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

r)al IffeFara7,76iietiii to this Bill. As he could not speak
1116W,' he wished. o) ask the' Speaker whether he could
bsas,,P,Tp.ose those amendments when the Bill was being read
blesaL-7rd time ? •
,he SPEAKER said the proper course for the Hon.
rember to pursue would be tO agree to the amendments
of the:Committee; after which, the Hon. Member would
• .'be able to propose any amendments.
'• Lord PALMERSTON said it did not appear with re-
' gerd to the machinery of this Bill that they had been
successful in 'removing all objections. The 'law, as it
stood, recognised to a certain degree protection to the
Inventor. If that law went as far as the Right Hon.
Gentleman said it did, he had not quite explained the
necessity for those additions which had been made. He
understood the particular object of the Bill was to apply
the law to certain branches of trade which it (lid not at
present embrace. Ile (Lord Palmerston) would only state
1118 opinion upon one branch, and that was the lace
trade. He thought his Hon. Friend and Colleague had
Made out a strong case for restoring the Bill to the same
state as it stood upon the second reading ; and he hoped
that if the Right Hon. (lentleman,who founded his argu-
.l Meats in favour of this part of the Bill upon the wishes
• *which had been expressed for the protection which he
said this Bill would aflhrd, 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 sup-
ported by one class" of lace manufacturers.
Sir R. PEEL thought the special question of trying
*holier protection should be given to lace should be
' discussed on the third reading. The general question
Wits 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
.Itight 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
• tigly pattern.—(Renewed laughter.) Then it goes on,
• " London British Manufactory. Published as the Act
directs, March Ist, 1841." Tnat was the way of distin-
,guishing one pattern, and a very pretty way it was.
;11-! 'lt was rather hard for a man who had paid 701. or 801.
for a pattern, to be deprived of the benefit of it by a man
ss,- who did not pay a single shilling. A person, under the
present system, waited to sea if the pattern succeeded,
and then inundated the market. Just as a person began
tO reap the profit of his invention, another person pro-
":.- kited by his capital and liberality towards art and design,
; - g the market with an inferior article. Now that
• gated as a great discouragement to improvement.
e were only three months' protection given at pre-
aent. Why did France beat them ? We were superior
to them in manufacturing, but they were superior in
taste. He (Sir R. Peel) had been told by some of the
constituents of the Hon. Member for Coventry, that there
vi,as a complete suspension of business until they got the
natterns. That was a convincing proof that there
'"'" was wan. c;late. The Coventry patterns would not sell
in the London L ,rket, but the moment the French patterns
lame they sold. There was no reason whatever why an
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
existed in France. The Bill had been under the
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 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,
and considering that the Bill had been under considera •
ton 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
**out affirming the principle of that Bill, and causing
ftk,improvement to—he hoped he might use the term
stagnation of trade.
Mr: J. HEATHCOAT explained. He had been pre-
'rented by indisposition from attending when the Bill
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. BROTHERTON said this was a very difficu
4pestion, as there was so much difference of opinion upon
the subject, at the same time, if he had not apprehen-
sions that the passing of the Bill would be injurious to
Bode, he would not offer his opposition to the measure.
• ut he considered that they were running a great risk in
„_l,t_f?ducing a measure of that kind. The existing law
.Passed in 1787, and the trade had improved and
auurlahed since that time. In 1830, they manufactuted
,60(000,000 yards, hal fof which was for exportation. They
in:eals.e.rted more than 360,000,000 yards. Now, look-
culateu" to injure
was very
caTunwilling to adopt any measure
. said there w
injure that. trade.. The Right Hon._ Baronet
Rrantin superior taste in France. Now, would
, gcopyright give an improved taste ? He (Mr.
thought that this Bill.would produce nothing but
liti-
▪ 84tion, as there was such difficult), in ascertaining what was
copyright, and what was design. He conceived that
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.
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. Baronet said,
did not average more than 7s. in price, instead of 141.
• tr 15/. This Bill would have the effect of keeping down
:!lose rising geniuses which were constantly springing
41). The Bill would hold out encouragement to lb-
. feigners, as it Would induce the Belgians to establish
Print works to the injury of the British printer. The
• !fleet of the Bill would be, probably, to benefit a few,
out it would injure the great body of the public, and the
West course for him to pursue would be to oppose the
Bill.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
Rouse
For bringing up the Report
For the re-committal
Majority in favour of bringing up
the Report
—59
The Report was then brought up.
Mr. WILLIAMS then rose to propose amendments.
The first amendment he intended to propose was on the
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 no
Personal interest in this subject, although the contrary
sj:` was stated. The Right Hon. Gentleman, the Vice-
-I)resident of the Board of Trade, also showed that he
• did not pay much attention to the subject. The manu-
facturers and merchants of the country were opposed to
4 any change in the present law. The Right Hon. Gen-
Liman stated that the Committee which sat in 1836 re-
-14; commended a measure like the present. He (Mr. W.)
• ..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 two
;Magistrates to decide upon the design was of long stand-
L,lt was never applied to the principal branch of the
' manufacture. They wanted to smuggle this Bill, of
R c h they knew nothing at all, through the House. The
him!) Hight Hon. Gentleman was supported by a large ma-
tsq.74 Jority, but he would venture to say that nineteen out of
;.,every twenty of them did not understand a single one of
ItZt, the enactments of the Bill. The amendment he intended
7" -:,to propose was, that all the words after the word "copy-
sight,"in the 3d line of the 2i clause, should be expunged.
the present law two Magistrates were to decide
"*tfT.lipon the design, and they could award damages to the
amount of from 51. to 301. He did not see what right
they had to sit there making laws with respect to mat-
ters of trade, on which they were entirely ignorant,
With the exception perhaps of half a score, and without
receiving any application from the trade generally to
make a change in the law. He did not see why they
• should thus act in opposition to those who were most
interested in the matter, especially as there was now
' less copying than in former years, as was admitted even
by those who supported the present Bill. He denied
that French articles were preferred to English, because
they were more tasteful ; but they were preferred be-
'ee '4 cause they were the fashion. It was most difficult to say
;_ts. what was a new. design. He knew a person who pro-
• duced 700,000 pieces annually, and though he pro-
Muted new designs every year, he was not able to say
- what a new 'design was. He was aware of only one new
design being produed, but it was the result of the
ae 1 idoscope,and maybe considered a mechnical invention.
2s ;fit Let them look at the endless variety of patterns that
14tFrIk• Was continually produced—and all of them produced
from the combination of fprmer patterns—there was no
4;„ such thing as a new and original pattern. In seeking to
ite. protect a new design, they were seeking to protect a
phantom, and the only effect of such legislation would bi
3d3'.,}® • to produce endless litigation. The lawyers were-, ho
lo only persons who would benefit by the Bill, for it would
alit'.-. give rise to endless Chancery suits. With a view of
t kr, preventing litigation, he should, in the course of the
Ls, Bill alterations fur the purpose of preventing any
propose
44-7, suit in Chancery, or any action at law, and should pro-
-I%o' Pose to make the decision of two Magistrates final. He
'ts.: should also endeavour to prevent the extension of copy-
: right to articles which were not included in the original Bill.
The effect of this Bill would be to greatly enhance the price
of calicoes, whichformed a principal article of clothing for
the poor. A merchant had told him, that if this Bill
' passed, he must cease to deal in British calicoes altogether,
so great would be the obstacles it would throw in his
- Way in executing orders for the foreign market. That
. merchant told him that if this Bill passed he should im-
. • Mediately enter into a treaty with a calico-printer in
Belgium to print his calicoes and export them from that
country. He would send his calicoes manufactured in
England to Belgium, and get them printed there. It
was prOposed to give a protection of three years to pat-
'y
terns in wool, which had never yet been protected. Ihe
same thing was proposed with regard to flax and earthen-
ware, which were not so protected, and with regard to
paper hangings, which had not been protected- until
1839. Carpets, which were also first protected .in 1839,
Were included in this Bill, and with respect to paper
hanings, it was proposed to extend the protection from
one, year to three. Shawls were in the same category.
The experiment of protection for a year to these
articles had not been fairly tried, and he protested
against this interference, , which . was uncalled for
by the trade. He objected also to the extending
the copyright to crapes and printed furnitures,
He should make his objections to the various clauses as
they were proposed. The• first amendment he should
propose would be in the second clause, which provided
three means of litigating the question :—First, by a
Chancery suit ; second, by an action at law ; and third,
by a reference to two Magistrates. He should propose
an amendment - to- leave out all. the words giving the
PqWer of au appeal to the Court of Chancery or a Court