As noticed by us last week, we will quote some of the remarks of Ex-Commissioner Ewbank, in a letter to the Secretary of the Interior. He says, " If systematic endeavors to overawe and overrule the Commissioner be not frowned down, they will, in time, effect the integrity of the Patent Office, and will make it a source of injustice to the public, and of grievous wrong to real inventors. Its judicial character requires that it be cordially sustained, and zealously protected from improper influences." " If the Commissioner and chief officers are not competent to perform, or are noS faithful to discharge their duties, they should be removed ; bat if they are able and honest, they ought not to be harrassed with calls to answer complaints preferred to the Department of the Interior, and often to the President, by disappointed applicants and their triends, nor is there the slightest grounds for coercion, since, if the Office improperly refuse a patent, the law has provided a Court of Appeal, in which its decisions can be revised and reversed." We say that the system of appealing is unjust, inasmuch as all the expense comes upon tiie appellant, or inventor, and none upon the Patent Office; yea, and even when successful, the appellant has to pay the appeal fee to the Patent Offiemdash;to the parties for making a wrong decision, that is beautiful justice. We don't like the wheel-within-wheel system of coercion as spoken of here. This government frowning, and lick-spittle interference with the Patent Office is anti-republican in essence and spirit. ADDITIONAL KOOM REQUIRED.mdash;It will be recollected by our readers that the present Secretary of the Interior, attempted to get a Bill passed through Congress granting him, for his Department, the use of the new wing of the Patent Office. It was said by him that there was plenty of room both lor the Patent Office Hnd his also. We took strong grounds against his Bill, and pointed out the incorrect ness of its general statements. The "National Intelligencer " (not the " Republic," as mentioned by us last week), came out in defence of the application of the Secretary of the Interior, and tried to defend it as being in accordance with law. We exposed the fallacy ot such reasoning ; but the principlemdash;that which we now wish to make plainmdash;was the request of the Secretary of the Interior for the wing of the Patent Office, coupled with the assertion that there was plenty of room fox his department and the Patent Office business also. This Report of the Commissioner says, mdash;'' they are so embarrassed for want of room that, for twelve months, the mails have been made up in an open passage,mdash;where the correspondence and daily cash remittances are unavoidably exposedmdash;if more room is not soon provided, it will prove a positive interruption to the business of the Office; such an exhibition of the models as was contemplated by the law of 1836, is not only impossible, but it is scarcely practicable to protect the delicate models from destruction. The condition of these models is a great injustice to their authors, and to inventors and patentees generally, since the rooms and cases prepared expressly for them at ths expense of the Patent Fund, have now been withheld from the Office for a period of ten years." The whole force of the Patent Office also unitedmdash;and their letter is published in this Reportmdash;in urging the providing of more room for their business. Their report statesmdash;"the patented models now in the Office are so crowded that the provision of the law with respect to the exhibition of them, cannot be complied with, and the rejected models are in a worse condition. Three times the present space 13 wanted for the Library, and double for the Draughtsmen's Room. The copying clerks are now crowded into the rooms of other officers. Rooms are required for workshops, caveats, models, and pending models." How does this accord W'th the demand for the new wing of the Patent Office for the offices of the Department of the Interior ? Our inventors and patentees have been deeply wronged, already, in appropriating for other uses the Exhibition Room lor Models,mdash;it is now the National Museum, which should have a building exclusively for itself. There are now 20,000 models in the Patent Office, and in ten years it is supposed their number will be 40,000,mdash;as they are increasing at the rate of 2,000 per annum. The value of the 20,000 models, we presume, cannot be less than $1,000,000; but what of that? They only relate to the progress of invention (that which has made our country great), and as they do not relate to party politics, why, let 6,000 rot in the cellars. It is a great mistake to suppose that the treatment of inventors does not influence politics; we know to the contrary, but some leading politicians have not the gumption to perceive this. In 1851, 2258 applications were made for patents ; out of this number 760 were granted, thus making the rejections to be 1491, nearly two to one. The hasty rejection of some applications causes more trouble to the Office than it otherwise would; and many applications for patents have been rejected which should not have been. The surplus of the Office Fund for the year amounted to $8,881 68, over all expanditures; our inventors pay all their own taxes in connection with patents, yet they have been often treated as if they were paupers. We hope that better days are in store for them; we feel amply repaid for what we said about appropriating the Patent Office to the service of the Department of the Interior,\by the prevention of such an outrage upon inventors' rights.
This article was originally published with the title "Patent Office Report"