pounds on or before the A.D. day of and the stamp duty payable in respect of the certificate of such payment; and the sum of pounds on or before the day of A.D. and the stamp duty payable in respect of the certificate of such payment; and also if the said A. B., his executors, adminis- Conditions of trators or assigns, shall not supply or cause to be supplied for Our certificate of the production of such Letters-patent or duplicate so stamped, specifying the date of such production, shall be endorsed by the Clerk of the Commissioners on the Letters-patent or duplicate, and a like certificate shall be endorsed upon the Warrant for such Letterspatent filed in the said Office." Schedule of Stamp Duties to which this Act refers. 5 0 0 50 0 0 100 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 On the Letters-patent, or a Duplicate thereof (meaning those issued 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 22, in lieu of those destroyed or lost), before the expiration of the third year On the Letters-patent, or a Duplicate thereof, before the expiration of the seventh year . On Certificate of Record of Notice of Objections On Certificate of every Search and Inspection. Considerable difficulty has arisen under this provision, which does not, it appears, amount to a contract to purchase the articles of the Patentee. In a case before Lord Eldon (Walker v. Congreve (1816), powderbarrels, 29 Lond. Journ. 311; Carp. Pat. Rep. i. 356), the invention of the Patentee had been used in the Royal Laboratory at Woolwich, under the direction of Sir W. Congreve, Secretary to the Board of Ordnance. An injunction to restrain its use was disobeyed. On a motion to commit the defendant for its breach, Lord Eldon, C., remarked "Speaking with all due respect, I will treat Government here as I would any other suitor. . . . . I recommend Government to pay the costs of this application. I can only recommend to Government; but by the use of this language I give it to be understood that if the recommendation is not attended to, I will make an order for the defendant, Sir William Congreve, to pay the said costs." In the case of Pering's Patent (1836 (anchors), 6 N. & M. 472; 4 A. & L. 949), ..... supplying arti cles for Her Majesty's service. Power to grant licences. service all such articles of the said Invention as he or they shall be required to supply by the Officers or Commissioners administering the department of Our service for the use of which the same shall be required, in such manner, at such times, and at and upon such reasonable prices and terms as shall be settled for that purpose by the said Officers or Commissioners requiring the same, that then and in any of the said cases these Our Letters-patent, and all liberties and advantages whatsoever hereby granted, shall utterly cease, determine and become void, anything hereinbefore contained to the contrary thereof in anywise notwithstanding: Provided that nothing herein contained shall prevent the granting of licences in such manner and for such considerations as they may by Law be granted: And lastly, We do by these presents, for Us, Our heirs and successors, grant unto the said A. B., his executors, administrators and assigns, that these Our Letterspatent, on the filing thereof, shall be in and by all things good, firm, valid, sufficient and effectual according to the true intent and meaning thereof, and shall be taken, construede and adjudged in the most favourable and beneficial sense for the best advantage of the said A. B., his executors, administrators and assigns, as well in all Our Courts of Record as elsewhere, and by all and singular the Officers and Ministers whatsoever of Us, Our heirs and successors, in Our the invention was made use of by the Admiralty in the Royal Dock.. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Channel Islands A.D. day of year of Our reign. abolition of The present practice with regard to the revocation of Change in the the privileges granted by Letters-patent differs very ma- practice by terially from that formerly observed, in consequence of enrolment. the changes effected with reference to the documents connected with it, and the discontinuance of the enrolment of Letters-patent and Specifications. The surrender of the Letters-patent by the Patentee, and the cancellation of the enrolment by "drawing strikes through it like a lattice," seem formerly to have been always insisted on as indispensable formalities. Patent. If a man surrendered his Patent and it were cancelled, Surrender of and a note of it endorsed and afterwards the surrender enrolled, the Patent was vacated by it; and after the vacatur entered upon the roll, a constat of it could not be granted." The surrender of the original Patent, where a Patent was granted to two, and the Chancellor made a duplicate, was held sufficient to vacate the Patent," for the duplicate was made by the Chancellor without a warrant." Formerly, in the event of the loss of original Letterspatent, a certificated transcript from the enrolment, called an "exemplification" or "constat," was obtainable, and was of the same forces as the original Patent. By the d Letters-patent are no longer signed by the Queen. e "It is the highest point of the Lord Chancellor's jurisdiction to cancel the King's Letters-patent under the Great Seal." 4 Inst. 88; 1 Hawk. P. C. 627. Dy. 167 a, in marg. By stat. 3 & 4 Edw. VI. c. 4, explained by stat. 13 Eliz. c. 6; 5 Co. 53 b; Co. Litt. 225 a. R. v. Newton. Revocation by the Queen's Bench. new Act, the proceedings in the event of the original Letters-patent being destroyed or lost are much simplified, the Commissioners being empowered to issue other Letters-patent, of the like tenor and effect and of the date of the original Patent. In the Queen v. Newton, a curious instance is afforded of rigorous adherence to ancient custom in deciding the practice as to Patents in the present day. It was an application to compel the defendant to bring the Patent into Court to have the same cancelled and the Seal cut therefrom. The question had been tried by action of scire facias, and judgment awarded, that the Patent was to be considered null and void. The Court inquired where precedents were to be found for the present application. It was admitted that there was no case upon record exactly similar to that before the Court, but one "bearing upon the point" occurred in the reign of Edward III., in reference to a Charter granted to the Friars Carmelites: this charter had been annulled by the Court of King's Bench, and the Friars were ordered "to take the Patent into the Court of Chancery (whence it had issued), there, according to form, to be cancellated, crossed with lines, and the Great Seal broken and cut off." After some further discussion it was decided, that the enrolment of the Patent should be cancelled, that a vacatur should be entered on the roll, and that the defendant should undertake not to bring a writ of error, or make any assignment of the Patent. Several precedents are to be found in the records of the Court of Queen's Bench of judgments given by that h 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 22. 1 Copied from the Warrant which embodies the form of the Letterspatent, and is filed in the Commissioners' Office. * (1845) 26 Lond. Jour. 361, cor. Lyndhurst, L. C., assisted by Lord Langdale, M. R. Court to repeal Letters-patent. In Mich. 3 & 4 Phil. & M., Roll. 16," is a record of scire facias to repeal Letterspatent, returnable in the King's Bench, 'quod literæ patentes revocentur, admittentur et evacuentur, et quod officium in manus Domini Regis seisiatur."' In Bynner v. Queen, the power of Courts of Common Cancelling. Law to order the cancelling of a Patent was argued at great length. In an elaborate judgment expressing the opinion of the Court, Tindal, C. J., said, "On the whole, we think the balance of authorities is decidedly in support of the position contended for on the part of the Crown; that the record is sent down to the Queen's Bench; that the Queen's Bench has authority to award the judgment, and afterwards to transmit either the record or the tenor thereof to the Court of Chancery, in order to be fully carried into execution; and that nothing remains to be done in the Court of Chancery but a mere ministerial act by the officers of that Court." The judgment of the Court below being complete, the Court of Chancery will not stay the necessary formal execution of that judgment.P remaining of Record. The documents remaining of Record under the new Documents repractice are the Warrant of the Law Officer for the sealing, and the Specification, both of which are filed in the Office of the Commissioners. Transcripts of the Letters-patent are to be transmitted Transcripts of Letters-patent to the Director of Chancery in Scotland, and to the for Scotland Court of Chancery in Dublin,' for enrolment in the re- and Ireland. cords of those Courts. To repeal a grant of the Office of Keeper of the Gaols of Ilchester and Dorchester. • Ex. Ch. 9 Q. B. 523. See 12 & 13 Vict. c. 109, ss. 35, 36 (Petty Bag, &c., Offices Amendment), and post, under head of" Scire Facias." P R. v. Eastern Archipelago Company (1854), L. C., 1 Eq. Rep. 513. The formality observed in this case was the proclamation three times by the Clerk of the Petty Bag for the defendants to bring in the Charter to be cancelled. No answer being returned, his Lordship named fourteen days as the period within which the Charter should be delivered up. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 18. r 15 & 16 Vict. c. 83, s. 29. N |