ioo Our Patent Lawh [January, 



a new manufacture, the right cannot be given more fairly 

 than to him who describes it, but we would add that he 

 must carry it out or attempt to do so within a given time. 

 We know as a certainty the history of several patents, and 

 we know of none which were successful without labour. But 

 even if a patent were for some idea that suddenly struck a 

 person, why should we refuse to reward him for giving it to 

 us. If a man finds a diamond we do not steal it from 

 him. Are not men's minds rushing through the regions of 

 thought to discover the good and the useful ? Why should 

 we steal what they find ? 



We agree with M. Renard — " Common sense and equity 

 would join to say that when a scientific man indicates a dis- 

 covery or an invention, that discovery or invention remains 

 at the disposal of every one if the finder does not claim the 

 exclusive right to work it ;" supposing it to belong to the 

 class to be made useful in the arts. 



How different this clearness from the wanderings of M. 

 Chevalier and others, who are not sure if a man can claim 

 an idea, because many can hold it at the same time. The 

 patentee does not attempt to keep others from the idea ; he 

 wants only his reward for teaching it. Surely this is agree- 

 able to all law and justice. 



Mr. Scott Russell is quoted in the recent discussions as 

 giving an objection to patents. It is that the moment any- 

 thing is patented everybody avoids it, lest he be subjected to 

 an expensive prosecution. Surely it is the same thing with 

 your purse — everybody, except the thief, avoids taking that, 

 lest he be subjected to crime and disgrace. 



Mr. Grove's objection took us by surprise. He says that 

 it is natural that people should yield to the patentee for fear 

 of prosecution. Perhaps this is the same as Mr. Scott 

 Russell's without the comedy. We do not question Mr. 

 Grove's experience, and we say, what a serious responsibility 

 it is, then, to give a patent to a man. 



But the law seems to sell patents to anyone. It says, 

 like all hucksters, " Caveat emptor" To us these patents have 

 a character not different from forged notes if given to more 

 than one individual, or useless to him. 



Mr. Grove makes another objection. It takes too much 

 time to try the patent cases. On this, also, we have to quarrel 

 with the management of patent law affairs. The power of 

 arriving at the main point in a discussion seems to be lost ; 

 we drivel for days over trifles. 



Perhaps we have not legal men enough. We have known 

 twenty men brought two hundred miles and sent away in an 



