INVENTION AND DISCOVERY. 557 



development being reached, the names of Siemens, Beaude, Roches, 

 Otto Simon, Dugald Clerk, Priestman, Daimler, Dowson, Mond and 

 others appear as inventors who have worked at and added something 

 to perfect the internal-combustion engine and its fuel, and who have 

 helped to bring it to its present state of perfection. 



In the history of great mechanical inventions there is perhaps no 

 better example of the interdependence of the engineer, the physicist and 

 the chemist than is evidenced in the perfecting of the gas-engine. The 

 physicist and the chemist together determine the behavior of the gas- 

 eous fuel, basing their theory on data obtained from the experimental 

 engines constructed by the mechanical engineer, who, guided by their 

 theories, makes his designs and improvements; then, again, from the 

 results of the improvements fresh data are collected and the theory 

 further advanced, and so on till success is reached. But though I 

 have spoken of the physicist, the chemist and the engineer as separate 

 persons, it more generally occurs that they are rolled into one, or at 

 most two, individuals, and that it is indispensable that each worker 

 should have some considerable knowledge of all the sciences involved 

 to be able to act his part successfully. 



Now let us ask : Could not this very valuable invention, the internal- 

 combustion engine, have been introduced in a much shorter time by 

 more favoring circumstances, by some more favorable arrangement of 

 the patent laws, or by legislation to assist the worker attacking so diffi- 

 cult a problem? I think the answer is that a great deal might be 

 done, and I will endeavor to indicate some changes and possible 

 improvements. 



The history of this invention brings before our minds two important 

 considerations. Firstly, let us consider the patentable matter involved 

 in the invention of the gas-engine, the utilization for motive-power 

 purposes of the then well-known properties of the explosive energy of 

 gunpowder or of mixture of gas and oil with air. Are not these 

 obvious inferences to persons of a mechanical turn of mind and who 

 had seen guns fired, or explosions in bottles containing spirits of tur- 

 pentine when slightly heated and a light applied to the neck? Surely 

 no fundamental patent could have been granted under the existing 

 patent laws for so obvious an application of known forces. Conse- 

 quently, patent protection was sought in comparative details, details 

 in some cases essential to' success which were evolved or invented in 

 the process of working out the invention. In this extended field of 

 operations a slight protection was in some instances obtained. But in 

 answer to the question whether such protection was commensurate with 

 the benefits received by the community at large, there can, I think, be 

 only one reply. Generally, those who did most got nothing, some few 

 received insufficient returns, and in very few cases indeed can the return 



