The Sun.
London, England, 1850-12-06 00:00:00

tion, completing the proposal thrown out in the two
recedinv, it ~uggested " thlt an annual report of
specifications regis4rvd, with proper indexes and
calendars, he laid before Parii,:inent"—by hat means
securing a legislative autentication of the other mis-
cellaneous and unofficial documents.

A yet more admirable field fur improvement in re-
"erence to the laws affecting the interests cf scientia
►nen, is comprised in the fourth resolution, " that it
should be permitted to commence actions for the in-
fringement of the rights of inventors in the County
Courts." By alloeing inventors this inexpensive
method of obtaining for themselves reparation, and
fur their inventions protection, the Parliament would
be mitigating a very large amount of unalleviated
suffering, and preventing thereby a monstrous system
of piracy from passing altogether with impunity.
The little annoyance that could possibly result from
such reforms as have been traced out by the op
ponents of the existing laws relating to patents, is
referred to explicitly in the fifth and concluding re-
solution, " that inasmuch as, contrary to expectation,
very little litigation has been created by the rights
conferred by the Designs Acts, 1842 and 1843 the
Committee is of opinion that a fair trial should be
given to the working of the proposed system of re-
gistration of inventions, before any special tribunal,
to determine inventive rights, be substituted fur tt.e
existing tribunals." Nothing could be more excel-
lently accordant with the whole of the ideas expressed
in the columns of this journal, in one of its recent
impressions, than those incorporated in the resolutions
here particularised—resolutions which prove that the
aspirants for improvement in the patent laws are prac-
tical as well as sanguine, resolved to point out the
machinery as well as its application.
Whether or not the Exposition of 1851 turn out
successfully in advancing the interests of science in
other departments, we are confident that it will tend
immediately to secure-advantages until now denied to
those who have genius in mechanical invention. By
securing them from piracies, the Legislature will best
enable them to employ their peculiar faculties for the
public benefit, the pecuniary good resulting to them-
selves from their first efforts proving the happiest
stimulant for their ingenuity, and the most direct en-
couragement to them under disappointment. We
mean, of course, the disappointment arising out of
the errors of the theorist when tested by experiment ;
and such disappointments as these the inventor is
peculiarly liable to, suffering in this manner most
grievously from that " hope deferred which maketh ,
the heart sick." Foremost among the advantages
capable of being conferred on the class of scientific
inventors is that of placing within their reach, at a
moderate charge, the securities afforded by the bene •
licence of the law. In this particular we allude not
so much to the carrying out of the proposal of the
Committee appointed by the Society of Arts in regard
to the County Courts, as already specified, as we do to
the diminution of the great cost at present weighing
down the purchasers of all letters patent. Upon
this part of the subject we have already been
sufficiently explicit, having mentioned in detail the
intolerable fees required from the unfortunate inven-
tor in the procurement of his specification ; neverthe-
less, we could not but revert to them yet again, how-
ever incidentally, actuated in so doing by our solicitude
to witness the diminution of the burdens hitherto im-
posed upon men who, from the peculiar school in
which they are educated, are usually either im-
poverished or improvident. With this solicitude ever
before us, we shall persist at all available opportuni-
ties in enforcing the necessity for the proposed im-
provement.

A case was trial yesterday before Lord CAMPBELL,
which, although of no public interest per se, becomes
of considerable importance when taken in connexion
with the recent alterations in the law, and the more
than probable extension of the principle of allowing
parties to be witnesses in suits in which they are
themselves personally concerned, at no very distant
period. Considerable controversy bas already taken
place, and there is a great diversity of opi-
nion with respect to this point. Some contend
that it will lead to very serious results, holding oat a
direct inducement to wilful and corrupt perjury.;
while othera declare that it will provide an additional
and most valuable mode of arriving at the truth, and
preventing decisions from being *made contrary to
equity and good conscience, merely through the
failure or scarcity of legal evidence. They also rely
with much apparent reason on the fact, that such
testimony is admissible in courts of Equity
and indeed in almost every civil proceeding,
except in trials at nisi prius in the superior
courts, and that on the whole the balance of advan-
tages is greatly in favour of the principle, which con-
stitutes an important element in the attainment of
full and substantial justice, and is calculated to pre-
vent litigation from being carried to any undue de-
gree, when the parties are aware that they may have
to pledge their own solemn oaths in favour of the
accuracy of their statements, and the merits of
their claims or defence, as the case may be.
There is much to be said on both sides of
the question, and we believe that, as in
most other cases, the wisest and most politic course
will be found to lie between the extremes on either
side—that the evidence should be rendered admissible,
but subject to certain conditions and modifications,
to prevent its being resorted to on light and trivial
grounds.

Tne facts in the case to which we have alluded lie
within a very narrow compass. It appeared that a
widow named ANNE LAVEY was plaintiff in the
Whitechapel County Court, and a man named HAN-
NAH, defendant. The plaintiff was examined as a
witness, in pursuance of the 83d section of the
County Courts Act (9 and 10 Victoria, c. 95).
After giving her evidence in chief she was suhj cted
to a severe cross-examination by the defendant's
attorney as to her previous character, and among
other questions was asked " whether she had ever
appeared at the bar of the Central Criminal
Court on a charge of forgery, or any other
charge, or had been ever locked up in e
Thames Police, or, any other station ?" which
questions she answered in the negative. An
indictment for perjury was subsequently preferred
against her, and on the trial yesterday it was proved
that she had been committed from the Thames Police-
court on the charge of having forged a seaman's ad-
vance ticket, and that she had been tried at the Central
Criminal Court on that charge, although she had been
acquitted, as it was alleged, on a technical flaw in the
indictment. After a patient investigation, the juty
returned a verdict of guilty, accompanied, however,
with a recommendation to mercy, and the defendant
was thereupon sentenced to imprisonment in the
House of Correction, in Westminster, for twelve
calendar months.

Although we do not, in any degree, dissent from
,he verdict or sentence in the foregoing case—the
woman richly deserving the punishment to shich she
has been subjected--there are points in the case
worthy of notice ; and first, it will be seen that the
perjury assigned was not in any degree connected
with the real question at issue, whether Mrs.
LAVEY had a right to recover her demand from
the prosecutor? If there was no evidence to
sustain that demand beyond her own testimony, then
unquestionably her previous character became a
matter of considerable importance in enabling the
judge to decide upon the weight that should be at-
tached to her statements. But every uncorroborated
assertion of a party to a suit will ever be regarded
with considerable suspicion, and if unfounded, the
oath of the other party may be received as an equiva-
lent or set-off, so that much mischief could not under
any circumstances be occasioned by refusing to permit
any cross• ex,mination of plaintiff or defendant either
as to their general character, or as to particular trans-
actions unconnected with the subject-matter under
investigation. If the practice be at all sanction( dor
tolerated it may give rise to serious abuses. A vin-
dictive or malevolent person, although having no real
case, either as plaintiff or defendant, may go into
court merely for the purpose of being enabled to
bring .hit opponent to shame and disgrace, to convict
him out of his own mouth, and blast his character
among t,is neighbours and friends fur acts long since
forgotten ~ which had been sincerely and truly re-
pented. A fearful instrument of moral torture would
thus be p laced in the hands of ill-disposed persons,
who woe id be thereby enabled to persecute their
enemies, or to extort a recognition of unjust demands.
ry prin.
lege bei tug granted 9 W e think not! And we
Is there, then, necessity for this extraordinary .
•