The Sun.
London, England, 1842-08-03 00:00:00

Mr. -WALT/TAMS moved as an atn.;,,idult•nt, that the

Bid be re.coinnUttal;
Mr. J. HEATHCCiAT t,hought the Bill deserved
greater consideration than it had r!Teived, and he should
therefore Stltp o.rt the motion of the 11,_,n. Member for
Coventry. He its-tight if the Bill were re-committed it
would save time. His fitll objection to the Bill VisS' that
it introduced a principle that 4.")'lst never .acknowledgcti
by tlic: of the country, and to *hid! the greatest
authorities had &Tressed themselves decidedly hostile.
He alluded to the prifichtlt. of secrecy. Ile cotild not
sec how trade could be carried on ander this Bill with
anything lihe fairness or advantage, The Bill would
tittlifd great amitsettrnt to the lawyers, but very sorry
amusement to those who We're Plected to its operations.
He would like td know from the -light Hon. Gentleman
what the shopkeepers *ere to do with their goods if
this Bill passed into a law ? flow was a shopkeeper in
some remote parts of Scotland, Ireland, or Englwid
to know whether or not a particular design was
pirated or not ? Every manufacturer by ihe ope-
ration of this Bill would be liable to have his
properly confiscated. He also complained that there
was no competent tribunal established by the Bill to try
the patent tight, The difficulty seemed to him to con-
sist in finding out what Wes to be designed.—(Hear,
hear.) Then it was referred to the Magistrates to deter-
mine what was the nature of the design. He thought
that the Magistrates know very little about the matter,
and he would have less objection to the Hill if the deter-
mination of the subject was left to the Magistrates wives
ratter than to the Magistrates themselves.—(Hear,
hear, and laughter.) There was nothing defined in the
Bill, as to what constituted a new design. Almost all
existing designs were mere compounds. The Bill could
do no good—it might do much evil. It would be used
by common informers to harrass tradesmen, in
the hopes of profit, and by the competitors of
tradesmen as a means of annoyance. (Hear.)
He cautioned the House against this reckless
mania for legislation on subjects of which the House
could know nothing.-(Cheers.) It appeared to him
that if an individual went to France, secured copito of
their designs for the spring market, brought those de-
signs to tngland, and registered them under this Act,
that that individual Would, by means of this Bill, secure
to himself a monopoly of the importation of French
maw
nufactures. When patterns, were manufactured in
France for the next spring trade, a person might go
over, and by acting cautiously, copy the pattern, bring
it over here and enter it under this Bill and claim a
copyright in it. His advice was, not to pass this Bill
`his year, but to leave its consideration to another

session.
Mr. E. ELLICE hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman
would pause before he passed this Bill. He knew how
little time the Right Honourable Gentleman had to give
to such subjects, but he thought if he had applied
himself to the consideration of this Bill, and the vexa-
tious provision referred to by the Hon. Gentleman who
had just sat down, he would have hesitated before he
had undertaken to ride the hobby of the late Hon.
Member for Belfast, whose spirit for legislation had car-
ried him so far as to believe that the House could legis-
late effectively on this subject. He (Mr. Ellice) would
not go over the various details of the Bill, but he was
led to understand that the lace trade would not be af•
fected by it ; but now, after the desultory proceedings
which had taken place, it was discovered that that trade
was involved with many others affected by the Bill. He
thought that trade ought to have had fair notice. They
ought to have been allowed to lay their case before the
House. It was impossible for any two Magistrates to
decide what was a new or what was an old pattern. This
Bill provided that the case should be decided by a Ma-
gistrate, who was unable to tell whether the pattern
was new or old. He (Mr. Ellice) would not extend the
discussion, but he prayed the Right Hon. Gentleman,.
who knew how important it was that trada should be
unfettered, not to expose trade to the evils which this
Bill was calculated to :inflict upon it. With respect to
the place he (Mr. Ellice) represented, he did not think
the Bill would do either good or harm.
Dr. BOWRING had no objection to the objects of this
Bill, but he thought the machinery of the Bill was alto-
gether objectionable. He thought the protection of copy-
right was,. on the whole, a desirable object ; but that it
was not absolutely necessary to prosperity, was proved
by the fact that in Switzerland there had been great pro-
gress in invention, notwithstanding the absence of pro-
tection. The mode of obtaining redress by this
Bill was highly objectionable. Unless they could
provide some prompt ! means of preventing piracy
it would be better to have no protection at all.—(Hear,
hear.) He hoped that the Right Hon. Gentleman would
reconsider the subject, with a view to bringing forward a
more mature measure in another session.
Mr. HUME objected to the Bill, on the ground that it
would add to the restrictions on commerce which already
existed, and which had been proved to have produced
the greatest mischiefs. If the Right Hon. Baronet
wished the manufactures and industry of the country to
extend, he must free them from their shackles, and
must not throw impediments in their way. He there-
fore hoped the Bill would be allowed to stand over till
next session, and that a new Committee would be ap-
pointed by the Government. He would support the
amendment of the Hon. Member.
Mr HENLEY hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman
would allow the Bill to be re-committed, and would allow
further time for consideration. He objected to the
power of the Magistrates to give distress warrants,
and to the difference made between England and Scot-
land and Ireland.
Mr. M. PHILIPS coincided with what had fallen
from the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. Ile
felt much obliged to the Gentleman who had last spoken
for the statements they had made with regard to the
legal part of the question. He had, on Saturday week,
recommended the Government to withdraw this Bill for
the present session. He bad on that occasion alluded to
the fact that 2,0001. had been subscribed towards the
Belfast election by certain gentlemen, among whom was
Mr. Henry, a calico printer, and he had certainly
thought that many of the calico printers had also sub-
scribed to it. lie had since then received a letter from
Mr. Henry, which, in justice to that gentleman, he would
read to the House—(The lion. Member here read the let-
ter)—in which Mr. Henry distinctly repudiated the impu-
tation that the money in question had been subscribed
on account of Mr. Emerson Tennent having supported
this Bill.) Mr. Henry stated that he was the only calico
printer who had subscribed to that fund which had been
raised by gentlemen, friends of Mr. Emerson Tennent,
and admirers of his political character. In justice to Mr.
Henry he read that letter, and at the same time he
begged to state that in referring to Mr. Emmerson Ten-
neat on that occasion he had not had the remotest inten-
tion of throwing any imputation on the character of Mr.
Emerson Tennent. The question put by the Honourable
Member for Tiverton was well worthy of consideration.
What was an original design ? He held in his hand one
of the ugliest patterns he had ever seen.—(A laugh.)
(The Hon. Member here exhibited the pattern in ques-
tion to the House, which certainly answered the cha-
racter given of it.) Now that horribly ugly pattern was
claimed as an original design. The history of it was
this. Two manufacturers in England had gone over to
Paris, and each had purchased, at the same place and at
the same time, the pattern in question. One of these
parties had arrived in England a few days before the
other, and had published the pattern first, although the
other party had several pieces of goods of that pattern
in his warehouse. Now, according to this Bill, the one
party would have a copyright in this pattern, and might
prevent his neighbour from selling his goods for three
months. Now he thought they ought to pause before enact-
ing slaw which would give the wealthy such an advantage.
There could not, he thought, be much progress made in
any measure of this nature, until an international copy-
right should be established.—(Hear, hear.) The present
Bill would lead only to useless litigation, and he again
urged upon the Right lion. Gentleman the propriety of
withdrawing it for the present session. He asked the
House to consider the progress which had been made in
manufactures by foreign countries during the last ten
years, and not to pass a measure which would give to
them increased advantages in competition.
Mr. GLADSTONE said he wished the House to con-
sider whether the objection to the Bill, on the ground of
time, was, upon the whole, a fair one. The Bill had not
been introduced by the Government, but by the Hon.
Member for Belfast, on his own responsibility ; and upon
his losing his seat, the Bill, was taken up by the Govern-
ment. The Hon. Member for Coventry entreated the
House not to pass a Bill of that description, until the
representations of the trade had been heard. Now he
believed there never was any measure before Parlia-
ment with respect to which such an objection was less
appropriate. He could state with confidence that it
was only a minority of the trade who objected to the
Bill, and he believed the great majority would be greatly
disappointed if it did not pass during the present session.
Let the House consider by what authorities the Bill had
been supported. In the first place it had, in 1836, re-
ceived the sanction of the Committee who sat to consider
the state of arts and designs in this country. That
Committee recommended the main provisions of the Bill.
In the year 1840 a Bill was introduced on that subject,
which was referred to a Committee up-stairs, and the
main provisions of which corresponded with those of the
Bill before the House. That Bill passed through the
Committee up-stairs. With respect to the machinery of
the Bill, he admitted that it wls inferior to that which
existed in France, but he believed it was granted as a
concession to the opponents of the Bill, who objected to
the expense of proving the patent. The Bill was again
introduced in 1841, and referred to a Select Committee,
of which the Hon. Member for Manchester was a mem-
ber. The Bill would probably have passed into a law
during the last session if its progress had not
been cut short by the political crisis which intervened.
Why were not the objections to the details taken in
Committee ? The Hon. Member for Coventry, did he
not attend on Saturday and propose alterations, but the
Hon. Member for Tiverton did not attend and say a
word about the lace trade ; though this Bill had been
before the House six weeks, not one word had yet been
heard of a protest; the Bill had been allowed to be read
a first and second time, it had passed through Com-
mittee, and now when the time came for the receipt of
the Report, they heard for the first time of any protest
relative to the lace trade. He did not intend to enter
into the broad question of what would be the effect of
this Bill upon the trade and commerce of this country ;
but he would say that it was the opinion of the sup
porters of this Bill, that it would tend to increase the
wealth of this country, and give prosperity and energy
to its manufactures. This Bill had the sanction
of repeated Committees, of repeated Governments ; it
had the sanction of the majority of the people out of
doors and of Hon. Members in that House; and in spite
of all these sanctions they were asked to postpone this
Bill for another session, for the purpose of another in-
quiry, for the purpose of re-eliciting what
bad already been ascertained. He (Mr. Gladstone)
thought it would be a cruel and unjust course
to pursue towards those whose e7tpeetations had been
raised on this sullied, to consent to the withdrawal of
this Bill. He should therefore oppose the motion for the
postponement.
WILLIAXB said, it was ilia igteutiowta offer

arnetidrneeis to thislt. As he could not sped
. lie evi,-4,51 to ask the Soeuiter whether he could
propose those amendments when the Bill was being read
a third time ?
'The SPEAKER said the proper course for the Hon,
Member to pursue would be to agree to the amendments .
of the Committee; after which, the Hon. Member weuid
be able to propose any anit
Lord PALMERSTON said it ilid not appear with re- 11.41
gard to the machinery of this Bill that they had been
successful in removing all objections. The law, as it -
tood, recognised to a certain degree protection to the .;.41
inventor. If that law went as far as the Right lion. of
Gentleman said it did, he had not quite explained the
necessity for those additions which had been made. He
uederstood the particular object of the Bill was to app) 101
. the law to certain branches of trade which it (lid not at .7
present embrace. He (Lord Palmerston) would only state
his opinion upon one branch. and that was the lace
trade. He thought his Hon. Friend and Colleague had ;),51
made out a strong case for restoring the Bill to the smile '4,10
state as it ti,tuod upon the second reading ; and he hoped cjip
that if the night Hon. Gentleman,who founded his argu-
merits in favour of this On of the Bili upon the wishes ;01
which bad been expressed fir the protection which he s.;iot
said this Bill would afford, should find, as his Hon.
Friend had stated on behalf of the lace trade, that it
would only be an embarrassment instead of a benefit,
he would not force it upon them.—(Hear.)
Sir T. FREMANTLE stated that there were two
kinds of lace—pillow-lace, and that manufactured. by
machinery. Hon. Gentlemen must not arrogate to
themselves all the arguments, for they were only ettli-
ported by one class of lace manufaCturers.
Sir R. PEEL thought the special question of trying
whether protection should be given to lace should be
discussed on the third reading. The general question
was one of more importance. (The Right Hon. Baronet
here snoke so indistinctly as to render his remarks inau-
dible.). The manner of distinguishing one pattern from
another was very difficult to be understood. Here (the
Right Hon. Gentleman taking up a pattern)—here's one
—here's a great big black B, then there are two little
r's, then the word " cambric" is printed ; then " Rd.
Cobden- and Co."—(Laughter.) I think that's a very
ugly pattern.—(Renewed laughter.) Then it goes on,
" London British Manufactory. Published as the Act
directs. March Ist 1841." That was the:may of distin-
guishing one pattern, and a very pretty way it was.
It was rather hard for a man who had paid 70/. or 801.
for a pattern, to be deprived of the benefit of it by a man .
who did not pay a single shilling. A person, wider the
present system, waited to see if the pattern succeeded,'
and then inundated the market. Just as a person began.
to reap the profit of his invention, another person pro-, ' ,s
fited by his capital and liberality towards art and designs.issa
filling the market with an interior article. Now thOt ;11
operated as a great discouragement to improvement'
There were only three months' protection given at pre-' ss
sent. Why did France beat them ? We were superior
to them in manufacturing, hut they were superior
taste. He (Sir R. Peel) had been told by some of this
constituents of the Hon. Member for Coventry, that there.
was a complete suspension of business until they got the
French patterns. That was a convincing proof that there
was want of taste. The Coventry patterns would not sell
in the London market, but the moment the French patterns
came they sold. There was no reason whatever why so
„to
Englishman should not design as well as a Frenchman.
The reason was the law was defective. The object of
that Bill was, to give the same degree of prOtection that ,f)
existed in France. The Bill had been under the -4
consideration of that House for three years,
and had been received with favour by the
House. Many of its advocates had left town, and
therefore the weight of of authority was now against it-
He had no interest in the question, and far from im-
peding our manufactures, he thought it would operate
in increasing that part in which we were deficient--that
of design.—(Hear, hear.) Under these circumstances, s,
and considering that the Bill had been under considers-
tion for three years, he thought the House ought to -
pass the Bill. Many decided advocates of free trade
were strenuous supporters of this Bill. There was the
Hon. Member for Kendal and the Hon. Member for In-
verness, and he hoped another session would. not pass
without affirming the principle of that Bill, and causing
an improvement to—he hoped he might use the term
late—stagnation of trade.
Mr. 3. HEATHCOAT explained. He had been pre'
vented by indisposition from attending when the Bill ss
passed through Committee.
Mr. E. ELLICE explained. He did not object to the
principle of the Bill, but to the machinery.
After a few words from Dr. BOWRING, which were
not heard in the gallery,
Mr. BROTHLRTON said this was a very difficult ,
question, as- there was so much difference or opmion hen,nthe subject, at the same time, if he had not appre
sions that the passing of the Bill would be injurious to
trade, he would not offer his opposition to the measur.e•
But he considered that they were running a great. risk
10,v
introducing a measure of that kind. The existing
was passed in 1787, and the trade bad improv
flourished since that time. In 1830, they nianufaqhree;
360,000,000 yards, hal fof which was for exportation.
now exported more than 360,000,000 yards. Now'sd.ro
ing to this, he was very unwilling to adopt anY Eies
calculated to injure that trade. The Right Iton
w would
said there was superior taste in France. ICoile (sies
granting copyright give an improved taste ?
liti-
B.) thought that this Bill would produce nothing butt
lire
gation, as there was such difficulty in ascertaining 'wha • •
that
copyright, and what was design.- He conceived
there would be so many cases of litigation that the good -
expected from this Bill would be counterbalanced. He
thought the effect of the Bill would be to raise prices- t
Under this Bill it would he difficult to know to whom
the pattern belonged, as this was a secret register. The ,
patterns, contrary to what the Right Hon. liaronet said.
did not average more than 7s. in price, instead of 14 ~,
or 151. This Bill would have the effect of keeping do.wn
i
those rising geniuses which were constantly springing
up. The Bill would hold out encouragement to
reigners, as it would induce the Belgians to establish-
print works to the injury of the British printer. 00,2.
effect of the Bill would be, probably, to benefit a few.
but it would injure the great body of the poblie,os and th,, ; the
I safest course for him to pursue would be to pp
Bill. nd
the'
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, a
House divided—
For bringing up the Report • 73,
For the re-committal
Majority in favour of bringing up
oe
the Report s--59
The R, port was then brought up.
Mr. WILLIAMS then rose to propose amendments'he
S
The first amendment he intended to propose was on t..
second clause. The speech of the Right Hon. Baronet
showed that he was ignorant of the subject upon which
he was now legislating. He (Mr. Williams) had 0°
personal interest in this subject, although the contrail
was stated. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the VW'
President of the Board of Trade, also Showed that h°,,,
did not pay much attention to the subject. . .The
to.'
facturers -and merchants of the country were oppose... ,
any change in the present law. The Right Hon. Gr4o-S
tleman stated that the Committee which sat in 1836 re'',
commended a measure like the present. He (Mr. WI:
was a Member of that Committee, and he denied
that any such recommendation was made. The Right
Hon. Gentleman also said that the appointment of LI
Magistrates to decide upon the design was of long stike
nt'
ing. It was never applied to the principal branch of
manufacture. They wanted to smuggle this Bill, °
which they knew nothing at all, through the :House, The
Right Hon. Gentleman was supported by a large .011::,
jority, but he would venture to say that nineteen out u"
every twenty of them did not understand a single ones.E
the enactments of the Bill. The amendment be intend
to propose was, that all the words after the word " coPY;
right," in the 3d line of the 21 clause, should be expunger'
By the present law two Magistrates were to deeioe ,
upon the design, and they could award damages tote'
amount of from 51. to 301. He did not see'Wherigt:
they had to sit there making laws with respect to 1094:":
tors of trade, on which they were entirely igtior°:
with the exception perhaps of half a score, and withont?
receiving any application from the trade:generallf 11
make a change in the law. He did not See.. why the,:
should thus act in opposition to those who were aloof
interested in the matter, especially as there was 00"1
less copying than in former years, as *as admitted oven
by those who supported the present Bill. He denio"
that French articles were preferred ,to English, becanOr
they were more tasteful ; but they were referred be::
cause they were the fashion. It was, most difficult to sii.7.
what was a new design. He knew a person who per,
duced 700,000 pieces annually, and though he pro'
duced new designs every year, he was not able to ssi
what
ad ao-
snbeeeoii
pvn
egd,
ae
pns ird
.gomnd
uawye adb:
e.
co
butHn
sei
diwet
ra
eswdaaaws
ma aware
heo of onlyirceasui
.result
ot
vneoenf
p:e
Kdeaslegi
Let them look at the endless variety -of patterns th:r
was continually produced—and all of them P rodue
from the combination of former patterns—there was {ii
such thing as a new and original pattern. In seeking `;
protect a new design, they were seeking to proteetv;
phantom, and the only effect of such legislation would so
to produce endless litigation. The lawyers were . %
only ersons who would benefit by the Bill, for it won
give ris:' to endless Chancery suits. With a view u•
preventing litigation, he should, in the course of th!,
Bill propose alterations fur the purpose of preventing 140,,
suit in Chancery, or any action at, law, and should Pr%
pose to make the decision of two Magistrates final.. ps;
should also endeavour to prevent the extension of euP4_
right to articles which were not included in the original_BuS
The effect of this Bill would be togreatly enhance the priF;
of calicoes, whichformed a principal article of clothing fa
the poor. A merci(ant had told him, that if this
passed, he must cease to deal in British calicoes aittigetbe9.
so great would be the obstacles it would throw in, or
way in executing orders for the foreign nisrke.... tr 4
i3e
merchant told him that if this Bill passed he should
mediately enter into a tr, aty with a calico-prioter
B.lgium to print his calicoes and expert them from Oro
country. He w fluid send his calicoes manufaciured
jt
England to Belgium, and get them printed there.
was proposed to give a peutectien of three y ars to
terns in wool, which had tie' er yet been pr .tected. j ,
same thing was proposed with I.:.:!sard to flax •:nti eartlet%
ware. which were not ,o protected, uiia with Tegard
piece fringing-, bad not been pr,,terted 110,,t14.
1839.,,.ere i
nCe.iaurdieTi,nwitihieish
I3ill, and with its; c't i°
011
113
:81'; g;
IIaTIOTIZS. it lees proposed to mend the prott.ction
one year to three. t•lh.twl., wre in the soma categoo:
The experiment of protectien f a year to
red
articles had net n fairiv tried, and he protestor
against this interferetea., ethicli was .uncalled '
by the trade. He objected also to the txtindikr,
the copyright to crapes and prioted furniture„
Ile should make his objections to the various clausesstil
. they were proposed. The first amendment be sh,ti
propose would be in the second clause, which proVio',
three means of litigating the question :—First, h)Li,
Chancery suit ; second, by an actiOn 1aw,;,,ign441111.",
by a reference to two Magistrates. He should pr opn
an amendment to leave out all the words. giving-1;n
1 pow of wi appeal to the aeuft GURooni Ckr gOo"