construct models and perform experiments, "Now the invention thus loaded with a "1. It may be one of inestimable and immediate value, not only to the country but to the human race- -such as the steam-engine or the achromatic telescope, and therefore capable of rewarding the labours of its author. "2. It may be an invention of no intrinsic value, but which, from the extent of the demand, may give employment to many idle hands, require for its construction many taxable materials, and form an article of export, so as to become profitable to the community, and thus reward the ingenuity of its author. "3. It may be an invention of one or other of these classes, but which, from the state of the Arts, and other causes, does not come into actual use till the period of the privilege is expired. "4. It may be an invention of one or other of the two first classes, and yet the demand may, from its very nature, be so limited, and the expense of bringing it into use so great, that the profits are nothing, or at all events less than £350, the price of the patent. lity, in giving a new manufacture to the State? "There is no principle of equity upon which such a tax can be defended, even if the statute, by which it is levied, conferred real and substantial privilege. But the pri vilege actually conferred is almost wholly illusory, because it can be set aside on most frivolous grounds; and a patent right can never be considered as transferable property till its validity has been tried before a court of law, at an expense of one or more thousand pounds. "It will no doubt be said, that the un certainty of a patent right arises in a great measure, from the difficulty of protecting & mechanical invention, or a process in the arts; but this difficulty, or rather this inca pacity of our legislators to devise a sufficient protection for the productions of skill, instead of authorizing them to levy a tax upon in ventions which they are unable to defend, should have led them to confer bounties or rewards upon those who risk their time and their fortunes in labours which are thus with drawn from the protection of the law." to the When these observations were written, the greatest apathy on the subject of patents prevailed in England. No public body ven tured to advise or remonstrate. The British Association who was pledged to take up the question forgot their duty, and the Society of Arts had not yet opened their eyes iniquities of a system, which, at an after pe riod, they had the privilege to expose. Pri vate individuals alone, men interested in the progress of science and the arts, had the merit of pressing the subject on the attention of the Legislature. "For the last quarter of a century," says Mr. Webster, "men of science, inventors, and professional men, more peculiarly engaged in patent business, have laboured for the abolition of a vicious, and the establishment of a rational system of creating and protecting property in inventions in the arts and manufacture; but the inherent difficulty of the subject, the conflicting opinions of reformers, a want of sympathy on the part of the public, with "Now in the first two of these cases, is it the comparatively small class of scientific just or honourable that an inventor, who has and ingenious men, the mistaken jealousy of performed such great services to his country, some capitalists, and other causes, gave should be taxed with £350 for performing power and effect to the obstructiveness and these very services, even though he may be opposition of the numerous persons in the remunerated by his patent? In the third three countries, directly or indirectly interest and fourth case, is it just that an inventored in the official fees levied under the existing should pay £350 for bringing into use a valu- systems, and many well-intentioned efforts able invention, by which he has been either either failed or produced temporary exped wholly or partly ruined? Or is it just, in ents of little value. The history of the the fifth case, that an inexperienced and san- growth of abuses in the Patent System is guine projector should be fined £350 for ex- curious and instructive, counterparts of which erting himself, to the utmost of his abi- may be found in other branches of our 5. It may be an invention of no use at all, and one which evinces the folly of the patentee who seeks for a privilege, and the cupidity of the Government who grants it. require to be supplied by fresh legislation; | fund, by making patentees pay part of the The second topic to which we propose to call the attention of our reader, is the intolerable expense stil imposed upon inventors by the new law. The following is the schedule of fees and stamp-duties levied from the inventor: ries to clerks who have been recommended to the Government by their Parliamentary supporters ?-or, what would be a legitimate purpose, are they levied to pay the expenses necessarily incurred in drawing up and registering the patent, and in securing the rights of the inventor? The following table will to a certain extent answer these various questions. Analysis of the Appropriation of Funds levied from Inventors, from 1st October 1852 to 31st December 1854. (Abstracted from the Reports of the Commissioners of Patents.) Fees to law-officers of England, 50 0 0 Salaries of officers and clerks, Rent of office, 2 0 0 0.1 0 Surplus Income from Oct. 1, 05 0 This appropriation of "Inventors' Funds," 0 5 0 as it has been rightly called, we present to 500 the "Administrative Reform Association." 200 It has already excited the notice of the British Association, and been the means of directing its attention to the present state. of the Patent Law. 0 0 0 £184 11 2 If we add to this sum the cost of drawings, and patent agents and other casual expenses, the cost of many patent rights will not be far short of £200 or £250, so that an inventor who has, at great labour and expense, brought to perfection a machine, or instrument, or process, of value to his country and his species, is compelled to pay that large sum for the right of using it for 14 years; and though his claim has been scrutinized by a Board, his patent, bearing the Great Seal of England, is not secured to him. An ignorant pretender to his invention may drag him into a court of law, where, if a poor man, as he generally is, he may be ruined even if he gains his suit. Such legislation, such injustice, might have been expected in the darkest ages. Our readers will now ask why, and to whom, are these intolerable taxes paid? Are they demanded as a check to prevent numerous applications for patents? Are they intended to relieve the consolidated At the Liverpool meeting of that body in September 1854, the subject of the Patent Law was brought before the Mechanical Section, and on their recommendation, a committee consisting of the Earl of Harrowby, the Dean of Ely, Colonel Sabine, Professor Graham, Mr.. Fairbairn, and Mr. Thomas Webster, was appointed "for the purpose of taking such steps as may be necessary. to render the Patent system of this country, and the funds derived from inventors more efficient, and available for the reward of meritorious inventors and the advancement of practical science." At the Glasgow meeting, the Earl of Harrowby read the Report of the Committee to the Mechanical Section on the 14th September. After giving an account of the reasons which led to the appointment of the committee, the Report proceeds thus : "Under the administration of the new Patent Law, which came into operation on the 1st October 1852, a fund amounting to more than £50,000 per annum is raised from the inventors of inven |