The Sun.
London, England, 1861-09-07 00:00:00

SEPTEMBER 7, 'lB6l

and it would be difficult to remedy the evil by
any preliminary inquiry that it would be practi-
cable
to make, The number of patents, valid and
invalid, is becoming perfectly frightful, and it is im-
possible to make out with any certainty what one is
at liberty to invent or to use. Teem is probably
not one patent in twenty of any use, or likely to be
so, unless, as in the instance of the railway wheels,
they should happen to be rendered practicable by
the labour of others, and then the patentees would
step in and carry off the profits. Under the present
state of things every inventor is compelled to become
a patent., in mere self-defence. If he omit to do so,
he may fare like Mr. Brunel in the case of the wired
gun, or he may have his invention taken from him
entirely by another person patenting an improve-
ment and rendering the original unsaleable without
it. On the other hand, if the original invention he
patented, then the public suffers because no one will
make improvements to be absorbed by a patentee.
The system is full of crookedness. As an argument
for patents it is urged that the product of a man's
mind should be deemed his property. But who can
say that the invention of a patentee was not con-
ceived by other persons as well, or that he had the
priority ? If the invention be his property, why
take it from hien at the end of 14 years ? It is said
if copyright can be supported why not patent right
also ? But the two cases are widely different.
Copyright does not enable the author of a book to
prevent other persons from writing on the same
subject, or using his ideas. There need be no fear
of two persons writing independently the same book
—but they may easily happen to invent the same
thing. Copyright, therefore, can create neither
impediment nor injustice, but patent right does
both. It cannot be disputed that the Patent Laws,
by restricting the free use of ideas, do in that respect
at least obstruct inventions : and if, on the other
hand, it be contended that, by means of the re-
wards they hold out, they also encourage it, the
most that can be said is that they pull opposite
ways. But surely, if this be all, there can be no
sufficient warrant for such arbitrary interference
with liberty of action as is exemplified in the
first of the three cases I have related, and which
may be regarded as typical of a large number
of similar cases. For my part, I believe the
efficacy of these artificial rewards is much overrated.
The eagerness with which persons contend for the
mere honour of an invention, and the zeal -vith
which investigations in science are pursued where
no money reward is attainable, show how little
cause there is to anticipate that men would volun-
tarily consign their inventions to oblivion in the
absence of pecuniary recompense. Like all other
faculties, that of invention gives pleasure in the
exercise, and no factitious stimulus can therefore be
necessary to insure its activity. Although the Pa-
tent Laws ought to be discussed solely in reference
to public policy, it would seem harsh to exclude
from consideration the interest of the inventor.
Let us examine, therefore, what advantages would
naturally accrue to him, supposing monopoly to be
withheld. In the first place he gets the start of all
competitors. The presumption is he will understand
his subject better than other people, and therefore
be able to keep the lead in improvement. The public
have great faith in a name, and when he once gains
a reputation he will obtain a preference not easily
to be lost. If he be a poor man to begin with he
must be content to struggle with difficulty, whether
there be a patent law or not. How successfully he
may do so without the aid of patents and with what
beneficial results to himself is exemplified in the
career of George Stephenson and many others of
the same class. In my own case I became an inven-
tor before I had capital at my command or was
engaged in suitable business. In some instat-ces I
have availed myself of the patent laws and in others
not, and I am satisfied if those laws had not existed
I should have been substantially in the same posi
tion as at present. I will mention one case of my
unpatented inventions, because the circumstances
happen to be known to Mr. Bateman, the chair-
man
of this section. I allule to certain valves of a
novel construction, which were first applied to the
aqueduct pipe of the Manchester Waterworks.
Those valves, though not patented, and though
afterwards extensively used in other great water-
works, have been, I believe, exolueively supplied by
the firm of which I am a member:, They are at the
same time open to all the world to improve upon,
and the only thing I complain of is that in the
event of a patented improvement being ingrafted
upon them they would be taken out of my hands
and monopolised by the patentee. Under any state
of the law cases will occur of hardship and inade-
quate reward, and these ought to be met by
grants from the State. The public could well
afford to be liberal in this respect if they escaped
the imposts of the present system. At all events,
haalship and injustice are not prevented by the
existing patent laws, but rather the reverse. The
man, for example, who was mainly instrumental in
bringing into use the screw propeller, one of the
most important inventions of the age, was unable
to obtain any advantage from the law, while
another person who conceived the simple idea of
enabling one postage stamp to be easily separated
from another by punching a series of little holes
between them is placed in a position to obtain an
exorbitant recompense from the Government. The
system is lavish in its rewards, and is easily put in
force in cases of small inventions, which would
qnickly come to light without the aid of protection,
while it is seldom of much avail in the case of great
inventions, requiring long investigation and gra-
dual and laborious advance from step to step for
their development. I readily admit that the law
of patents for inventions is capable of amelioration.
A special tribunal of legal and scientific men to
decide all questions of patent right and to exercise
discrimination in the granting of patents would be
attended with much good, although not free fror,
objection. Compulsory licences and the abolition
of the right to patent foreign inventions would also
be improvements, but I regard the whole system as
unnecessary and impolitic, and see no other com
plete remedy for its evils than its entire abolition.
Before I conclude I must take exception to a pas-
sage which occurs in our president's inaugural
address in treating of tbis subject. He says, "it
is asserted by those who have done the least to
benefit their country by inventions that a mono-
poly is injurious." Now, to say nothing of my-
self, those who have taken the same view as I
do are not men to be referred to in such
terms. It is strange that this question can-
not be discussed even by one holding the digni-
fied position of President of the British Association
without verging on personalities. If the remark
were true, the argument would remain unaffected.
Whether it be true the public may judge. (Sir W.
Armstrong's remarks were frequently applauded.)
The other papers read were by Mr. Thomas Web-
ster, F.R.S., " On Property in Inventions, and its
Effect on Arts and Manufactures ;" by Mr. Macfie,
" On Patents considered Internationally ;" and by
Mr. W. Spence, " On Patent Tribunals."

The discussibn on the whole series of papers then
commenced.

Mr. FAIRBAIRN, the President of the Association,
in reference to a remark of Sir W. Armstrong, as-
sured that gentleman that " personalities" were a
commodity he never dealt in. (Laughter.) He had
not intended any condemnation of Sir W. Arm-
strong, and was exceedingly sorry if any remark of
his (Mr. Fairbairn's) had been offensive; but hr
maintained that the principles to which he had given
expression in the passage referred to were correct.
(Hear, hear.)

The discussion, which was rather animated, lasted
until late in the afternoon. It was shared in by
Mr. Fairbairn, Lord Wrottesley, Mr. Grove,' the
Mayor of Manchester (Mr. Curtis), Captain Blakely,
and the Right Hon. J. Napier, who briefl y expressed
concurrence in the report of the committee.
Lord STANLEY, in the course of some remarks on
the subject, said he did not think it would ever be
found that the public or the Legislature were wil-
ling to say that inventors should not be protected or
rewarded. He was quite sure the State could not
reward them, and thus we were thrown back on
some system of reward, of the nature of a patent.
But the practical reforms to which it seemed to him
—whether they could be effected or not—attention
Ought to be turned, were the question of compulsory
licenses, the question of forfeiting patents which
were lying idle and not worked out in practice

age.

age.

and the question of a preliminary inquiry, conducted
by competent persons, who would be able to pro-
nounce whether an invention really were novel or
not. (Applause.)

2HE FATAL RA ILWAV ACCIDENT A

KEN2.IBII TOIVN.

The following appeared in a portion of our impression of
yesterday evening :
At twelve o'clock the Coroner, Mr. Humphrey, resumed
the inquiry at the Vestry-hall, St. Pancras-road.
Mr. Metcalf, the barrister, appeared far the London and
North-Western and North London Railway Companies ;
Mr. Lewis, of Ely-place, appeared for the relatives of
Emma English; Mr. Charles Watkon for Elizabeth Allen.
Captain Yolland, tbe Government Inspector, was in
attendance.
The first witness called was,

Mr. George Greenwood, Allen-terrace, Fairfield-row,
Bow, who identified the bodies of the two boys who were
killed. The eldest was eleven and the youngest seven

years of age.
Mr. James Rees, 21, Walcof-place, identified the body
of Mary Sellis, as that of his sister.
Mrs. Elizabeth Turner identified the body of Mary
Clement. The deceased was her cousin and 44 years of

Mr. Henry Stacey, Bird-in-hand •yard, Bow, identified
the body of Eva Stacey. She was about eleven years of

Mr. Thomas Saunders, of Harold-terrace, Bow, engine-
driver, identified the body of Richard Saunders.
James Hills, Portland-street, Stepney, identified the
body of Richard Hills, as that of his brother. The de-
ceased was about 32, and was a telegraph clerk.
Mr. William Emmerson, of North-place, Queen-square.
The deceased, Elizabeth Allen. was brought to my surgery
on Monday evening, about half-past eight, She died in
consequence of a fractured neck.

Mr. J. D. Hill, house-surgeon to the Royal Free Hospi-
tal, said—The7deeeased Emma English was admitted to the
institution on Monday. She died an hour afterwards from
concussion of the brain.

Mr. Willis, house-surgeon of Middlesex Hospital, said—
The deceased man, Standing, was brought to the hospital
on Monday quite dead. The organs of the abdomen
were thrust up into the chest, which caused death. The
two Greenwoods were admitted at the same time. Both
died in consequence of ruptured liver.
Mr. S. Ringer, house-surgeon, University Hospital, said
—Mary Sellis died in consequence of concussion of the brain
Rhoda Oliver died from rupture of the liver; Clara Maria
Clements died from fractured ribs and injuries to the lungs ;
Eva Stacey died from fractured skull and fractured leg;
Richard Saunders died from fractured skull ; and Edward
Hills from rupture of the abdomen and other wounds.
William Hall identified the deceased, George H. Bolton.
He was a fireman on Hampstead Junction Railway.
Mr. Ringer (the house surgeon) recalled—He said the
deceased died yesterday in University Hospital from
scalds.

Mr. W. Yeomans identified the body of john Yeomans
as that of his brother.

Mr. Ringer said he died in consequence of a fractured
neck.

The C•Toner said he had been informed that there was a
witness who it was very desirable should be examined, and
as he was in a most precarious condition, he thought it
would be desirable for the jury to proceed to the University
Hospital and take the injured man's depositions. The jury
could then also view the nody of Boulter.

This course was agreed to, and while the conveyance for
the jury was being got ready, the Coroner said, in order not
to lose time, they would proceed with the examination of
witnesses.

John Perkins, the driver of the ballast train, said—l
am an engine-driver in the employ of the London and
North-Western Railway. I was employed on the line on
Monday evening, the 2d instant, removing ballast from
Bushy to Kentish-town. I recollect arriving at about
5 30 p.m. at Kentish-town. I discharged the ballast, and
then went to the Camden-road for fuel and water. I
returned to the siding. I had a guard with me
at that time. It was about five minutes past seven.

Juror—How do you come to know the time so exactly
then ?

Witness—l looked at the clock in the Camden yard.

Examination by Coroner continued—When I went on
the siding the engine was attached to the trucks. I then
opened the whistle for a signal to the policeman at the
Kentish Town station. I got an answer to my signal from
him. His name is Rayner. He waved his hand,
meaning by that that I wa' to leave the yard. 1
came out after seeing both signals, the one at the station
and the auxiliary one on the down line for Camden. town.
Both signals "blocked" the line. I then came out fremo the
siding. The guard detached the engine from the truck.
and proceeded on the down line and recrossed again on the
up line. My flagman was at the points. His name is
Stuart. I mean that he held the points for me to get on the
line. There was no pointsman there but my signalman. He
held the handle of both points. Having recrossed to the up
line the engine was again attached to the trucks by Stuart.
The effect of that was that the engine was in front of the
trucks; she was in the first instance at the rear. After the
flagman had turnoi me on the down line again, I
was then driving the train across the line. The train
consisted of 18 trucks and break van. The signals when I
crossed the line was standing at " Danger." After I had
proceeded for a short time, I saw the excursion train. Be.
fore I got the engine clear of the np-line I saw it coming.
I took it to be an excursion train by its following so closely
after the regular train. I had waited for the regular train
to go by. I knew there was one due about that time.
While I waited for the regular train I was on the down-
line. As soon as the regular train passed I opened the
whistle. I had not the slightest idea that an' excursion
train was due about the same time as the regular. We are
furnished with infotmation relative to the time and run-
ning of the regular trains, but not of the excursion trains.
When I saw the train coming I kept onward to get my
train clear if I could. I was not enabled to get it clear,
and a collision took place. When I first saw the train
coming she was near the Kentish Town station. She
seemed to me to be going at quite 40 miles an hour.
She was going fully at that speed. She had not passed
the station when I first saw her. She did not
attempt to pull up at Kentish-town station. It was not
usual for excursion trains to stop at Kentish. town without
they are tuned to do so. The result of the collision was to
knock a great many of my trucks to pieces, and sent them
over the right hand side of the embankment. The
second truck from the engine was the first struck.
The engine and first truck escaped uninjured. The fire-
man was riding with me. The guard was at the back.
The flagman was holding the points at the time. I had
been conveying ballast for eight or nine days. Twenty
is the regular number of trucks for a train. When I saw
the traiu coming I opened my whistle. Not the least
notice was taken of it. I foresaw there would be a colli •
sion, and to.d my mate there would be an accident. I was
not in any way injured by the collision. All I saw of the
collision was that the excursion train was coining at a
great speed. I did not see the engine run off the
line or turn over, because the trucks were across
the line. I saw the effects of the collision about
ten minutes after it occurred. I saw some of the
excursion train carriages on the left hand side of the em-
bankment. At this time my engine and one truck was on
the dewn-line, and the remainder on the six foot and the
up-line. I did not, signal after the accident had occurred.
I have been seven years in the employ of the company.
By Mr. Park, counsel for the Kentish Town signalman
—I could not have got back from Camden Town earlier
than I did, after taking in fuel and water. There was a
signal between Hampstead and Kentish-town stations. If
the signal stood at. " danger," the excursion train ought not
to have been coming at so great a speed.

By Mr. Wyatt—l had to travel about a mile and a half
to get• the fuel and water. There had been no unnecessary
delay in delivering the ballast. There were other engines
beside my own getting water and Nal. I can't say how
many—not whether there were two or half a dozen. I did
not feel alarmed at the approach of the train. I did the
best I could to prevent it.

By Mr. Wilson, a juror—We have no particular time for
leaving Bushey. We leave as soon as we get loaded. We
have papers given to us relative to the ordinary trains, and
our orders were to keep clear of them. We have no informa-
tion regarding other trains, and were never told when they
were coming. If the danger signal was on at
Kentish-town I should not pass it, as the line would be
blocked. That signal was not up when I passed, but
as soon as I had passed I knew the danger signal
was placed up. I can't say how long it remained
up. I know it was up when I was shunting. When I saw
the train coming I did not look at the signals. I did all I
could to prevent a collision. The main signal was between
me and the coming excursion train. I did not look at it.
Mr. Metcalf—He has said be was using his utmost exer-
tions to prevent a collision.

By the Coroner—The engine drawing the excursion
train was what is called a " tank engine," and was travel-
ling in front.

By Mr. Lewis—l produce the book of regulations. [Book
handed in.] I bring up my own flagman and guard. I
saw the flag in the man's hand, while with the other he
turned my train across the line. I did not see the train
coming when the man first had hold of the points. This
was about two minutes before the collision. It was less
than a minute from the time I saw the engine that the
accident occurred.

Mr. Metcalf—The train he has said was coming forty
miles an hour.
Witness continued—The passenger trains are signalled
in the ordinary way when a ballast train is on the line. I
always see that the s4ghals are at danger before I com-
mence. shunting. The guards always book the time in shunt,-
mg. The book is sent to Mr. Lamb. Everything done
during the day is entered in a book. I have giYen a state•

meat of the accident to Mr. Bruyers, of the North Western
Railway, at Euston station. I don't know that Mr.

Bruyers is a policeman.
Mr. Lewis—Was your statement written down ?
Witness—l shall answer that next time.
Mr. Lewis—You must answer it this time.
Witness—(after some hesitation)—Yes, it was written
down.

Mr. Lewis—Why did you hesitate to answer my question
at first?

Witness—Because I thought you were asking me about
things you have nothing to do with.
Mr. Lewis—Oh, very well. Were you not asked ques-
tions when your statement was taken ?

Witness—Yes.
Mr. Lewis—Were you not asked about the signals 2
Witness—Yes.
Mr. Lewis—Although you had previously said they were
at " Danger ?"
Witness—Yes. Every time I crossed the line I looked
at the signals, excepting last time, when I saw the train
coming. I did not look at anything but it. I have had
the book I produce since the 4th August, 1860. The
old rules had been entered in it. I have only been
an engine driver about 13 months. I was previously occu-
pied as a fireman. I had never driven an engine before I
did so on this line. Before I acted as fireman I was a
cleaner.

By Mr. Metcalf—Every station-master has the power
to shunt a train when a train is expected. We never
come out of the siding without the si,,nal is given to us
from Kentish-town. That signal was given before I left it
on Monday evening, and I a'so saw that the danger signal
was up. There was no appearance of anything being done
to stop the approaching train except shutting off the steam.
If the danger signal was up at Kentish-town, the driver of
the excursion train ought not to have passed it under any
circumstances. If the auxiliary signal was up between
Hampstead and the Kentish-town station he ought to have
stopped.
By the Coroner—The train which preceded the excur-
sion train had no accident light behind it. It ought to
have had one to show that an excursion train, not a regu-
lar train, was following.

By Colonel Yolland—The lamps were lit in the station
signal and on the down line auxiliary. I could not see the
up auxiliary from where I was standing. Before the
accident I was driving the tender first, and I had a red light
showing to Kentish-town, and a white one towards Cam-
den-town. The ordinary train was a little behind time,
and it was about five or six minutes after that the excursion
train passed.
This having concluded the examination of this witness
the coroner and jury then proceeded to the Westminster
Hospital to take the evidence referred to at the opening of
the proceedings.
When the coroner and the jury arrived at the Hospital
it was found that the poor man was 139 ill that his evidence
could not be taken in public. He was, therefore, screened
round, and the coroner, in the presence of Col Yolland,
took his evidence, the jury and the other persons who
accompanied them remaining outside.
On their return to the Inquest Room at twenty minutes
to six,

The Coroner read the evidence of Charles Cox, a pas-
senger in the excursion train, and George Woodley, the
signal man.

The evidence of Cox was to the following effect. He
stated he was a signal-man on the North London Railway.
At, the time of the accident he was riding in the break van
in front of the train, and next the engine. He did not
notice the auxiliary signal, but at the Kentish• town station
the signal stood " All right." The danger signal he was
quite sure was not on. He was looking out to see all was right,
and looked out nearly all the way. The guard had men-
tioned just before, " We're off to Camden without ~team."
He (witness) saw the danger from the trucks being on the
line. He could not say at what rate they were going, as
he was not in the habit of riding. The white light at the
Kentish station was turned on He was sure it stated all
was right
George Woodley's evidence was to the following effect.
He said ho was on the break van with Cox, and saw at the
Kentish-town station the signal denoting " all right." He
did not notice any light on the ballast train. He saw the
trucks 60 or 60 yards before the collision. The excur-
sion train might have been going a little sharp at the time,
but he could not tell at what rate.

George Webster, guard of the ballast train, said—l ac-
companied the train to take in fuel. It was near seven
o'clock. The engine was attached to the trucks
when it started from the siding. The driver sounded
his whistle three times, and the signalman at the
station put up his hand to mean " All right, come out." I
mean ny the danger signals those used both day and night.
The engine brought the trucks out. The train came to a
standstill, and the engine was detached and put in front of
the trucks. I was holding the points for the ballast train
to turn it on the down line. The signal was still up. I did not
notice them after. I stood still when I saw a collision must
take place, and I saw the up•train run into the trucks. It
struck the second one. I don't know how the signal stood
at the Kentish-town station when the train passed through.
I never noticed the signal before the ballast train came out
of the siding. I had a lamp in my hand, not a flag.
When I saw the up• train coming I showed my red light.
I heard the engine whistle of the ballast train. The ordi-
nary train was about five minutes late. I should
think about 12 minutes elapsed before the excursion came
up. I don't know anything about the time the excursion
train was due. There were no lights at the back of the
regular train or "excursion boards." All was
done by both parties, as far as my judgment will allow me
to say, to prevent a collision. I did not notice how the
signals stood after the accident at the Kentish-town Sta-
tion.

By Mr. Wilson—The guard has charge of the ballast
trains. We have IRO list of arrivals or the excursion trains.
I first saw the excursion train at the Kentish-town Station.
I did not look at the signals at that moment. The driver
of the excursion train I should think could have seen the
red light I showed him. _ _ _

By Mr. Lewis—l was employed on the line a platelayer
before I was engaged as a guard. I did not know that six
excursion trains were coming up. I did not know there
was one. I don't know that any provision was
made for those excursion trains. Our orders
were to work between the ordinary trains. I
am positive the red light at the Kentish-town
station was up before I left the siding. There is no doubt
about that. The auxiliary down signal was also up. These
were the only two signals I could see. I don't call 7in the
evening dusk. I should say dusk is about half-past 7.
The red signal is generally put up in the month of Septem-
ber before seven. It was my duty to see that the red light
was up to protect the down line.
Charles Cook examined—l am a fireman in the employ
of the London and North-Western Company, and acted as
such to the ballast-train on Monday last. After going to
Camden to take in water and fuel, we came back along the
down-road, and crossed to the siding. Before moving the
driver blew his whibtle, and the policeman at the Kentish-
town station gave the all-right signal with his hand, and
put up the danger signals to block the line, both the day fn.d
night signals, the red arm and signal. They were also put
on at the down auxiliary. I could not see the up auxiliary
signal beyond the station. The signals put up were to pro-
tect both the up and the down line. The signals I know
were kept up until such time as our engine was attached to
the front of our trucks; but if they were up after that time
I cannot say. I did not see any one remove the platform
signals at the station before the collision. I first saw the
train at the station. As soon as we saw it we could see it was
coming at the rate of 40 miles an hour. I waved our side
lamp red, and the driver blew his whistle from the moment
we saw the excursion till the collision. As near as I could
say, the regular train had gone up some seven or eight
minutes. I believe that train to be he 635 from Kew. I
think she was about her time. I did not notice the tail
lights of that train, but I noticed there was no " special"
board on it.
By Mr. Wilson—l can judge of the speed of a train com-
irg towards me as well as I could it I was by the side and
saw it pass me. It is my firm belief that the excursion
was coming at the rate of 40 miles an hour. I noticed the
signals up at the Kentish-town station at the time I saw the
train coming into the station. Ido not know whether the
driver of the excursion train could have seen the danger
signals up at the Kentish-town station on the other side
coming round the sharp curve from Hampstead.
By Mr. Lewis-1 believe I and the engine-driver of the
ballast train saw the excursion together, and we put on all
the steam we could to get out of the way. I saw both arms
of the semaphore up at the station. If any one has sworn
that there was but one arm up, it is, I think, a mistake.
The driver, myself, and the guard went up to Euston to
make a statement. We gave it to Ur. Bruyeres and others,
and they wrote down something, but I do not know what
they were writing. The driver went into the room first,
and me and the guard went into the room together. I only
knew they had been writing down my statement when it
was read over. The guard did not hear my statement nor
I the guard's statement. I signed that statement. I heard
the statement of the driver, the guard, and
.
over. Ido not remember any questions be;_ng asked when
we were all there together. my
own read
George Wightman—l am a police-constable in tho em-
ploy of the London and North .Western Railway, at the
Hampstead station. The 6.35 Kew train passed that sta-
tion up on Monday evening at two minutes past seven,
which was seven minutes behind time. There was only
one red lamp behind the last carriage of that train. The
regular train had passed ten minutes when the excursion
train came up and passel through at the rate of about 30
miles an hour. For about 100 yards on the Loudon side
the line is on a level, but as it approaches Kentish-town
it is on an incline of lin 101. I was not inf„riLed of the
exact time of the specials except that they were to run at
9.30 a.m., or how many, or how long, or what time they
would return ; there was no specified time. There were six
special excursions that day, four in the morning and two
froammof these six excursion half-past one teixllcutwrsoinn
ttrheei
ne. afternoon.
They
I nonegot
of a
themtelgr
stoppedlat my station. In theevening I received a telegram
from Finchley-road at 7.10, that an excursion train had
passed there. The needle worked " train on line" and I
replied blocked." I then telegraphed to Kentisn-
town in about a minute the words " train on line" I re-
peated at Kentish-town to one in reply," train ou lino."