be lost, and the time of that house
(the Commons) in further considering the clauses thrown
away. But he would not pursue that point. It was for the
government to say whether, under such circumstances, they
thought it right to pass the bill. His right hon. friend had
mid that the bill had been carefully considered elsewhere ;
hut what b-came of that consideration when the first act of
the guiernment was to recast it to the extent of intro-
during upwards of thirty new clauses? What were they
doing with the clause under discussion The bill as it came
down from the House of Lords included the colonies, and now
after about a quarter of an hour"s conversation, the govern-
ment abandoned that part of the bill altogether. They had
been told in the other house that it was important that the
eelasioi should he included, but now the government were
tepad tio throw over the colonies, which they considered as
compered with the urgency of passing the bill.
(hhiem bear). And then they had the extraordinary an-
nouncement front the Attorney-General that 9-piths of the
Mink of the patents granted were alike useless to the public
and profitless to the patentees; and yet they were asked to
festinase a system which was deocribeil by the host and
yard pad...man m so defective. The hon. gentleman
balm him (Mr. Ricardo) bad referred to the ease of patents
Ihe useful inve whets being rendered more expensive by this
hill than they were at present. That argument, as it ap-
=to him, was an irresistible answer to that of the
ley-general, who had appealed to the 9-ldths of use-
,Ms patents. If the heave were not to be mere mutes in
the matter, passing whatever measures government might
consider necessary to carry, it was their duty to discuss the
clauses of the hi, and if tUtry were to be told that by doing
so they would be considered m offering a vexatious obstrue-
tiou to legislation they had better withdraw from the house
altogether. (Hear.)

THE EXPRESS, THURSDAY EVENING, AUGUST 7, 1851.

ite •xprefili.