The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1858-02-16
pa.sAs Law Reform I'm Congress Mr.. Tsy-
lox's New NM. -E.

tjyea for the 9sne. Moment OF the Patent laws.
Mr.. TAYLOR c0axplufas of the opinion expressed
by us. that the real object Of the proposed mea-
sure was to extend, revive or enlarge several of
the old patents. II IL NOT eur fault If the cor
rupt and INSCRIPTIONS efforts making by the
great patent monopolists and their agents in
the lobby to push their extension schemes
through Congress should lead us to view with
suspicion and jealousy any attempt to remodel
the existing laws.
To justify fresh legislation on this subject, it
should first he shown that the present system
works badly for the interests Of the inventor
and the public. No testimony of this sort has
been brought forward by the advocates of the
proposed measure. Against all such allega-
tons we have the evidence of the fact that the
appeals made from the decisions of the Com
missioner are very rare indeed, and that when
relief is sought from Congress by patentees,
1t is in the shape Of extensions cOnfessedly OPP
posed to- public policy and to the interests
of the general body of inventors. There can,
We think, he no stronger proof Of the soundness
and efficiency of the present system; and I'M
less we can see sufficient reasons for modifying
it, we will steadily reeist giving to individuals,
under cover of an alleged desire to promote the
public good, an opportunity Of advancing their
own particular interests.
Whilst we are disposed to accord to Mr.. Tay-
lor individually, the fullest credit for an honest
desire to improve the present laws relating to
comparison of his bill with the existing statutes
we see no changes introduced by the former
which are likely to compensate for the risk of
fresh tinkering at the present system. With the
exception of the clause rendering the appeal
from new Board Of Examiners to the
chief Commissioner final, and giving
the latter power to grant extensions.
and also of that equalizing the fees to be paid
by native born and foreign inventors, we see no
really important notifications effected by the
new bill. The policy of the first of these
clauses is more than questionable. 1t is recog-
! milton of the one man power in an Office in
| which the judgment of a single individual re-
quires to be more strongly fortified than in per
haps any other position. The questions that
| come before him for decision are frequently Of
so difficult and technical a nature that with all
the qualifications that he can bring to the task
he cannot be sure of the correctness Of his
opinion. To render his decision final is, there
FORE to shut out the protection which the exist
ing laws afford the applicant against an erro-
neous view of the merits of his invention. Were
the process to be reversed and an appeal to be
taken from the chief commissioner to properly
qualified board Of examiners, as was the case
previous to the act of 1889, there would be
more sense in the alteration. AS it ia. under
the present law an appeal lies from the
decision of the Chief Commissioner to the Chief
Justice of the District Court of the United
States for the District of Columbia, SO that not
only does it provide all that this clause enforces
in the way of impartial examination. but it sup
plies additional safeguards against error. The
benefit accruing from the proposed alteration is
therefore entirely apocryphal, so far as the
public are concerned, though in the case of a
corrupt understanding between the applicant
and the Commissioner there can be no mistake
as to the effect. Combined with the power of
extension proposed to be conferred upon the
latter, the latitude of discretion that he would
enjoy under this clause would enable him to
sell patent rights to the highest bidder When
we see the enormous sums that are expended to
force extensions through Congress, it is but
natural that we should view with alarm any
measure which proposes to intrust a single off.
Ger with such irresponsible powers, exposed a.
he must constantly he to temptations of The
most irresistible kind.
The only feature in Mr. Taylor's bill which
has any recommendation in our eyes Is rem
dered Objectionable by double alteration in
the law. II is proposed to equalize the deposits
paid by native and foreign applicants, in which
there is such shameful disparity; at present a
British subject being taxed $500, foreigner Of
any other nation $500, and citizen of the
United States only $50 Mr. Taylors bill fixes
$50 as the amount TO be paid by all on the first
application. Now while we admit the injustice
of imposing heavy tax upon foreigners, We
see no reason why the expenses of our own in
ventors should be increased. We would reduce
them, instead Of augmenting them, and If we
cannot perform an act Of justice without inflict-
ing this injury on our own citizens then we say
it would be better to let matters remain as they
are.
Against these doubtful reforms we have to
balance certain other unmistakeable dissdvan-
tages and dangers, which, we think, are in
themselves sufficient TO condemn this measure.
In the first place. the bill creates multitude of
new Offices and salaries not called for by the
exigencies Of the department. There are to be
three examiners in chief, with a salary of $4,000
EACH twenty-feur assistant examiners, with sala.
ries of 80 500; disbursing clerk at 81 500; a
draughtsman, librarian and machinist, at
$1,000; six clerks, at 81 900, one at 81, OsO and
messenger at the same. Considering the CON-
paratively inexpensive. but at the same time
IL. N