the realm, or an invention tending to the furtherance of a trade, should have the right of the sole use of the same for a reasonable time. In their views a patent is the best mode of remunerating the person for introducing such an improvement or manufacture. The grant of a patent is based on a bargain between the inventor and the public. The inventor is not obliged to declare his discovery or invention he may work it in secret. But the public wish to have the benefit of his invention. They desire not only to have the result of his invention, but to know how the invention has been produced, in order that they may obtain the knowledge for future use. And how can they obtain such knowledge except from the inventor himself? Surely the knowledge of the facts connected with such discovery is the property of the inventor, which no legislation whatever can touch, and it must rest absolutely with him whether he will make known such facts to the public or not. To secure his consent, therefore, the public say to him, 'Tell us your secret, and we will assure you against any unfair use of your discovery.' Legislation thus steps in and says, There being two facts, the right of the inventor to keep his own discovery to himself, which is indefeasible, and the wish of the public to get and use that discovery, the two desires must be made mutual, and a bargain settled between the public and the inventor. The opponents of the patent law, on the other hand, allege that such laws are really prejudicial to inventors themselves; that in the present state of things, when all branches, whether in manufacture or art, are in such an advanced state, and when every process in production consists of a combination of the results of the improvements effected at different times, a good invention is rarely a new idea, suddenly propounded or coming as by inspiration into the mind of man, but is simply some sensible improvement upon what has been done; that in most cases it is some small modification, which may produce very important results; that to produce a good thing one must be well acquainted with all that has been done in any particular branch; that anything so done is in a vast majority of cases dependent entirely upon the success of previous steps, which already exclusively belong to individuals by patents or otherwise; and that many of the most important inventions, such as that of paper, oil painting, glass painting, &c., were made without patents. Such objections, however, were not pressed with any weight upon the committee's attention, and on the following session the Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852, was passed, supplemented by another Act on the following year, providing that all letters patent for inventions shall be made subject to the condition that the same shall be void at the expiration 2 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 115. 3 of three years and seven years respectively from the date thereof, unless there be paid 50l. at the end of the third year and 100%. at the end of the seventh year. These fees, though smaller than were charged under the old system, are large enough to be a burden on inventors, whilst they do not prevent many trivial and even useless inventions being made the subjects of patent monopoly.1 The question of the policy or impolicy of the patent law is not yet settled. In 1865 a royal commission was appointed to inquire into the working of the law relating to letters patent for inventions, on which occasion much evidence was received on the defect of the patent law. In 1870 a Committee of the House of Commons was appointed with full power to inquire into and report on every point of the important question, and after giving to the whole matter the most careful attention, the report was to the effect that the privilege conferred by patents promotes the progress of manufactures, by causing many important inventions to be introduced and developed more rapidly than would otherwise be the case; that the same privilege leads to the introduction and publication of numerous improvements, each of a minor character, but the sum of which contributes greatly to the progress of industry; that, in the absence of the protection of letters patent, the competition of manufacturers among themselves would doubtless lead to the introduction of improved processes and machinery, but that it would probably be less rapid than under the stimulus of a patent law; and that it does not appear that the granting of pecuniary reward could be substituted with advantage to the public interest for the temporary privilege conferred by letters patent. Still more recently, an international patent congress was held at Vienna, on the occasion of the international exhibition, and the conclusions arrived at were, that protection of inventions should be guaranteed by the laws of all civilised nations, because the sense of right among civilised nations demands the legal protection of intellectual works; because such protection affords, under the condition of a complete specification and publication of the invention, the only practical and effective means of introducing new technical methods, without loss of time and in a reliable manner, to the general knowledge of the public; because the protection of invention renders the labour of the inventor remunerative, and so induces competent men to devote time and means to the introduction and practical application of new and useful technical methods and improvements, and attracts capital from abroad, which, in the absence of patent From 1832 to 1878 only about 30 per cent, of the patents paid the third year's stamp duty of 50%., and continued in force till the end of the seventh year; and about 11 per cent. paid the seventh year's stamp duty of 1007., and consequently remained in force for the full term of fourteen years. the realm, or an invention tending to the furtherance of a trade, should have the right of the sole use of the same for a reasonable time. In their views a patent is the best mode of remunerating the person for introducing such an improvement or manufacture. The grant of a patent is based on a bargain between the inventor and the public. The inventor is not obliged to declare his discovery or invention-he may work it in secret. But the public wish to have the benefit of his invention. They desire not only to have the result of his invention, but to know how the invention has been produced, in order that they may obtain the knowledge for future use. And how can they obtain such knowledge except from the inventor himself? Surely the knowledge of the facts connected with such discovery is the property of the inventor, which no legislation whatever can touch, and it must rest absolutely with him whether he will make known such facts to the public or not. To secure his consent, therefore, the public say to him, 'Tell us your secret, and we will assure you against any unfair use of your discovery.' Legislation thus steps in and says, There being two facts, the right of the inventor to keep his own discovery to himself, which is indefeasible, and the wish of the public to get and use that discovery, the two desires must be made mutual, and a bargain settled between the public and the inventor. The opponents of the patent law, on the other hand, allege that such laws are really prejudicial to inventors themselves; that in the present state of things, when all branches, whether in manufacture or art, are in such an advanced state, and when every process in production consists of a combination of the results of the improvements effected at different times, a good invention is rarely a new idea, suddenly propounded or coming as by inspiration into the mind of man, but is simply some sensible improvement upon what has been done; that in most cases it is some small modification, which may produce very important results; that to produce a good thing one must be well acquainted with all that has been done in any particular branch; that anything so done is in a vast majority of cases dependent entirely upon the success of previous steps, which already exclusively belong to individuals by patents or otherwise; and that many of the most important inventions, such as that of paper, oil painting, glass painting, &c., were made without patents. Such objections, however, were not pressed with any weight upon the committee's attention, and on the following session the Patent Law Amendment Act, 1852,2 was passed, supplemented by another Act on the following year,3 providing that all letters patent for inventions shall be made subject to the condition that the same shall be void at the expiration 2 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 115. of three years and seven years respectively from the date thereof, unless there be paid 50l. at the end of the third year and 100l. at the end of the seventh year. These fees, though smaller than were charged under the old system, are large enough to be a burden on inventors, whilst they do not prevent many trivial and even useless inventions being made the subjects of patent monopoly. The question of the policy or impolicy of the patent law is not yet settled. In 1865 a royal commission was appointed to inquire into the working of the law relating to letters patent for inventions, on which occasion much evidence was received on the defect of the patent law. In 1870 a Committee of the House of Commons was appointed with full power to inquire into and report on every point of the important question, and after giving to the whole matter the most careful attention, the report was to the effect that the privilege conferred by patents promotes the progress of manufactures, by causing many important inventions to be introduced and developed more rapidly than would otherwise be the case; that the same privilege leads to the introduction and publication of numerous improvements, each of a minor character, but the sum of which contributes greatly to the progress of industry; that, in the absence of the protection of letters patent, the competition of manufacturers among themselves would doubtless lead to the introduction of improved processes and machinery, but that it would probably be less rapid than under the stimulus of a patent law; and that it does not appear that the granting of pecuniary reward could be substituted with advantage to the public interest for the temporary privilege conferred by letters patent. Still more recently, an international patent congress was held at Vienna, on the occasion of the international exhibition, and the conclusions arrived at were, that protection of inventions should be guaranteed by the laws of all civilised nations, because the sense of right among civilised nations demands the legal protection of intellectual works; because such protection affords, under the condition of a complete specification and publication of the invention, the only practical and effective means of introducing new technical methods, without loss of time and in a reliable manner, to the general knowledge of the public; because the protection of invention renders the labour of the inventor remunerative, and so induces competent men to devote time and means to the introduction and practical application of new and useful technical methods and improvements, and attracts capital from abroad, which, in the absence of patent 4 From 1832 to 1878 only about 30 per cent. of the patents paid the third year's stamp duty of 501., and continued in force till the end of the seventh year; and about 11 per cent. paid the seventh year's stamp duty of 1007., and consequently remained in force for the full term of fourteen years. protection, would find means of secure investment elsewhere; because by the obligatory complete publication of the patented invention the great sacrifice of time and of money, which the technical application would otherwise impose upon the industry of all countries, is considerably lessened; because by the protection of invention, secrecy of manufacture, which is one of the greatest enemies of industrial progress, loses its chief support; because great injury would be inflicted upon countries which have no patent laws, were native inventive talent to emigrate to more congenial countries, where their labour is legally protected; and because experience shows that the holder of a patent will make the most effectual exertions for a speedy introduction of his invention. Patent laws are enacted in almost every civilised state. In Austria, a patent is granted for every new discovery, invention, or improvement, extending over the entire Austrian empire, for a period of fifteen years. The patent is granted only to the inventor or his accredited agent, and for an invention not in use within the empire. In Belgium, the patent is granted for twenty years to the inventor who has not obtained a patent for the same invention for any other country. If a patent has been first obtained in any other country, the term of the Belgian patent would be for so long as it lasts in that country. In Germany, patents are granted for new inventions, the application being first submitted to examination, for a period of fifteen years. If the patent be obtained by fraud, or by a stranger not having a representative in Germany, the patent is forfeited. In France, a patent is only applicable to discoveries relating to industrial art, and is granted for fifteen years. In Denmark, important inventions are protected for ten years, though usually a patent runs for three, four, and five years. In the Netherlands, by a law of 1870, no fresh patents for inventions or improvements were to be granted. In Switzerland, no special laws exist for the encouragement and protection of inventors. Public opinion in the Confederation is opposed to the patent law, the accepted theory being that inventions should be considered as common property. In the United States of America patents are granted for seventeen years. In some countries, a patent is granted as a matter of course, if the formal procedure be complied with. In others, a patent is granted only upon and after previous inquiry. In some countries patents are granted to the inventor only; in others, to the first importer also. But nearly all civilised states have patent laws for the furtherance of art and industry. How far patent laws have contributed to the present advanced progress of art industry, is extremely difficult to say. Doubtless some of the most remarkable inventions have been made without any patent to foster them. Nevertheless, it is a matter of common |