TRANSACTIONS OF THE SECTIONS. 197 



■was not a monopoly. A monopoly was a protection to an existing mode of manufac- 

 ture or industry, a means to keep in the possession of a few and to injuriously 

 limit existing- property ; while a patent-right related to something before unknown, 

 hut now called into existence and supplied for the use of man. The views of Mr. 

 Mactie and others, who hold that inventors were the creditors of tlie nation, and 

 deserved national compensation, were next noticed ; and he argued that such an 

 arrangement, though it might appropriately form a complement to a patent-law, 

 could never be fully regarded as a substitute for a patent-law. A patent-law, 

 while giving an adequate stimulus to inventions, also secured, during the period 

 over which the right of property existed, that it should be so limited by the terms of 

 its creation as to give the minimum of interference with the freedom of manufac- 

 tures with a maximum of advantage to inventors and the public. The speci- 

 fication by means of which were determined the questions of utility, novelty, and 

 invasion, next came under notice. This point went to the root of the essential 

 difficulties of a patent-law. Issues in patent causes were principally questions of 

 construction, and it was obvious that the instrument upon the true construction of 

 which the decision of these issues depended should be framed with the utmost care 

 and consideration. The practical evils of the present system were : — (1) the indis- 

 criminate granting of patents ; (2) the want of accuracy in describing the nature 

 and limits of the rights secured by the patent ; (3) the cost, vexation, and unsatis- 

 factory character of the trials of patent causes. The remedies which he suggested 

 were twofold, — suggestions for the efficient working of the existing law, iiud the 

 introduction of additional provisions, both of constitution and administration. The 

 proposed remedies might be thus classiiied : — 1, conditions precedent to the grant- 

 ing of patents; 2, provisions to secure acciu'acy of description and definition; 

 3, conditions precedent to litigation ; 4, provisions in regard to the trial of patent 

 causes. With regard to the tirst point, the present function of the law officers of 

 the Crown should be either absolutelj' abolished or essentially modified. Next, the 

 grant of a patent sliould be precedecl by an examination by competent examining 

 officers. The result of that examination should be made in the form of a report, 

 and, if favourable, a grant should be at once made ; if unfavourable, there should be 

 the right of appeal. On the second point, the specification, which was the patentee's 

 charter, should be reported upon by competent officers. On the third point, prior 

 to the institution of proceedings for infringement, the report of an examiuing-officer 

 should be obtained, based upon the statement of the applicant as to the precise 

 nature and extent of the infringement. On the fourth point, the trial of patent 

 causes sliould be conducted before a judge sitting -with assessors. By such means 

 it was contended that the total amount of litigation would be lessened, and 

 simplicity and efficiency would be given to the administration of the patent-laws. 

 The creation of a limited right of property was expedient, for it was capable of pre- 

 cise determination : tlie duty of the public in regard to it was clearly ascertainable ; 

 on the discharge of the duty it was the basis of further improvement, and the time 

 of the cessor of the right was fully shown. The giving to inventors a linuted right 

 of property in their inventions would aflbrd them the best security, while, with the 

 least practicable interference with free action, it would confer the greatest ad^'a^- 

 tage upon the public. 



On Batlis and WasJihouses, By J. Pakrt. 



MaUway Accounts for 1868 jms< issued ly tJie Board of Trade, luifh suggestions 

 for liaihvay Beform. By John Pattebsoit, President of the Liverpool 

 Chamber of Commerce for 1868. 



Attention is first directed to the fact that accounts which might have been issued 

 in the spring of 1869 are not issued until after Parliament has risen this year, 

 and therefore fail in the object of supplying statistical guidance for legislation. 

 Nay, not even in the spring of 1870, but only in this week ; so that for two sessions 

 the' accounts are kept hidden, and the value of publicity is now more historical than 

 practical. 



