“I have found them interfere in a way that very much embarrasses an engineer in carrying out large works, without being of the slightest advantage to the inventors, excepting that in some cases a man who takes out a Patent finds a capitalist (however frivolous the invention) who will buy the Patent, as a sort of patent-monger, who holds it, not for any useful purpose, but as a means of making claims which embarrass persons who are not prepared to dispute questions of that sort. I think that in that way many Patents are granted which are but of little benefit to the real inventor, serving only to fill the coffers of parties who only keep them to inconvenience those who might have occasion to use the particular invention in some adjunct way which was never contemplated by the inventor. “After you have designed something that is really useful in engineering works, you are told that some part of that design interferes with some Patent granted for an entirely different purpose, and which might in itself be frivolous, but important in the new combination; and one has such a horror of the Patent-Laws, that one evades it by designing something else, perhaps as good in itself, but giving one infinite trouble, without any advantage to the holder of the Patent. I have frequently found this to be the case.” Mr. W. S. Hale, candle manufacturer, said in 1851, in answer to the question— “At present they are obstructions to you?—Decidedly. “You say that, practically, you have found the existence of Patents in themselves useless—a great obstruction to the introduction of inventions which would otherwise have been of value?—Certainly. “The great objection which I conceive many parties have to introduce real improvements arises from useless Patents. I am in treaty now for one or two which in themselves are useless, yet they contain the germ of something, and it is worth my while, if I can get them for a small sum, to purchase them; but directly you make application for a Patent of that description, it becomes very valuable all at once; the party conceives you are desirous of possessing yourself of it, and that you will be inclined to give anything for the use of it.” In like manner Sir William Armstrong answered this question, put in 1864— “Is it within your knowledge that considerable inconvenience does exist in those branches of business with which you are most conversant from the multiplicity of Patents?—Most certainly, and great obstruction.” So also Mr. James Spence, of Liverpool, a well-known correspondent of the _Times_ during the American war, said— “It is difficult for a manufacturer to move in any direction without treading on the toes of some sort of a patentee.” Likewise Mr. Montague E. Smith, Q.C., M.P., said:—