Chapter XVI: Mr. Brunel’s Professional Opinions and Practice

SCHEME OF THE CHAPTER--MR. BRUNEL’S POSITION IN RELATION TO THE
COMPANIES OF WHICH HE WAS ENGINEER--LETTER ON THE DIRECTION OF
RAILWAY WORKS IN ITALY (MARCH 4, 1845)--LETTER ON THE POSITION OF
JOINT ENGINEER (OCTOBER 16, 1843)--LETTER ON THE POSITION OF
CONSULTING ENGINEER (DECEMBER 30, 1851)--LETTER ON THE POSITION OF
THE ENGINEER IN RELATION TO THE CONTRACTORS (MAY 26, 1854)--LETTERS
ON THE POSITION OF THE ENGINEER IN RELATION TO THE DIRECTORS (APRIL
15, 1850; DECEMBER 6, 1851; JANUARY 22, 1857)--MR. BRUNEL’S
ASSISTANTS--LETTERS ON INTERFERENCE OF DIRECTORS WITH THE ASSISTANT
ENGINEERS (JANUARY 19, 1842; JANUARY 28, 1842; JANUARY 12,
1851)--MR. BRUNEL’S PUPILS--HIS RELATIONS WITH OTHER
ENGINEERS--INVENTORS--LETTER IN REPLY TO AN INVENTOR (SEPTEMBER 17,
1847)--MR. BRUNEL’S VIEWS AS TO STATE INTERFERENCE--LETTER ON THE
ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE APPLICATION OF IRON TO RAILWAY STRUCTURES
(MARCH 13, 1848)--LETTER ON A PROPOSAL TO OBTAIN THE RECOGNITION IN
ENGLAND OF DECORATIONS CONFERRED AT THE PARIS EXHIBITION OF 1855
(FEBRUARY 9, 1856)--MR. BRUNEL’S OPINION ON THE PATENT
LAWS--MEMORANDUM FOR EVIDENCE BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE OF THE
HOUSE OF LORDS ON THE PATENT LAWS, 1851--EXTRACT FROM OBSERVATIONS
ON THE PATENT LAWS, MADE BY MR. BRUNEL AT A MEETING OF THE SOCIETY
OF ARTS (MARCH 26, 1856).

It is proposed in the earlier part of this chapter to describe, principally by extracts from Mr. Brunel’s correspondence, the position occupied by him in regard to the Companies which he served, and to the various classes of persons with whom he acted in the discharge of his duties as engineer to those Companies. These selections are followed by extracts relating to questions of general professional interest.

* * * * *

The first point to be considered is, his relations with the Companies which employed him as their engineer, and with the Directors who formed the governing body.

Mr. Brunel conceived that he was, by virtue of his appointment as engineer, the sole and confidential adviser of the Company in all matters relating to the construction and mechanical working of the undertaking. He did not permit any one to be associated with him in the supreme control over those matters which were in his department; and the moment he thought that confidence was no longer placed in him, he was prepared at every sacrifice to resign his office. But, as long as he was supported by the Directors, he thoroughly identified himself with their cause, and he never allowed considerations of health or convenience or pecuniary advantage to interfere with the performance of any service which he could render them. The fearless independence of his position, combined with his absolute devotion to the interests of his employers, was no doubt the secret of the immense influence he acquired, and of the affectionate esteem with which he was regarded by those whom he served.

_On the Direction of Railway Works._

March 4, 1845.

I have well considered the communication which you did me the
honour of making on the part of the Government of His Majesty the
King of Sardinia with reference to my undertaking the direction of
the works of the proposed railway from Genoa to Alessandria, about
to be executed by the Government itself....

In the first place I assume that if the direction of the works be
confided to me as the engineer, the same degree of confidence will
be placed in me, and the same authority will result from that
confidence, as would be the case in England--that is to say, I
should be the confidential adviser of the Government in all
engineering questions connected with this railway, my
communications would in all matters be made direct with the
Government, and as long as I continued to be responsible for the
direction of the works no other engineer would be consulted or
allowed to interfere. Of course I claim no right to direct anything
but that which has the sanction of the Government; but I should
claim to be their sole adviser on all engineering points (connected
with the construction of the railway), and to possess their entire
confidence; and also that, if any portion of that full confidence
were at any time withdrawn, the fact should be immediately
communicated to me; when, after making every possible arrangement
to prevent inconvenience to the Government, I might withdraw from
the direction of the work. This is the position which an engineer
of any standing occupies in this country, whether acting for the
Government or for individuals; and I believe it to be as fully
essential for the success of the proposed undertaking, and as
necessary for the interests of His Majesty’s Government as for my
satisfaction, that I should be placed in a similar position.

The circumstance of my being a foreigner, of my being rarely
present to meet objections, if any are raised, of the unavoidable
frequency of real as well as apparent failures in works of such
variety and so numerous as those which occur on this line, of the
difficulties which always attend the introduction of novelties and
everything connected with a railway, the rapid mode of its
construction, the necessity which experience has proved of
frequently adopting apparently hasty and hazardous methods to
prevent the evil consequences of protracted delays,--all this will
be novelty with you as it was a few years ago in England, all these
circumstances combine to render it peculiarly essential to the
satisfactory progress of the undertaking that it should be well
known to all parties that full and entire confidence is placed in
me by the Government.

It will of course also be necessary that all parties acting under
me in the direction of the works should feel that their appointment
or dismissal depends entirely upon me.

In return for the confidence thus placed in me and the authority
given to me, I should of course know no interest but that of the
Government. If the Government is willing to appoint me engineer
according to this definition of my position, I shall feel pride in
the appointment, and I shall devote my best energies to the
accomplishment of one of the finest and most interesting works of
the day....

_On the Position of Joint Engineer._

October 16, 1843.

The contents of your letter of yesterday take me quite by surprise;
the expression you use of joint-engineership implies a view of our
relative position diametrically opposed to the views which I have
plainly and unequivocally expressed to you and to the Directors
when such a thing as joint-engineership was proposed to and
rejected by me....

You wind up your letter by saying ‘we have accepted the duty of
joint-engineers,’ &c., and you add a postscript requesting me to
lay your letter before the Directors: this I should have been
obliged to do without any such request. I never accepted the duty
of joint-engineer; I have always refused to do so. I thought I had
made this very clear both to you and the Directors on several
occasions; indeed I often feared that I expressed myself too
strongly instead of leaving it capable of misapprehension....

_On the Position of Consulting Engineer._

December 30, 1851.

I shall be happy to act in any capacity (subject to the exception I
will further explain) which can be useful to your Company; ... but
the exception I have to make is one which perhaps resolves itself
merely into a question of _name_. The term ‘Consulting Engineer’ is
a very vague one, and in practice has been too much used to mean a
man who for a consideration sells his name, but nothing more. Now I
never connect myself with an engineering work except as the
Directing Engineer, who, under the Directors, has the sole
responsibility and control of the engineering, and is therefore
‘The Engineer;’ and I have always objected to the term ‘Consulting
Engineer.’ ...

In a railway the only works to be constructed are engineering
works, and there can really be only one engineer; and in your case
especially, where, as I apprehend, the contractor is part of the
company, and has to be treated with consideration, and perhaps less
vigorously, at all events differently from an ordinary contractor,
considerable management and discretion will be required of your
engineer, and a degree of responsibility which I would only
undertake if sole engineer. Possibly this is what you meant, and
that I alone see the distinction, but it is an important one with
which you may not be so familiar as I am.

_On the Position of the Engineer in Relation to the Contractors._

May 26, 1854.

I have in due course taken steps to prepare a report for the
Directors on the state of the work, but you must not apply to the
contractors for such reports. In the first place, it would lead to
ridiculous contradictions, inasmuch as most likely my reports
would differ materially from theirs; and also it would reverse the
whole order of things. I must alone, so long at least as I am the
professional adviser of the Company, be the medium of communication
with contractors in all matters which the terms of the contract
refer to me. I am very particular about the regularity of all these
forms, because, although, while all goes smooth, they are of no
consequence, yet if, unfortunately, any little difficulties arise,
then it is unpleasant and difficult to alter a previous course.

I would ask, then, that all official communications with the
contractors should be made through me, and that, even as regards
these, we should confer together before any formal resolution
should at any time be passed, so as to be sure that it is properly
worded, and that no awkward precedent is established.

You may have seen that a great appeal case before the Lords,
affecting claims of some hundreds of thousands, has just been
finally decided in favour of the Great Western Railway Company
after fourteen years of litigation;[190] and this favourable
decision was entirely obtained by carefully prepared
specifications, and by my not having departed in any single case,
in years of correspondence, from the letter and spirit of the
contract, and particularly from the fact--strongly commented upon
by Lords Cranworth and Brougham--that I had maintained my position
of umpire between the Company and contractor. It is, then, as
essential to the Company as to the contractor and to me that I
should maintain that position.

_On the Relations between the Engineer and the Directors._

I.

April 15, 1850.

You will remember that on the 2nd of November last I addressed you
a letter on the subject of my acting as umpire in several cases of
reference between the Company and contractors, who were raising
heavy claims against the Company, in which I expressed my readiness
to act in a very responsible, laborious, and thankless position....

I am also still acting, so far as my services can be useful, as
your engineer; and in arranging with contractors, &c., there is
even now much remaining to be done. As long as I enjoy your full
confidence, it would be a great pleasure to me, although the
profit might for the present be small, to continue your engineer,
looking forward, as I do, at no distant period to the completion of
the works; but the changes that have lately taken place in the
Board, and the excitement which has been displayed by some of your
proprietors in effecting those changes--such excitement as is too
apt frequently to lead men to form most unjust and erroneous
opinions of the trustworthiness of those who have been long engaged
in their service--very naturally causes anxiety. I, and you who
have been acting with me for so long, know that I have always
advised you honestly, and I hope generally wisely, on such matters
as I have been consulted upon, notwithstanding my known connection
with other and sometimes conflicting interests. But new men may not
have the same confidence in me, and I cannot afford to run the risk
of any doubts being entertained upon the subject.

I must therefore beg of you to bring the matter before the Board
formally, and if it is desired that I should continue to act as
your engineer, that I may have it clearly understood that I do so
with the full concurrence of the Board as now constituted, and
particularly of the new Directors; and that to render the
expression of their confidence clear, I wish them to understand
that I am quite ready to tender them my resignation if they do not
feel that confidence, and that such resignation cannot prejudice
any of the cases under arbitration before me, as I undertook them
upon the express understanding that it was as agreed umpire, and
not as engineer to the Company.

I shall only add that by being engineer to a Company, I mean acting
in perfect confidence with the Directors on matters generally, as I
have been in the habit of doing.

II.

December 6, 1851.

I really cannot consent to forego in this case the rule I lay down
for myself in my professional business, which is to yield as far as
I comfortably can to the mere wishes of Directors in the mode in
which I direct the works they may order, but not beyond this
point--and if the Directors of any body claim the right to control
the staff which I think necessary to carry on my work, I concede
the right at once, and resign the direction of that staff. The
staff for constructing engineering works is not a permanent
establishment, which can be extended or restricted just as a Board
of Directors may determine; it is much more of the character of a
personal staff attached to the engineer-in-chief, and by means of
which he is enabled to take great responsibility upon himself,
both in respect of the works which he executes, and the settlement
of large amounts of payments, in which settlement both the company
and the contractors are very much at his mercy. It is the duty of
an engineer of course to study economy as well as efficiency in his
staff, and to pay attention to the wishes of the Directors so far
as he can; but he must be the ultimate judge of the number and the
persons of that staff. At least, that is my rule, and I cannot
depart from it in this case. I should wish to state this as
respectfully as possible to the Board, but at the same time to
state it clearly.

III.

January 22, 1857.

...I have replied very fully to the observations of the Directors,
but having done so I must again place my resignation in the hands
of the Directors. A Board of Directors has a perfect right to
dispense with the services of an engineer, or to lay down any rules
of conduct they may think fit, and to engineer the works
themselves, either as a body or by appointing one of their members,
if they think fit; but if they desire to have the advice and
responsibility of any respectable engineer--at all events, if they
wish to have mine--they must place the usual amount of confidence
in me; and as long as I am engineer they must leave me to conduct
the engineering, and must act as if they assumed that I was more
able to advise the Board upon all the usual practical questions of
engineering than any one of the Directors. Admitting as I do the
full right of a Board of Directors to determine whether they will
have an engineer or not, if they have one they must trust him to do
his own work.

As a mere question of time it would be impossible that I could be
constantly entering into long explanations of the most trifling
character upon points on which I must be by far the most competent
judge--and in fact the competent and responsible judge, expressly
employed, and paid professionally because I am so. If individual
Directors are more competent than their engineer, let them assume
the office and the responsibility; but do not have a divided
responsibility. I am most happy at all times to receive any hints
or suggestions from any body whether Directors or not, but I cannot
undertake the labour of replying to them all, neither can I act as
engineer to a Board of Directors who, either as a body or by one or
two of their members, make a practice of taking upon themselves to
judge of those details of which I must be assumed to be the
competent judge, and thereby interfering with my proper duties. If
the engineer is not assumed to be worthy of trust both in respect
of zeal in the interests of the Company, and very superior to any
one of the Directors as regards experience, and ability to carry
out what the Directors may determine upon, he is not fit to be the
engineer; but if he is so, he must be left to carry out those
details of his department of the business. These are the general
principles upon which alone I can act.

It is, from the nature of the case, impossible by any extracts from Mr. Brunel’s correspondence to give an adequate idea of the position which he occupied in relation to his assistants. There was so much personal intercourse between them that letter writing was but little resorted to.

His relations with them were of the most affectionate and intimate kind, and were maintained without any ostentation or outward show. He was in the habit of placing entire confidence in his subordinates as long as he considered that they deserved it; and, while he preserved his own proper position, he was always ready to shield them from the interference of others. The letters which are printed below are evidence of this. When, on the other hand, anything occurred to displease him in the conduct of his assistants, he was eager to give the offender a chance of retrieving his position; and he was always ready to help them in any difficulties.

_On Interference of Directors with the Assistant Engineers._

I.

January 19, 1842.

While I am upon the subject, and as I have referred to the impolicy
of Directors taking notice of little things, and as I speak freely
to you, I will mention that I have observed with pain on some
occasions this tendency; and I will give one instance of what I
must call most unwise interference. It was lately, and
unfortunately at the same moment as this complaint, intimated that
a pair of boxing gloves had been seen in one of the Company’s
offices, and that _the Directors had observed it_. Now I really do
not know why a gentlemanly and industrious young man like ----
should be subject to have his trifling actions remarked upon more
than I myself, unless the observer gave him credit for a much more
gentle temper than I possess; because I confess, if any man had
taken upon himself to remark upon my having gone to the pantomime,
which I always do at Christmas, no respect for Directors or any
other officer would have restrained me. I will do my best to keep
my team in order; but I cannot do it if my master sits by me, and
amuses himself by touching them up with the whip.

II.

January 28, 1842.

I am much obliged to you for your letter. I am sorry to find,
however, that the impression, a very erroneous one as I believe,
remains upon your mind that the assistant engineers are predisposed
to encourage, or at all events allow, improper conduct on the part
either of contractors or the inferior agents of the Company....

From some experience in these matters it is that I have come to the
conclusion that it is wise (however strange you may think the
doctrine to be) to shut one’s ears and eyes really and truly to
everything which does not come forward in such a shape as to demand
and admit of an enquiry; and it is for this reason also that I do
entertain the opinion very strongly (in which you appear to differ
from me), that it is not the interest, it is not wise, and
therefore only it is not the duty of Directors to look after, or to
see into, the smaller details of the conduct of an establishment
which, being of a very temporary, changing, and uncertain
character, cannot at the best be conducted with the discipline and
regularity of a permanent establishment, in which the parties have
their clearly defined and unchanging duties, and look forward to
the permanent occupation of their places as their means of support.

At all events, when the Directors see anything they think desirable
to correct or to modify, they can fully communicate it to me
without the possibility of giving to me any soreness of feeling,
which it is always desirable not to excite, even in the case of the
lowest menial whose best services one wishes to have and use.

III.

December 12, 1851.

With reference to your letter of December 11, stating that the
Directors ‘are satisfied that great irregularities have existed,
and that they feel it to be their duty, and will not hesitate on
any occasion, to represent to me any irregularity on the part of my
staff that may come to their knowledge,’ I am almost afraid, unless
in a short note you may have failed to convey to me the meaning of
the Directors, that they greatly misunderstand my feelings on the
subject; my great desire, as great as, possibly greater than even
that of the Directors, who cannot feel so personally responsible as
I do for the efficiency of my staff--my great desire I say is to
hear immediately from anybody, and particularly of course from a
Director, of any supposed irregularity; and I should feel that I
had ground of complaint even if any such report or any suspicion of
any irregularity were not immediately communicated to me. The
moment that the Directors could doubt my being as anxious as they
can be to know and to remedy any irregularity, or that they should
look upon me in such matters otherwise than as one of themselves, I
should feel that I had lost their confidence, and could no longer
carry on satisfactorily to myself my duties, and should therefore
resign them. Such must, I beg, be our relative position as regards
the future; and carrying out this principle as regards the past, I
must beg of them to tell me explicitly what are the irregularities
to which they refer as having been committed. I ought to be fully
informed of such things--indeed, nothing ought to be suspected even
without my knowing; for if _I_ ought not to know, who ought?

As a matter of form, and to be strictly correct, I must guard
myself against being supposed to mean that I could desire or
approve of what the Directors I am sure would also disapprove
of--namely, a system of fault-seeking--because in a very numerous
staff or body of men, particularly where they have not the benefit
of permanent situations, the perfection of regularity cannot be
hoped for; what I principally seek and require of my assistants is
an honest discharge of their duties, and any departure from this it
is well known amongst them I never overlook. Have the goodness,
therefore, to ascertain for me, and to let me know immediately,
what these irregularities have been.

A few words may here be added on Mr. Brunel’s practice in reference to taking pupils.

Although many of his assistants had been his pupils, he did not encourage young men to come to him with the object of learning their profession in his office. He never absolutely declined to take pupils; but he endeavoured, by fixing a high premium, to reduce the number of applicants.

He did not profess to do more for his pupils than to give them the opportunities of seeing work, afforded by his office, and the chance of being afterwards employed as his assistants. He attached much importance to private study of mathematics and other branches of science.

* * * * *

Passing on to the position assumed by Mr. Brunel in his relations to the profession at large;--it may be stated in a few words, that he was desirous on all occasions of promoting its welfare by encouraging friendly intercourse among its members, by healing strife, by suppressing as far as he could all cant or pretension, and by setting his face steadfastly against all attempts to fetter the freedom of invention or to lessen the independence of engineers by State patronage or control.

It may appear strange to affirm of one who was foremost in almost all the professional contests of his time, that he was zealous in healing strife; but it is nevertheless true that Mr. Brunel, while he was a bold and uncompromising advocate of his own schemes, was at the same time untiring in his exertions to limit the area of controversy, to confine it strictly within its proper bounds, and to divest it of all personality or of anything which could lead to unpleasant feeling or annoyance.

His endeavours to this end were greatly helped by the friendly relations which he maintained at all times with his professional brethren. He never allowed any divergence of opinion to interfere with private friendship; and, even in the height of controversy, he was glad to give, and ready to ask for, advice on matters connected with the scientific departments of civil engineering.

It is but seldom that extracts have been made from Mr. Brunel’s private journals; but it may be permitted, in illustration of what has been said on this point, to give the following passage, written during the great contests of the year 1846.

May 5, 1846.

I am just returned from spending an evening with R. Stephenson. It
is very delightful, in the midst of our incessant personal
professional contests, carried to the extreme limit of fair
opposition, to meet him on a perfectly friendly footing, and
discuss engineering points.... Again I cannot help recording the
great pleasure I derive from these occasional though rare meetings.

Mr. Brunel’s opinions on the working of the patent laws will be given below, as following more fitly after extracts from his correspondence relating to the position of his profession in regard to the Government; but, before entering upon that subject, a few words may be said in reference to a class of persons who formed a very large proportion of his correspondents--the class of ‘Inventors.’

He used to receive numerous applications from persons who had invented, or who thought they had invented, some useful contrivance, from a locomotive which would save fifty per cent. in fuel over those then in use, to a machine which, as Mr. Brunel assured its inventor, ‘would not even have a tendency to move.’ He was always ready to encourage inventions which seemed likely to produce good results, and to enquire into their merits, if they were patented; but not otherwise, lest it should be said that confidence had been placed in him.

The following is one of the many letters he had to write in answer to requests of this nature.

September 17, 1847.

I could not have complied with your request of giving any opinion
upon the merits of the invention. Simple as such an act may be, it
too frequently involves one in controversy; and I never found,
before I made the rule not to give opinions, that my advice was
ever followed, if it was to discourage the inventor from further
expense and trouble.

I should tell you in this case that the idea of dovetailing, which
in your first letter I find was the principle of the invention, had
long before been worked out in every shape and form that ingenuity
or blundering could possibly give it.

Upon the important question how far, if at all, the practice of civil engineers should be subject to State control, Mr. Brunel held very decided views. He was strongly opposed both to any interference on the part of the State with the freedom of civil engineers in the conduct of their professional work, and to the recognition of merit by the bestowal of honours or rewards.

_On the Royal Commission on the Application of Iron to Railway Structures._[191]

March 13, 1848.

I regret that the Commissioners should have done me the honour of
requesting ‘my opinion upon the enquiry referred to them;’ because,
as it is known to one or more of these Commissioners that I have
expressed very strongly, both publicly and privately, my doubts of
the advantage of such an enquiry, and my fears of its being, on the
contrary, productive of much mischief, both to science and to the
profession, it would expose me to a charge of weakness and of
inconsistency if I were now to refrain from expressing those
opinions, which otherwise I had no idea of intruding upon the
Commissioners; and, indeed, I had hoped that, by making those
opinions known to some of the members, I might have been passed
over, and not invited to assist in the proceedings.

I shall be most happy to communicate, as I am at all times most
anxious to do, any knowledge which I may obtain in the course of my
practice, and such intercommunication of ideas and of experience
amongst engineers I believe to be most useful; but the attempt to
collect and re-issue as facts, with the stamp of authority, all
that may be offered gratuitously to a Commission in the shape of
evidence or opinions, to stamp with the same mark of value
statements and facts, hasty opinions and well-considered and
matured convictions, the good and the bad, the metal and the dross
(and simple courtesy to the donors must prevent the Commissioners
from attempting to draw distinctions which might appear
invidious)--this, I believe, always has rendered, and always will
render, such collections of miscalled evidence injurious instead of
advantageous to science; and the facts or statements and opinions
so collected will form generally, I believe, a lower average of
information than that which is already in the possession, or at
least within the reach, of those who have occasion to study the
subject: for it is remarkable that in this particular enquiry the
Commissioners can have no peculiar means of obtaining, and, as I
believe, cannot hope to get better or more extended information
than that possessed by any one of the principal engineers of the
day; while they will be compelled to receive and to publish much
that a prudent man, acting on his own responsibility, would either
not have attended to, or would silently have rejected. This,
however, is perhaps a negative evil, or, at most, one which cannot
much affect the proceedings of the well-informed in our profession;
but the mischief which I anticipate is much more dangerous to the
progress of science.

If the Commission is to enquire into the conditions ‘_to be
observed_,’ it is to be presumed that they will give the result of
their enquiries; or, in other words, that they will lay down, or at
least suggest, ‘rules’ and ‘conditions to be (hereafter) observed’
in the construction of bridges, or, in other words, embarrass and
shackle the progress of improvement to-morrow by recording and
registering as law the prejudices or errors of to-day.

Nothing, I believe, has tended more to distinguish advantageously
the profession of engineering in England and in America, nothing
has conduced more to the great advance made in our profession and
to our pre-eminence in the real practical application of the
science, than the absence of all _règles de l’art_--a term which I
fear is now going to be translated into English by the words
‘conditions to be observed.’ No man, however bold or however high
he may stand in his profession, can resist the benumbing effect of
rules laid down by authority. Occupied as leading men are, they
could not afford the time, or trouble, or responsibility of
constantly fighting against them--they would be compelled to
abandon all idea of improving upon them; while incompetent men
might commit the grossest blunder provided they followed the rules.
For, in the simplest branch of construction, rules may be followed
literally without any security as to the result. There is hardly a
branch of engineering that could have been selected which in its
present state is less capable of being made the subject of fixed
laws or instructions than the application of iron to railway
structures, and certainly there is no branch in which there is more
room for improvement, or which offers so many different channels or
directions for that improvement.

In the quality of the material, the workmanship, or the mode of
manufacture, and in the application of it, there is every
imaginable variety, there is room for almost any imaginable degree
or nature of improvement; and unless the Commissioners are endowed
with prophetic powers, it is impossible that they can now foresee
what may be the result of changes in any one of these
conditions.[192] ...

What rules or ‘conditions to be observed’ could be drawn up now
that would not become, not merely worthless, but totally erroneous
and misleading, under such improved circumstances? But above all, I
fear--nay, I feel convinced--that any attempt to establish any
rules, any publication of opinions which may create or guide public
prejudice, any suggestions coming from authority, must close the
door to improvement in any direction but that pointed out by the
Commissioners, and must tend to lead and direct, and therefore to
control and to limit, the number of the roads now open for advance.

I believe that nothing could tend more to arrest improvement than
such assistance, and that any attempt to fix now, or at any given
period, the conditions to be thereafter observed in the mode of
construction of any specific work of art, and thus to dictate for
the present and for the future the theory which is to be adopted as
the correct one in any branch of engineering, is contrary to all
sound philosophy, and will be productive of great mischief, in
tending to check and to control the extent and direction of all
improvements, and preventing that rapid advance in the useful
application of science to mechanics which has resulted from the
free exercise of engineering skill in this country, subjected as it
ever is, under the present system, to the severe and unerring
control and test of competing skill and of public opinion. Devoted
as I am to my profession, I see with fear and regret that this
tendency to legislate and to rule, which is the fashion of the day,
is flowing in our direction.

I must repeat my regret that circumstances should have forced me to
intrude these my opinions upon the Commissioners; but, for the
reasons I have before given, the application to me, after the part
I have taken, left me no alternative; but having expressed my
opinions, and respectfully protested against the objects and
proceedings of the Commissioners, I shall feel it my duty to attend
to their summons, and afford any information in my power.

_On a Proposal to obtain the Recognition in England of Decorations
conferred at the Paris Exhibition of 1855._

February 9, 1856.

I regretted to be under the necessity of declining to sign the
memorial that was brought to me by a gentleman introducing himself
with your card, without an opportunity of explaining to you my
reasons; and it would be difficult to do so satisfactorily without
an opportunity of personal explanation. In a few words, however, I
will state that I disapprove strongly, and after full
consideration, of any introduction into England of the system of
distinctions conferred by Government upon individuals, whether
engaged in professions, arts, or manufactures, whose merits can be
so much better and more surely marked by public opinion. In
countries where public opinion is not so searching and so powerful
as in England, the evils of favouritism may be out-balanced by the
advantages of some means of distinguishing men. I admit the
possibility, though I doubt the fact; but I feel sure that the
evils would be far greater than the advantages in England. The few
cases of knighthood conferred in England generally follow public
opinion, though I should not wish to see this system carried
further. Such being my opinion, I could not consistently ask for my
own letter of Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur being recognised
here.

On the question of the patent laws, Mr. Brunel held the opinion that the system of protecting inventions by means of letters patent was productive of immense evil. The prominent part which he took in all discussions upon this subject exposed him to much adverse criticism, which was perhaps the more freely bestowed, because it was felt that he was a very formidable opponent, not only from the force of his arguments, but also from the authority with which he spoke.

He was, from the necessity of his position as a civil engineer, himself an inventor; he had in his staff and among those with whom he acted many inventors; he did not, therefore, underrate the benefits conferred on science by those who, by inventing, add to its resources. He was continually being trammelled and thwarted in his various undertakings by patents, and he therefore could judge of their evil effects upon the progress of practical engineering; and, lastly, he had the best possible means of judging of their effects upon the inventors themselves, both from his opportunities of becoming acquainted with the fate of others, and from his own experience. His father, Sir Isambard Brunel, had taken out patents for most of his inventions, and, as Mr. Brunel stated before the House of Lords Committee of 1851, with very unfortunate results, especially in the case of the carbonic-gas engine (see Note B to Chapter I); where, if they had not been obliged to work secretly, in order to conceal the process before the patent was granted, they could have obtained valuable advice, which might either have led to an earlier abandonment of the project, or to its improvement in those points in which it failed.

Mr. Brunel drew up the following statement when asked to give evidence before the Select Committee of the House of Lords in 1851. His evidence will be found at p. 246 of the Minutes of Evidence (ordered to be printed July 1, 1851).

_Memorandum for Evidence before the Select Committee of the House
of Lords on the Patent Laws, 1851._

I have for many years had considerable experience of the operation
of patents.

I have been engaged under my father in the working out of numerous
inventions of his, and the taking out of patents on his account,
also in advising others professionally with him, and by myself, and
have been engaged in numerous questions of disputes resulting from
patents; and I have had frequent occasion to use the patents and
inventions of others. I have also had to introduce improvements of
my own without patents, and to defend my use of them against
patents.

I have thus for the last twenty-eight years been in the midst of
everything connected with inventions, and in constant contact with
the operation of the patent laws.

I have been behind the scenes the whole time.

The result has been that I have never taken out a patent myself, or
ever thought of doing so; and I have gradually become convinced
that the whole system of patents is, in the present advanced state
of arts and science and manufactures, productive of immense evil.

I think that it does nothing of what it professes to do, and which
I believe to be impracticable in the present state of things, but
that, on the contrary, it impedes everything it means to encourage,
and ruins the class it professes to protect, and that it is
productive of immense mischief to the public.

I should wish to observe that my opinions are not formed from any
theory, or from any consideration of what are or ought to be the
laws of patents, or whether the details of such laws are capable of
improvement or otherwise; but they are simply the result of a very
long and tolerably intimate knowledge of the operation of the hope
of protection held out, and the operation of that protection such
as it can be when obtained; and these results do not, in my
opinion, depend at all upon any question of whether patents are
cheap or dear, whether they are granted sparingly or profusely, by
a simple or by complicated machinery; it is the ruinous effects
upon the class of inventors, of the false dreams and hopes excited
by the system, and the injurious effect upon improvements of the
greater or less degree of exclusive privilege which is attained,
which I have had constantly before my eyes for so many years, and
which must be increased by any real improvement of the patent laws.

I should, therefore, be an advocate for very cheap patents granted
with great facility, to the poor illiterate workman, as well as to
the rich manufacturer with his counsel and agents, and as well
protected as legal ingenuity can devise.

If the system is good in principle it must bear extension, but I
believe it could not stand a twelvemonth under such a test--every
evil now inherent in the system would be greatly increased in
quantity, and the absurdities which are now ascribed to errors of
detail would all become so evident that the system would be
abandoned by universal consent.

I believe, paradoxical as it may seem, that the privileges thus
promised and granted to inventors are most injurious to them. To
understand this, it must be known and borne in mind that useful
inventions or improvements in the present day, certainly in nine
hundred and ninety-nine cases out of a thousand, are not new
discoveries, but generally slight modifications of what is already
in use; judicious applications of known principles and of
well-known and common parts of machinery, or of common substances,
very often mere revivals or re-inventions of something which had
many times previously been thought of, and perhaps tried, and
failed from the want only of some substance or of some tool which
has since been introduced.

I believe that the most useful and novel inventions and
improvements of the present day are mere progressive steps in a
highly wrought and highly advanced system, suggested by, and
dependent on, other previous steps, their whole value and the means
of their application probably dependent on the success of some or
many other inventions, some old, some new. I think also that really
good improvements are not the result of inspiration; they are not,
strictly speaking, inventions, but more or less the results of an
observing mind, brought to bear upon circumstances as they arise,
with an intimate knowledge of what has already been done, or what
might now be done, by means of the present improved state of
things, and that in most cases they result from a demand which
circumstances happen to create. The consequence is that most good
things are being thought of by many persons at the same time; and
if there were publicity and freedom of communication, instead of
concealment and mystery, ten times or a hundred times the number of
useful ideas would be generated by each man, and with less mental
effort and far less expenditure of time and money.

In the present state of things, if a man thinks he has invented
something, he immediately dreams of a patent, and of a fortune to
be made by it. If he is a rich man he loses his money, and no great
harm is done; but if he is a workman, and a poor man, his thoughts
are divided between scheming at his machine in secret, and scheming
at the mode of raising money to carry it out. He does not consult
his fellow-workmen, or men engaged in the same pursuits, as to
whether the same thing had ever been tried, why it had failed,
what are the difficulties, or (what is most probable) whether
something better is not already known, and waiting only the demand.
In nine cases out of ten he devotes his time and money to the idea,
instead of pursuing his legitimate and natural pursuits. In
elaborating this idea his whole thoughts are turned to the means of
making it different from what he may happen to know of similar
ideas, so that he may secure a patent, rather than to an honest
endeavour to obtain the most useful result. He does not make use of
other good ideas which may be already patented or in use, even if
he knows of them, because his sole object thenceforth is not
improvement, but ‘exclusive right.’ After much time and money spent
in experiments, he takes out a patent. I will assume that the mere
patent costs him nothing, but the waste of time and money in
elaborating his idea is generally considerable, and far more
serious in its effects upon the man than the payment of the fees
now demanded for a patent. When his patent is complete, and his
invention published, the chances are, and ever will be, one hundred
or one thousand to one that it is not worth a sixpence as an
exclusive right which others will buy of him: every chance is
against him.

_In the first place_ it must be a good thing, it must be an
improvement upon the very ‘best thing’ of the same sort: the
chances are of course great against this.

_Secondly._--It must be new, nothing of the sort must have been in
use before--how very few things can be devised which will bear this
test. I do not know of half-a-dozen clear cases of distinctly new
inventions since I have been acquainted with machinery and science;
and, judging from analogy, I cannot bring my mind to believe that
these would bear the test of a strict and searching enquiry by
interested parties. The chances are then immensely against his
invention, if good enough to be disputed, proving to be new enough
to stand as giving a claim to exclusiveness.

_Thirdly._--It must not depend for its success upon the use of some
other exclusive and privileged invention, or else of course it is
of little saleable value, even if not an infringement upon the
previous patent.

_Fourthly._--There must be a demand existing or creatable for the
article produced; or, like many other good things, it will be out
of time, and drop accordingly.

_Fifthly._--He must find some parties whose interest it is to
encourage the introduction of the change, and who have the means of
combating those interests which are embarked in previous
monopolies.

Since all these conditions are necessary for success, it is not
surprising that the result should be, as I am positive that it is
in practice, that the aggregate of individual benefit derived by
the exclusive privileges granted, is greatly below the aggregate
expenditure of time and money involved in the production of the
whole, taking the good and bad; but the proportion of the aggregate
benefits as compared with the cost to the real inventor is still
less.

It is known to all persons acquainted with the subject that, in
nine cases out of ten of successful inventions, the patents are not
beneficially enjoyed by the original inventor. And it always must
be so. The mere original invention forms generally but a small part
of the whole business or merit of bringing into useful operation
any new thing. Judgment, a knowledge of the world, and of business
and other qualities not particularly belonging to inventors, are
just as requisite as mere ingenuity, although they are not the
subject of protection. Capital and connection are also generally
required. All these command, as they ought to do, a large share in
the ultimate profits, but it is rare that an inventor at once finds
such a partner. The invention generally changes hands once or
twice, or oftener, till some chance brings it into operation; and
ultimately it is (as must be admitted by all who know anything
about these matters) very rarely, even in the case of good things,
that the party who originated the subject of the patent has
ultimately any large beneficial interest in it; and certainly, from
these and all the other causes mentioned, it is an undoubted fact
that inventors, on the whole, make a heavy annual loss, quite
irrespective of mere patent fees, by inventions and patents, and
that patents are not therefore a benefit to the present class of
inventors, and particularly not to the poorer members of the class.

Without the hopes of any exclusive privileges, I believe that a
clever man would produce many more good ideas, and derive much more
easily some benefit from them. It is true that he will aim only at
earning a few pounds instead of dreaming of thousands; but he will
earn these few pounds frequently, and without interfering with his
daily pursuits; on the contrary, he will make himself more useful.

An observing man sees what he thinks to be a mode of increasing the
production of a certain machine or manufacturing operation in which
he is engaged, or a better mode than that which he is acquainted
with of producing some article. In all probability the same
circumstances which led him to make the observation have attracted
the attention of others before him; perhaps, at the same time, a
little free communication with his fellow-work men or with other
manufacturers or men of science would show him that there were
insuperable difficulties, and he would turn his attention at once
to other things, or that there were better ways of doing the same
thing, or, by pointing out difficulties, enable him to avoid
useless investigations, or to make a change that would vastly
improve his scheme; or he would communicate his ideas, instead of
wasting his time in elaborating them, which very possibly others
more acquainted with the particular branch would do much better
than he; if he is a workman, his master would give him something
for the idea, or if not, his value as a workman would soon become
known. It is a great error to suppose that stupid men can live upon
the clever man’s brains if they are all left free scope in the use
of their intellect; but if by artificial means an exclusive right
or property in an idea can be secured, then of course the thief may
steal the idea, and having registered his property in it, his
inferiority of intellect is more than counterbalanced. Intelligent
men who would always be suggesting improvements in a manufactory
would soon become necessary, and would be valued accordingly. A
manufacturer who was not surrounded by such assistants would stand
no chance in the general competition, and what is necessary and
valuable will in England fetch its price; and thus clever workmen
will get well paid, and earn much more, and that more healthily,
than the whole body of schemers now do.

The impediments thrown in the way of improvements by the existence
of patents will hardly be credited by those who are not familiar
with the operation of them. In the present state of things they
create such barriers that it is almost wonderful that any
improvements can be effected.

It will not be difficult to understand that, from the infinite
number of patents that are now taken out, it is hardly possible to
devise a mechanism or a chemical combination that does not, in some
shape or other, form part of some previous invention or process.
This would be the case even if patents were only taken out to
secure real, or what are believed to be real, inventions. But the
shoals of patents have brought into existence animals to feed upon
them. There is a trade which nothing can destroy as long as patents
last, and which must increase with the increase of patent, whatever
may be the mode of granting them. Patents are taken out even in
very general terms, so as to embrace everything that can resemble
some probable or imaginary improvement, and then, like a spider in
his web, the patentee watches for his victims. Besides this, the
honest but trading patentee, the more completely to secure a
monopoly, often takes out several separate patents for nearly the
same thing in different forms, some avowedly worthless. In doing
this, without even intending it, he includes combinations, any
beneficial application of which perhaps never crossed his mind, and
which, in the shape in which he suggested them were good for
nothing, but which nevertheless more or less prevent anybody else
from touching them, even to make a good thing.

Again, the most respectable houses take out patents merely to
secure a monopoly of some one form of article without much regard
to the superiority of it. The result of all this is that it is
almost impossible now to introduce the slightest real improvement
in anything without infringing upon some patent, and exposing
oneself to be proceeded against by some patentee.

The extent to which improvements are impeded by this state of
things is hardly conceivable, except to those who, like myself, are
daily suffering under it.

There is another very serious evil produced by the system. In
taking out a patent, the necessity for avoiding all claim to
anything that can be shown to have been patented or in common use
before compels you in most cases to seek rather what part of it can
best be patented than what it is that is good in the invention.
Comparatively trivial points are frequently patented in order to
secure the monopoly of that which, although it constitutes the
merit of the invention, may not happen to be so new in every
respect as to admit of a patent. When the patent is taken, other
modes of carrying out the real invention are discovered; these
modes are patented and the original patentee is obliged to lose the
benefit of his invention or to buy up these new patents. There are
instances where enormous sums have been spent in this manner to
protect an original invention.

And, lastly, there is an evil which acts like a numbing disease on
all improvements; a patentee frequently dares not himself introduce
improvements in any apparatus or process which he has patented, for
fear of thus injuring his patent; and I have seen numerous cases of
very important inventions where all improvement has been thus
checked and resisted by the very parties most capable of effecting
them, and who would have brought great talent and zeal to the work
if they had been free.

_Extract from Observations on the Patent Laws made by Mr. Brunel at a Meeting of the Society of Arts._

March 28, 1856.

He did not agree at all as to the advantages of patents. He quite
agreed as to the desirability of protecting, as far as possible, a
man’s property, whether it was in the power of invention, or any
other good thing that was within him, and still more would he
protect in every possible way the property in inventions of those
who possessed but little other property--the powers of the inventor
and the ingenuity of the workman; but, having had some considerable
experience with patentees, manufacturers, and workmen, he was of
opinion that any practical benefits derived from the patent laws
did not compensate for the injury inflicted. He believed, on the
contrary, that both the inventors and the public greatly suffered
from the attempt to protect inventions. He had had great experience
on this subject, being compelled daily to examine inventions of
various kinds, and having himself constantly to invent in the
occupations in which he was engaged. Having, then, all his life,
been connected with inventors and workmen, he had witnessed the
injury, the waste of mind, the waste of time, the excitement of
false hopes, the vast waste of money, caused by the patent laws, in
fact, all the evils which generally resulted from the attempt to
protect that which did not naturally admit of protection. He agreed
as to the abstract desirability of protecting inventors in some
way, provided it did not foster unhealthy invention, as he thought
it desirable to protect every species of property that existed. He
was disposed to encourage every step towards facilitating the
obtaining patents; he hoped they would be made dirt cheap, as he
thought that would be the most effectual way of destroying them
altogether. Therefore, whenever he had been consulted on the
subject of the patent laws, he had always advocated the rendering
of patents as open and free and cheap as possible; in the first
place, because he saw no reason for attaching a price to them, and
next, because they would sooner arrive where the principle would be
fully tested. We were already nearly arrived at that state of
things when engineers were almost brought to a dead stand in their
attempt to introduce improvements, from the excess of protection.
He found that he could hardly introduce the slightest improvement
in his own machinery without being stopped by a patent. He could
mention a striking instance, in which, a few months ago, wishing to
introduce an improvement that he thought would have been valuable
to the public in a large work on which he was engaged, he had no
sooner entered upon it, with a willingness to incur considerable
expense in the preliminary requirements and in the trial of it,
than he was stopped by a patentee; but he was fortunate enough to
find that another patent existed of the same thing, and a week
after a third appeared. There was thus, fortunately, a probability
that, by the destruction of all value in any of the patents, he
might be able to continue the improvements he was desirous of
introducing.