248 THE WEDGWOODS. 



he held the privilege of his monopoly, that he would make a full 

 and true specification of the art by which he converted these mate- 

 rials into porcelain; and that he entirely failed in fulfilling this 

 obligation. 



"For in the pretended specification which he made, he omitted 

 to describe the principal operations in which his art or discovery 

 consisted, having neither exhibited the proportions in which the 

 materials were to be mixed to produce the body or the glaze, nor the 

 art of burning the ware, which he knew to be the most difficult and 

 important part of the discovery. 



" That the company concerned in the porcelain manufactory at 

 Plymouth, established under the authority of this patent, contracted 

 with one gentleman, in whose lands these materials are found, that 

 he should sell the materials only to them, and that they should 

 purchase materials from no other person, during the term of ninety- 

 nine years. 



"That nevertheless there are great quantities of such materials 

 in other estates in Cornwall and Devonshire, and probably in many 

 other parts of this island. 



" That in the year 1774 Mr. Cookworthy assigned over his patent 

 right to Mr. Champion, of Bristol, who now applies to Parliament 

 for an extension of this monopoly, seven years before the expiration 

 of the patent, which assignment was made upon condition that Mr. 

 Cookworthy should receive for ninety-nine years from Mr. Champion 

 as large a sum every year as should be paid to the proprietor for the 

 raw material, hereby levying a tax of 100 per cent, upon them. 



" That Mr Champion in his petition sets forth that he has brought 

 this discovery to perfection ; and that in a paper he has published, 

 entitled A Reply, <$fc., he says that if the various difficulties which 

 have attended this work from the beginning could have been fore- 

 seen, this patent ought not to have been applied for at so early a period; 

 that is, in plain English, the patent was taken out for the discovery 

 of an art before the discovery was made by the patentee. And if 

 the discovery has been made since, there has been no specification 

 of it ; it has not been recorded for the public benefit ; it is in Mr. 

 Champion's own possession ; it is kept from the public for his own 

 private emolument : and the nature of it being unknown, it is 

 humbly presumed such a pretended discovery can neither entitle 

 the patentee nor the petitioner to the extension of a monopoly 

 injurious to many thousands of industrious manufacturers in various 

 parts of the kingdom. 



" And in the same paper in which we find the above curious con- 



