670 REPORT—1904. 
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-combus- 
tion engine, have been introduced in a much shorter time by more favouring 
circumstances, by some more favourable arrangement of the patent laws, or by 
legislation to assist the worker attacking so difficult a problem? I think the 
answer is that a great deal might be done, and I will endeavour to indicate some 
changes and possible improvements. 
The history of this invention brings before our minds two important considera- 
tions. Firstly, let us consider the patentable matter involved in the invention of 
the gas-engine, the utilisation for motive-power purposes of the then well-known 
properties of the explosive energy of gunpowder or of mixtures 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 
turpentine 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. Consequently, 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 be said to have been adequate. The second 
important consideration is that of the methods of procedure of the patentees, for 
it appears that very few of them had studied what had been suggested or done 
before by others before taking out their own patent. We are also struck by 
the number of really important advances that have been suggested and have 
failed to fructify, either from want of funds or other causes, to be forgotten for 
the time and to be re-invented later on by subsequent workers. 
What a waste of time, expense, and disappointment would be avoided if we in 
England helped the patentee to find out easily what had been done previously, on 
the lines adopted by the United States and German Patent Offices, who advise the 
patentee after the receipt of his provisional specification of the chief anticipa- 
tory patents, dead or alive! And ought we in England to rest content to see 
our patentees awaiting the report of the United States and German Patent 
Offices on their foreign equivalent specifications before filing their English patent 
claims? Ought not our Patent Office to give more facilities and assistance to the 
patentee P 
Before proceeding further to discuss some of the possible improvements for 
the encouragement and protection of research and invention, I ask you to further 
consider the position of the inventor—the man anxious to achieve success where 
others have hitherto failed. To be successful he must be something of an 
enthusiast; and usually he is a poor man, or a man of moderate means, and 
dependent on others for financial assistance. Generally the problem to be 
attacked involves a considerable expenditure of money; some problems require 
great expenditure before any return can thereby accrue, even under the most 
favourable circumstances. In the very few cases where the inventor has some 
means of his own they are generally insufficient to carry him through, and there 
have unfortunately been many who have lost everything in the attempt. In nearly 
all cases the inventor has to co-operate with capital: the capitalist may be a 
sleeping partner, or the capital may be held by a firm or syndicate, the inventor in 
such cases being a partner—a junior partner—or a member of the staff, The com- 
