The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-25 00:00:00

MENT BILL.

This bill passed through committee, after an explana-
tion from the Home Secretary that it was intended to re-
main in force tin 1867.
MUTINY BILL.

The house then went into committee on the Mutiny
Bill.
Clauses to 21 inclusive having been agreed to,
On clause 22,
Mr. WHITE said that flogging in the army had, he was
happy to say, greatly decreased during the last few years,
and he went into the statistics of the subject to prove the
statement. He said it appeared from the returns that 179
men were flogged in 1861; and in 1860, 512. In the year
1858 there was no flogging in all but 69 regiments; in 1859,
in all but 34 regiments; and in 1860, in all but 19 regi-
ments. Believing, however, that flogging was detrimental
to the army, and degrading to the national character, he
moved the omission of the clause ; and ho begged to state
that so long as he was honoured with a seat in that house,
he should never cease to do his utmost to abolish that bar-
-
barons practice.
Sir G. Cl. LEWIS said this decrease was attributable to
a general order issued at the end of 1859, by which no sol-
dier could be flogged until he had been degraded from the
first class into the second of the two which it created. The
effect had been to reduce the number of lashes, and the
clause itself limited the number to 50. He hoped the com-
mittee would adhere to the clause.

Mr. PEASE observed that the statement of the right
hone gentleman himself was conclusive against the pro-
priety of retaining the punishment, and he hoped the cob..
mittee would throw out the clause.
The committee divided and the numbers were—
For the clause
Against it l4
Majority for

The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill.
On clause 26, providing for branding soldiers with the
letter D, or with the letters B C, on the breast, to signify
" deserter," or " bad character,"

Mr. HENNESSY moved to omit it, but did not divide
the committee, and the clause, with the remaining ones,
was agreed to.
The house then resumed.
MARINE MUTINY BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
:,PUBLIC-HOUSES (SCOTLAND) ACTS AMEND-
MENT BILL.

Mr. MUIR moved the second reading of this bill, which
he said he hoped would be allowed to pass, as it had been
framed in accordance with principles which had received
the sanction of Scotch members generally.
Mr. BUCHANAN said he had no intention of opposing
the bill, and he gave credit to the intentions of the hon•
and learned gentleman who had charge of it. He had in-
tended to improve it by consolidating it with the other two
bills on the subject, but did not intend to offer any impedi-
ment to its progress.
The bill was then read a second time.
BLEACHFIELDS (WOMEN AND CHILDREN
EMPLOYMENT) BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
The house then adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

P 41.RLIAMENTAIRY CO SIIIIITTEES.

TRADE MARKS.

The committee on this bill met again yesterday.
Mr. Roebuck in the chair. The other members of
the committee are—Mr. Milner Gibson, the Attor-
ney General, Sir H. Cairns, Mr. Alderman Cope-
land, Mr. Crossley, Mr. Hassard, Mr. Crum-Ewing,
Mr. Selwyn, Mr. Potter, Sir F. Goldsmid, and Mr.
Warner.

Mr. Rylands, a member of the council of the Bir-
mingham Chamber of Commerce, and ex-mayor of
the borough, was the first witness examined. He
said—The Chamber of Commerce are very anxious
to see some statutes passed which shall prevent
fraudulent imitations, by something more than the
mere payment of costs and damages. They wish
the offence to be made a misdemea-aour, subject to
fine and imprisonment. Registration ought to be
made part of any act that may be passed on the sub-
ject. I would register the trade mark. It appears
to me unnecessary to register the names of the
manufacturers who do not adopt a mark. There are
many manufacturers who depend upon their names
alone, and if any ono imitates their names with a
fraudulent intention, a new remedy should be given
in such case, because the object is either to simplify
the evidence against offenders or to give warning to
Manufacturers who may unwittingly adopt, a mark
used by other persons. In the case of a manufac-
turer of tho same name as myself I should consider
an emblem necessary, and should have to register.
The emblem and the name should be both registered.
The remedies proposed in the bill are simple and
t inexpensive, and I do not see why they should not
be extended for the benefit of persons who use their
names only without trade marks. There would be
no difficulty in adopting an efficient system of re-
gistration, and I believe it would pay its expenses.

Mr. Bartlett, needle manufacturer of Redditch,
produced a book showing the genuine labels used by
his firm and some counterfeit labels. The latter, he
said, are made in Germany. They are engraved at
Aachen, and the object is to enable the Prussian
manufacturers to get rid of a bad article at a good
price. My firm has never taken legal proceedings
because we were told that there being no law in
England enabling foreigners to obtain redress they
could give us none. I believe it to be of the utmost I
importance to have a system of registration along
with the name, accompanied by a summary juris-
diction.

Mr. James Wright, button manufacturer, of Bir-
mingham, believed the adoption of trade marks by
manufacturers would become general. He had
adopted one, but was not aware whether it was a
new one, or whether any other person had a prior
right to it. An act of Parliament which would
enable him to ascertain such a point would be very
desirable. He knew of an expensive Chancery suit
now in progress, which had been caused by the
adoption by one of part of the compound mark used
by another. That suit might have been avoided
under an efficient system of registration. He thought
the magistrates would form a competent tribunal
for the decision of trade mark cases.
The committee then adjourned.