Intelligence a?id Miscellaneous Articles. 75 



the specification ; where there is any doubt about it, I always have 

 machines made in exact conformity with the drawings, and put them 

 to the actual test. 



What should you think of the appointment of a commission autho- 

 rized to examine specifications, and to certify whether they were 

 sufficient to enable the invention to be used by the public? — 1 think 

 that a specification ought not to be inrolled at all, till it is made suf- 

 ficient ; and that there should be no further inquiry about the suf- 

 ficiency of the description, except by way of appeal against the 

 examiners ; one-tenth of the trouble and expense that is now in- 

 curred, to find out whether it is sufficient or not, when it is too late 

 to make any remedy, would have made it sure at first. 



Do you think a commission would be a proper mode of determin- 

 ing that sufficiency ? — I think a commission well constituted would 

 determine that and other points very well; but I think it would be 

 very objectionable that any previous examination should take place, 

 as to the merit of inventions ; because it is impossible to foresee 

 which will, by future cultivation, grow up to maturity, and which 

 will not be worth such cultivation ; hence every one should be al- 

 lowed a fair chance. Any competent person can say whether a spe- 

 cification is intelligible or not; and if it is not sufficient, the inventor 

 should be called upon to make it sufficient: if he proves that having 

 used reasonable diligence he has not had time to do so, more time 

 should be allowed than was at first granted. If he makes improve- 

 ments afterwards, he should be called upon to inrol them, so as to 

 keep the records of the Patent Office a correct transcript of his ope- 

 rations. 



You would propose to secure to the applicant, from the time of 

 his application, his right to the principle of his invention? — Yes, to 

 the invention of which he details the heads ; and all such fair deve- 

 lopment of those heads as he is prepared to specify completely how 

 to practise them, at the time when his specification is due, or with 

 such extension of that time as is reasonable. 



So that before his patent is issued, he should be required to inrol 

 his specification ? — Yes, in order that the specification may be trans- 

 cribed in the patent itself, having been first approved to be sufficient, 

 and if found deficient, or not confined within the limits of the heads 

 first lodged, it should be amended. 



By a record of the heads of an invention, could you so secure to 

 the applicant his invention, as to leave him at sufficient liberty to 

 pursue his invention, for the purpose of making a complete speci- 

 fication ? — I think he ought to be bound to be able to define his 

 principle very accurately at his first application, because he ought 

 not to be allowed even to apply for a patent, when his invention is 

 a mere vision ; he ought not to come until he has done all that can 

 be done mentally by himself, and by projection on paper, so as to 

 be fully prepared to state all the principles or heads of his invention, 

 leaving nothing remaining to be done but what requires to be de- 

 cided by experiment. 



In the experiments which it would be necessary to make, in order 

 L 2 to 



