The Oxford Handbook of Jane Addams

Patricia M. Shields
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-jane-addams-patricia-m-shiel
ds/
 T h e Ox f o r d H a n d b o o k o f

JA N E A DDA M S
The Oxford Handbook of

JANE ADDAMS
Edited by
PATRICIA M. SHIELDS,
MAURICE HAMINGTON,
and
JOSEPH SOETERS
 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers
the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education
by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University
Press in the UK and certain other countries.

Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press

198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America.

© Oxford University Press 2023

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in

a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction
rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above.

You must not circulate this work in any other form

and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Shields, Patricia M., editor. | Hamington, Maurice, editor. | Soeters, J., editor.
Title: The Oxford handbook of Jane Addams / edited by Patricia M. Shields,
Maurice Hamington, and Joseph Soeters.
Description: New York, NY : Oxford University Press, [2023] | Series: Oxford handbooks series |
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
Identifiers: LCCN 2022040654 (print) | LCCN 2022040655 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780197544518 (hardback) | ISBN 9780197544549 | ISBN 9780197544532 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Addams, Jane, 1860-1935. | Women political activists—United States—History. |
Women social reformers—United States—History. | Women social workers—United States—History. |
Women pacifists—United States—History.
Classification: LCC HQ1236.5.U6 O936 2023 (print) | LCC HQ1236.5.U6 (ebook) |
DDC 361.92—dc23/eng/20221222
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022040654
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2022040655

DOI: 10.1093/​oxfordhb/​9780197544518.001.0001

Printed by Marquis Book Printing, Canada

 Dedications
Patricia Shields dedicates this volume to future Addams scholars.
Please find inspiration in your scholarly journey.
Maurice Hamington dedicates this volume to the Jane Collective of the Society for
the Advancement of American Philosophy, a community of scholars that since 2006
has encouraged research on issues in feminist thought as they occur in American
philosophies, including their intersections with people of undervalued and
oppressed identities.
Joseph Soeters dedicates this volume to those who suffer(ed) immensely from the acts
of dominating people and whose fate tends to be forgotten; a typical case, but surely not
the only one, being the Indigenous people in the United States of America.
 Contents

Acknowledgments  xiii
Foreword  xv
Charlene Haddock Seigfried
About the Editors  xvii
List of Contributors  xix

I N T RODU C T ION
1. On the Maturation of Addams Studies: A Figure of Vital Intellectual
and Practical Significance  3
Patricia M. Shields, Maurice Hamington, and Joseph Soeters

PA RT I . A DDA M S , DE M O C R AC Y, A N D
S O C IA L T H E ORY
Edited by Patricia M. Shields

2. Jane Addams’s Democratic Vision  37

Carol Nackenoff
3. Vital Lies and the Fate of Democracy  55
Scott L. Pratt
4. Jane Addams: Care-​Centered Leadership and the Democratic
Community  75
DeLysa Burnier
5. Jane Addams and Richard Rorty: The Philosophy and Practice
of Pragmatist Social Ethics  93
Chris Voparil
6. Labor Unions as a Factor in a Caring Democracy  111
Maurice Hamington
viii   Contents

PA RT I I . A DDA M S A N D H E R C ON T E M P OR A R I E S
Edited by Joseph Soeters

7. The Complementary Theory and Practice of Jane Addams and

George Herbert Mead: Bending Toward Justice  129
Barbara J. Lowe
8. Legacies of Jane Addams and W. E. B. Du Bois: Lessons for
Scholarship on Diversity and Inclusion in Organizations  149
Obie Clayton Jr., June Gary Hopps, Chris Strickland,
and Shena Brown
9. Jane Addams and John Dewey  169
Shane J. Ralston
10. Jane Addams and William James on Sport and Recreation  187
Erin C. Tarver and Shannon Sullivan
11. Jane Addams and Mary Parker Follett’s Search for Cooperation  205
Joseph Soeters
12. Hull House Social Change Methodology and New Deal Reforms  223
Judy D. Whipps
13. Intersections of Race, Gender, and Class in Jane Addams’s Political
Friendships  241
Wynne Walker Moskop

PA RT I I I . A DDA M S AC RO S S DI S C I P L I N E S
Edited by Maurice Hamington

14. Inhabiting Reality: The Literary Art of Jane Addams  261

Katherine Joslin
15. A Biographer’s Angle on Jane Addams’s Feminism  279
Louise W. Knight
16. Jane Addams and Public Administration: Clarifying Industrial
Citizenship  305
Patricia M. Shields
17. Jane Addams on Play, Education, and Ethical Teaching  327
Nuria Sara Miras Boronat
 Contents   ix

18. Dialogue, Liminality, and a Spatial Ethic of Reciprocity in Difference:

Jane Addams’s Social Ethics at the Confluence of Feminism and
Pragmatism  345
Amrita Banerjee
19. Public Administration and Social Equity: Catching Up to
Jane Addams  371
Nuri Heckler
20. Was Jane Addams a Sociologist?  389
Kaspar Villadsen

PA RT I V. A DDA M S , P E AC E , A N D
I N T E R NAT IONA L R E L AT ION S
Edited by Joseph Soeters

21. Peace Pragmatism and the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda  413
Jacqui True
22. Jane Addams, Expansive Masculinity, and the Fragility of the
War Virtues  427
Tadd Ruetenik
23. Jane Addams and the Noble Art of Peaceweaving  441
Patricia M. Shields and Joseph Soeters
24. Strange Encounters?: Contemporary Field Researchers and
Six Lessons from Jane Addams  459
Chiara Ruffa and Chiara Tulp
25. Jane Addams and Twenty-​First Century Refugee Resettlement:
Toward the Substitution of Nurture for Warfare  479
Tess Varner

PA RT V. A DDA M S ON K N OW L E D G E
A N D M E T HOD S
Edited by Maurice Hamington

26. Addams’s Methodologies of Writing, Thinking, and Activism  501

Marilyn Fischer
x   Contents

27. Hull House Maps and Papers, 1895: A Feminist Research Approach
to Urban Inequalities by Jane Addams and Florence Kelley  525
Núria Font-​Casaseca
28. Jane Addams, Social Design, and Wicked Problems: Designing In,
With, and Across  545
Danielle Lake
29. Jane Addams’s Use of Narrative in Sociological Research: “As no
one but a neighbor can see”  567
Patricia Madoo Lengermann and Gillian Niebrugge
30. Jane Addams and the Return to Settlement Sociology: Inspiration
for How to Help Others in the Digital Age  585
Erik Schneiderhan and Kaitlyn Quinn
31. Jane Addams’s Pragmatist Feminist Thoughts and Actions for and
with Ill and Disabled Women  603
Claudia Gillberg
32. Making the Jane Addams Papers Accessible to New Audiences  625
Cathy Moran Hajo

PA RT V I . A DDA M S A N D S O C IA L P R AC T IC E
Edited by Patricia M. Shields

33. Jane Addams and Settlement Sociology  645

Ann Oakley
34. Social Ethics for Ecological and Community Resilience:
Jane Addams and the Environment  663
Heather E. Keith
35. Jane Addams’s Education, Hull House, and Current-​Day
Civic-​Engagement Practices in Higher Education:
Coming Full Circle  683
Belinda M. Wholeben and Mary Weaks-​Baxter
36. Jane Addams and Epistemic Agency in Contemporary
Social Work  705
Heidi Muurinen and Aino Kääriäinen
 Contents   xi

37. Affect and Emotion in Jane Addams’s Thought  723

Clara Fischer
38. Epilogue: Jane Addams’s Contemporary Relevance  737
Joseph Soeters, Patricia M. Shields, and Maurice Hamington

Index 749
 Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Cecily Berberat, Assistant Editor, and Anthony (Toby) Wahl,
Senior Acquisitions Editor, at Oxford University Press. Both facilitated the process with
good cheer and fabulous advice. They were patient with our endless questions and al-
ways responsive. We also appreciate the work and dedication of Afrose A, Project
Manager of Newgen Knowledge Works, who supervised the critical task of copyediting
this handbook.
Marilyn Fischer was instrumental to the success of this project. Her encouragement
and willingness to find authors came at a critical time. It helped set us on the road to suc-
cess. Judy Whipps also provided invaluable support throughout the process. We appre-
ciate that these two senior Addams scholars gave so generously of their time.
 Foreword
Charlene Haddock Seigfried

The casual attribution of Jane Addams as “a classical American philosopher,” in a recent

talk marks a recognition inconceivable only a few decades ago. When I first encountered
her life and work, she wasn’t even recognized as a philosopher, let alone as a member of
the founding generation of pragmatists. Women’s absence from the standard narratives
of pragmatist philosophy was pointed out some years earlier, but the revival of interest
in Addams can be dated roughly to 2002, with the publication by the University of
Illinois Press of the first volumes of a series dedicated to reissuing most of her books.
With the exception of Twenty Years at Hull-​House, they were all out of print at the time.
New introductions were commissioned to alert a new generation of readers to their con-
tinuing relevance.
The Oxford Handbook of Jane Addams is a testament to how quickly her revival as a
distinctive feminist voice in pragmatist philosophy has entered into the scholarship of
multiple disciplines including a significant role in sociology. It is also a tribute to the
cogency and challenge of her work. This volume exhibits Addams’s trajectory from a
world-​renowned social activist and spokesperson for a community of women reformers
central to the late nineteenth and early twentieth century progressive movement to her
rediscovery in the twenty first century as an engaged pragmatist feminist philosopher
who exemplified the interaction of theory and practice. Her participatory model of
empowering those less well off in the immigrant community of Chicago stretched to
include those devastated by war in Europe as she interpreted pacifism as an active trans-
formation of the conditions inimical to it.
The extent of such boundary-​crossing is illustrated in the disciplines that trace their
origins to the work of the women at the Hull House settlement she headed. These in-
clude sociology, social work, education, public administration, and occupational sci-
ence. Addams’s own boundaries, as well as those of the residents, were permeable, as she
makes clear in Twenty Year at Hull House. She recounts the impact that the people they
served had in challenging the residents’ middle-​class perceptions and values. Addams’s
interactions with the other settlement women were not only mutually beneficial in de-
veloping a multi-​perspectival outlook, but multiplied their effectiveness immeasurably.
Many of the disciplines influenced by Hull House are rediscovering and claiming their
origins as they develop a more consensual, justice-​based, client-​centered, compas-
sionate version of their guiding theories.
xvi   Foreword

All of these trends and more are represented in the contributors to this volume. They
include scholars who participated in the initial recovery of Addams’s writings and those
who are just now discovering her. I was one of those who discovered Addams early on
and have yet to run out of ideas she has inspired or to have found her lacking in useful
insights into whatever issues I currently want to address. It is gratifying to find that so
many of my initial insights and those of others who discovered Addams for themselves
continue to take root and expand in new scholarly writings.
Addams was a woman for her time just as this handbook is a book for our time. Her
appeal endures because she approached the massive late nineteenth century social
upheavals with a willingness to question her own biases, an unswerving confidence
in persons of diverse backgrounds and aspirations, a willingness to work together in
common causes, and an insatiable thirst for a just and fair society that would emerge
from people’s lives and not be imposed on them. There have been voluminous arti-
cles and encyclopedias devoted to the nature and importance of feminist and pragma-
tist thought, but this volume on Addams’s theories and practices shows how much she
influenced the development of both and how much she transformed the meaning and
aims of both.
Addams was acutely aware of the multiplicity of ways that persons interact in the
world. Her goals didn’t include spreading the truth or the right values as she understood
them, but instead she sought to facilitate their co-​constitution with others, especially
those who were marginalized. It was an on-​going, never-​ending process, always open to
revision as circumstances and understanding changed. The need to make democracy a
vital way of life was a constant theme for Addams and one that challenges us yet again.
Addams understood that democracy itself was under threat when prejudices against
immigrants explode into violence, when employers exploit their workers, and when
ethnicity or race determines a person’s worth. The seeds of its demise can be found when
healthcare, food, and housing are withheld from those unable to afford them; when
women are not allowed to choose their way of life; and when facts and interpretations
are distorted for the purpose of privileging one faction over others. Democracy is also
the antithesis of waging war because war ignores the underlying causes of disputes and
peaceful means of resolving them.
This volume testifies to the resourcefulness of Addams’s approach by concretely
demonstrating the multifaceted ways that her insights are continuing to motivate new
generations as they are revised, utilized, and expanded.
 About the Editors

Patricia M. Shields is a Regents’ Professor in the Department of Political Science at

Texas State University. Her scholarship includes works on peace, pragmatism and
public administration, democracy, gender, military studies, and research methods. She
has edited the journal Armed Forces & Society since 2001 and is a fellow of the National
Academy of Public Administration. She began studying Jane Addams as part of an effort
to link pragmatism and public administration. In the process, she found that Addams’s
work could be applied to peace studies and peacekeeping in particular.

Maurice Hamington is Professor of Philosophy, and Affiliate Faculty in Women,

Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Portland State University. In addition to being an
Addams scholar, he is a feminist care ethicist who publishes on both the theory and ap-
plication of care. Bringing those two research arcs together, Hamington views Addams
as a forerunner of today’s feminist care ethics. The author or editor of fifteen books,
he serves as a Fulbright Specialist and enjoys giving invited lectures on his research
areas. Hamington has been fortunate enough to receive university awards for teaching,
advising, and scholarship.

Joseph Soeters has been a Professor at the Netherlands Defense Academy, after which
he accepted a position at Tilburg University, where he taught organizational soci-
ology. Now he is an emeritus professor. He has published extensively on the military
and peacekeeping, including issues of human resources management, diversity, and
(international/​inter-​organizational) cooperation. His work has been published in ten
languages. Today, he works on a voluntary basis with refugees and asylum seekers (in-
cluding language training).
 List of Contributors

Amrita Banerjee, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Indian Institute of Technology

Bombay
Shena Leverett Brown, Assistant Professor, Clark Atlanta University
DeLysa Burnier, Professor, Ohio University
Obie Clayton Jr., Professor and Director, Clark Atlanta University
Clara Fischer, Vice Chancellor Illuminate Fellow, Queen’s University Belfast
Marilyn Fischer, Professor Emerita, University of Dayton
Núria Font-​Casaseca, Assistant Professor, University of Barcelona
Claudia Gillberg, Senior Research Associate, Jönköping University
Cathy Moran Hajo, Editor and Director of the Jane Addams Papers Project, Ramapo
College of New Jersey
Nuri Heckler, Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Omaha
June Gary Hopps, Professor of Family and Children Studies, University of Georgia
Katherine Joslin, Professor Emerita, Western Michigan University
Aino Kääriäinen, Senior University Lecturer, University of Helsinki
Heather E. Keith, Executive Director of Faculty Development and Professor, Radford
University
Louise W. Knight, Visiting Scholar, Northwestern University
Danielle Lake, Director of Design Thinking and Associate Professor, Elon University
Patricia Madoo Lengermann, Research Professor of Sociology, The George Washington
University
Barbara J. Lowe, Associate Professor, St. John Fisher University
Núria Sara Miras Boronat, Associate Professor Moral and Political Philosophy,
University of Barcelona
Wynne Walker Moskop, Professor of Political Science, Saint Louis University
xx   List of Contributors

Heidi Muurinen, Senior Specialist, Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare
Carol Nackenoff, Richter Professor Emerita of Political Science, Swarthmore College
Gillian Niebrugge, Professorial Lecturer, The George Washington University
Ann Oakley, Professor of Sociology and Social Policy, University College London
Scott L. Pratt, Professor of Philosophy, University of Oregon
Kaitlyn Quinn, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri-​St. Louis
Shane J. Ralston, Dean, Woolf University
Tadd Ruetenik, Professor, St. Ambrose University
Chiara Ruffa, Professor, Centre for International Relations, Sciences Po Paris
Erik Schneiderhan, Associate Professor, University of Toronto Mississauga
Chris Strickland, Doctoral Candidate, University of Georgia
Shannon Sullivan, Professor of Philosophy and Health Psychology, University of North
Carolina
Erin C. Tarver, Associate Professor of Philosophy and Humanities Division Chair,
Oxford College of Emory University
Jacqui True, Professor and Director, Monash University
Chiara Tulp, Independent scholar
Tess Varner, Assistant Professor, Concordia College
Kaspar Villadsen, Professor, Copenhagen Business School
Chris Voparil, Graduate Faculty, Union Institute & University
Mary Weaks-​Baxter, Andrew Sherratt University Professor and Director of the Jane
Addams Center for Civic Engagement, Rockford University
Judy D. Whipps, Professor Emerita, Grand Valley State University
Belinda M. Wholeben, Professor Emerita and Founding Director of the Jane Addams
Center for Civic Engagement, Rockford University
I N T RODU C T ION
 Chapter 1

On the M atu rat i on

of Addams St u di e s
A Figure of Vital Intellectual and
Practical Significance

Patricia M. Shields, Maurice Hamington,

and Joseph Soeters

Introduction

This handbook is a selective collection of original analyses offered by an interna-

tional group of social and political theorists who have contributed to the burgeoning
field of Addams studies. As late as the 1980s, academics in sociology, philosophy, and
social work would be surprised at the prospect of a scholarly handbook devoted to
Jane Addams as a prominent theorist and intellectual. However, much has changed
over the last thirty years. Scholars in sociology, philosophy, political science, history,
and rhetoric have recovered Addams as a critical intellectual force of the late nine-
teenth and early twentieth centuries. Furthermore, interest in Addams has emerged
as a global phenomenon exemplified by the many international contributors to this
volume.
This introduction situates Addams as influential in scholarly disciplines and fields of
practice. After a concise introduction to Addams’s life, an overview of her influence on
sociology is followed by an overview of her place in philosophy. Then Addams’s role
in public administration and social work is offered. The introduction concludes with a
brief explanation of the volume’s organization.
Jane Addams was born in 1860 in Cedarville, Illinois, to a prominent family. Her fa-
ther, Illinois state senator John Huy Addams, owned the town mill and ran the bank.
Jane Addams was the youngest of five living children. Her mother, Sarah Weber
Addams, died during premature labor when Addams was two. As a result, she had a
4    Patricia M. Shields, Maurice Hamington, and Joseph Soeters

very close relationship with her father. An average elementary school student, Addams
thrived at Rockford Female Seminary (now Rockford University) as class president, val-
edictorian, and editor of her college’s newspaper. In 1881, she graduated from Rockford
and her father died, leaving her a sizable inheritance. She spent several years traveling
Europe, where she visited the British settlement house, Toynbee Hall. This experience
inspired her (and friend Ellen Gates Starr) to found Hull House, a progressive-​era settle-
ment community in an impoverished, immigrant Chicago neighborhood (1889). Hull
House flourished, as did Addams. She became a prominent spokesperson and author,
publishing influential books and articles in popular magazines.
Along with the progressive community at Hull House, Addams led reform efforts
addressing dangerous workplaces, child labor, unhealthy city streets, juvenile jus-
tice, and much more. She subsequently became active in the peace movement, leading
the first women’s peace conference in The Hague (1915) and establishing the Women’s
International League of Peace and Freedom. She was honored with the Nobel Peace
Prize for this effort. She died in 1935 at the age of seventy-​five. See Table 1.1 for highlights
of her critical life events and the books she authored.

Table 1.1 Key events and works in the Life of Jane Addams

Year Events and key works

1860 Born to Sarah and John Huy Addams, Cedarville, Illinois

1863 Mother dies
1868 Father remarries (Anna Haldeman)
1877–​1881 Enrolled Rockford Female Seminary1880 “Bread Givers” Speech First Junior Exhibition
1881 “Cassandra” Valedictory Speech
1881 Father dies and leaves her a sizable inheritance
1883–​1888 Two extended trips to Europe—​visited Toynbee Hall and uses it as a model for
Hull House
1889 Moves to Chicago with Ellen Gates Starr. Establishes Hull House
1889–​1920s Hull House expansion (art gallery, coffee house, public bath, gymnasium, daycare,
meeting rooms, variety of clubs, labor museum, cooperative boarding club for girls,
playgrounds, speaker series)
1891 Florence Kelley moves to Hull House—​inspires Addams’s activist orientation
1894 Pullman Strike
1895 Hull House Maps and Papers (co-​authored with the Residents of Hull House)
Garbage inspector
1896 First of five American Journal of Sociology articles. Meets with Tolstoy during trip
to Europe
1901 Co-​founded Juvenile Court Committee
1902 Democracy and Social Ethics
1905–​1909 Served Chicago School Board
 On the Maturation of Addams Studies     5

Table 1.1 Continued

Year Events and key works
1907 Newer Ideals of Peace
1909 The Spirit of Youth and the City Streets
Founding member—​National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
1910 Twenty Years at Hull House
1912 Publishes “A Modern Lear”
1914 World War I begins
1915 Establishes Women’s Peace Party
Presides International Congress of Women at the Hague
Led peace delegation to capitals of warring countries
Women at the Hague (edited with Balch and Hamilton)
1916 US enters WWI
The Long Road of Women’s Memory
1917–​1919 Spokesperson—​Department of Agriculture Food Relief Program
1919 Founder –​Women’s International League of Peace and Freedom
1920 Founding member American Civil Liberties Union
1922 Peace and Bread in Time of War
1923 A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil
1930 The Second Twenty Years at Hull House
1931 Nobel Peace Prize (shared with N. M. Brown)
1932 The Excellent Becomes the Permanent
1935 My Friend Julia Lathrop
Died in Chicago

Unlike her social theorist contemporaries such as Weber or Durkheim, Addams

lacked university-​affiliated status and suffered from the intellectual sexism of the
era. However, Addams’s influential scholarship stemmed from direct experience at
Hull House (e.g., Schneiderhan, 2011). She engaged in social amelioration by living
in proximal relations and being a good neighbor. She and the residents of Hull House
were dedicated to aiding in “the solution of the social and industrial problems which
are engendered by the modern conditions of life in a great city” (Addams 1910, 68).
Settlement progressive methodology involved breaking down social barriers that
separated individuals from appreciating the plight of others.
Addams is remembered as a social reformer and peace activist. Accordingly, the in-
tellectual legacy found in her books, essays, journal articles, and speeches has seldom
received its scholarly due. Moreover, progressive ideals regarding social progress waned
after World War I. Her peace advocacy in the face of rising United States jingoism and
nationalism contributed to widespread suspicion and alienation of Addams and her
progressive approach.
6    Patricia M. Shields, Maurice Hamington, and Joseph Soeters

In the 1980s, her contributions to sociology, philosophy, and conceptions of democ-

racy, feminism, care ethics, community engagement, social ethics, peace, municipal
governance, social justice, and more, received traction in the scholarly literature. A
common theme of this scholarship is the ongoing relevance of Addams’s ideas, particu-
larly in an age when neoliberal responses to modern problems fail. In addition, the prac-
ticality of her approach has found significant purchase in practice-​oriented academic
disciplines/​fields such as public administration, military studies, environmentalism,
and qualitative methods. See Table 1.2 for a timeline of notable books of analysis and
commentary in contemporary Addams studies.

Table 1.2 Timeline of Selected Significant Books and Commentary in Addams

Studies

1965 The Social Thought of Jane Lasch (ed) Influential sociologists address
Addams Addams’s social commentary.
1967 Beloved Lady: A History of Jane Farrell Includes exhaustive bibliography
Addams’ Ideas on Reform and of Addams’s works.
Peace
1973 American Heroine: the Life and Davis Historian gets past Addams
Legend of Jane Addams popular legacy to focus on her
thinking and activities.
1988 Jane Addams and the Men of Deegan Argues for Addams’s
the Chicago School, 1892–​1918 foundational role in sociology.
1996 Pragmatism and Feminism: Seigfried First book to argue that Addams
Reweaving the Social Fabric was an important American
pragmatist philosopher.
2002 The Jane Addams Reader Elshtain (ed) Useful anthology of key
Addams’s works.
2002 Jane Addams and the Dream of Elshtain Political scientist commentary
American Democracy on Addams’s democracy.
2003 The Selected Papers of McCree, Bryan, Bair, Made letters and other writings
Jane Addams and de Angury (eds.) available to the public from
vol. 1: Preparing to Lead, Addams’s formative years.
1860–​81
2004 The Education of Jane Addams Brown Intellectual biography focusing
on Addams education.
2004 Jane Addams: A Writers Life Joslin Literary analysis of Addams.
2004 On Addams M. Fischer First concise intellectual
introduction to Addams.
2005 Citizen: Jane Addams and the Knight Intellectual biography of the first
Struggle for Democracy part of her life.
2009 The Social Philosophy of Jane Hamington Argues that Addams was a
Addams radical American pragmatist
philosopher.
 On the Maturation of Addams Studies     7

Table 1.2 Continued

2009 Jane Addams and the Practice
of Democracy
2009 The Selected Papers of
Jane Addams
vol. 2: Venturing into
Usefulness, 1881–88
2010 Jane Addams: Spirit in Action
2010 Feminist Interpretations of
Jane Addams
2017 Jane Addams: Progressive
Pioneer of Peace, Philosophy,
Sociology, Social Work and
Public Administration
2019 The Selected Papers of
Jane Addams
vol. 3: Creating Hull-​House
and an International Presence,
1889–​1900
2019 Jane Addams’s Evolutionary
Theorizing: Constructing
“Democracy and Social Ethics”
M. Fischer, Essays on Addams social and
Nackenoff, and political philosophy.
Chmielewski (eds.)
McCree Bryan, Bair, Letters and other writings
and de Angury (eds.) available as Addams prepares to
form Hull House.
Knight Intellectual biography
addressing her public roles.
Hamington (ed) Collection of feminist
commentaries in highly regarded
feminist philosophy series.
Shields First work to place Addams in the
field of public administration.
Mary Lynn McCree letters and other writings
Bryan, Maree de available from the first years of
Angury, and Skerrett Hull House.
(eds.)
Marilyn Fischer Argues that understanding the
context of evolutionary thinking
in the early 20th century is crucial
for understanding how Addams
formulates her social and
political philosophy.

The chapters of The Oxford Handbook of Jane Addams take the relevance of her ideas
seriously. Our overview begins with sociology, a major impetus for this volume.

Jane Addams’s Place in Sociology

During Addams’s time as a public figure, rigid barriers between social and scien-
tific disciplines did not exist. For example, sociology has several possible genealogies.
August Comte viewed sociology as the culmination of the sciences. Today’s sociology is
often associated with founding figures such as Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, and Karl
Marx. By the end of the 1900s, sociology had evolved into a major academic discipline.
Many scholars associated with other disciplines such as philosophy and psychology
participated in sociology’s formative years.
8    Patricia M. Shields, Maurice Hamington, and Joseph Soeters

Addams’s intellectual maturity coincided with the rise of sociology. Although many
settlement workers engaged in sociological work (Lengermann and Niebrugge-​Brantley
2002, 7–​8), Addams did not explicitly take an academic label for herself. She instead
focused on social amelioration and improving people’s living and working conditions.
Given the institutional and academic deficits described above, it is not so surprising that
Addams’s position in sociology remained largely unrecognized for an extended period.
Nevertheless, during her lifetime, she was well published in social affairs. Furthermore,
she maintained intensive connections with scholars at the University of Chicago, in-
cluding the men of the newly founded sociology department. She, however, refused to
accept a formal position as a sociologist at the University. Accordingly, Lewis Coser’s
authoritative Masters of Sociological Thought (1977) did not include Addams. Currently,
however, scholars appreciate Addams as a formative theorist in sociology (Lengermann
and Niebrugge-​Brantley 1998; Deegan 2007; Calhoun 2007). In particular, Addams
plays a pivotal role in developing women’s studies and feminist pragmatism in sociology.
Addams’s pioneering sociology advanced the discipline by contributing domestic
analyses of racism, urban demographics, militarism, gender, labor diversity, and power
dynamics, as well as contributing insights into international relations. In addition, she
helped advance the development of sociology as an empirical science. Finally, she ap-
plied a pragmatist approach to deal with social issues and wicked problems, such as
crime (e.g., Deegan 1988; Schneiderhan 2011).
For Addams, sociology was a matter of activism—​the personal, practical, academic,
and political were entangled spheres of life. From this perspective, sociology was a sci-
ence that could render reform possible. This social reform approach made her position
tenuous. She introduced normative points of view that sociologists gradually learned to
regard as non-​objective, un-​academic, or even unprofessional. Nevertheless, Addams’s
sociology connected local issues to macro-​social themes, bringing in a sociological view
to everyday affairs.
Her activist approach differed from acclaimed European sociologists such as
Durkheim, Weber, and Simmel, who advocated the maturing and professionalization
of sociology. Addams seldom referred to famous theoreticians, with one exception—​
Marx, with whom she shared concerns about growing poverty and inequality. However,
she disagreed with Marx’s methods to achieve greater social fairness (Deegan 1988).
Addams refused to accept the Marxist idea that conflict, let alone revolution and vio-
lence, were needed to resolve societal disparities. The rejection of antagonistic conflict
to achieve goals became an ongoing theme in her analysis.
European scholars did not often reference her work. However, on tour throughout
the United States in 1904, Max Weber and his wife Marianne visited Chicago, which
they thought was “the monstrous city which even more than New York was the crystal-
lization of the American spirit” (Weber 2009 [1926], 285). Marianne Weber discusses
Addams’s good works saying that the people in the city “looked, marveled, and believed
in this ‘Angel of Chicago’ ” (Weber 2009 [1926], 288). The Webers visited Hull House,
and Marianne later returned to meet with the Women’s Trade Union League (Scaff
2011, 43).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 The Project Gutenberg eBook of Recent
discussions on the abolition of patents for
inventions in the United Kingdom, France,
Germany, and the Netherlands
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Recent discussions on the abolition of patents for inventions in

the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and the
Netherlands
Evidence, speeches, and papers in its favour

Compiler: R. A. Macfie

Release date: November 11, 2023 [eBook #72096]

Language: English

Original publication: London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer,

1869

Credits: Stephen Hutcheson and the Online Distributed Proofreading

Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from
images generously made available by The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK RECENT

DISCUSSIONS ON THE ABOLITION OF PATENTS FOR
INVENTIONS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, FRANCE, GERMANY,
AND THE NETHERLANDS ***
 RECENT DISCUSSIONS
ON THE
ABOLITION OF PATENTS FOR
INVENTIONS
IN THE
UNITED KINGDOM, FRANCE,
GERMANY, AND THE NETHERLANDS.

Evidence, Speeches, and Papers in its

Favour
BY
Sir WILLIAM ARMSTRONG, C.B.; M. BENARD, Editor of the
“Siècle” and “Journal des
Economistes;” Count Von BISMARCK; M. CHEVALIER, Senator and
Member of the
Institute of France; M. FOCK; M. GODEFROI; Mr. MACFIE, M.P.,
Director, or
Member, of the Liverpool, Edinburgh, and Leith Chambers of
Commerce and Merchants’
House of Glasgow; Sir ROUNDELL PALMER, M.P., late Attorney-
General, &c.; Right
Hon. LORD STANLEY, M.P., Chairman of the late Royal Commission
on Patent-Law;
JAMES STIRLING, Esq., Author of “Considerations on Banks and
Bank-Management,”
“Letters from the South,” &c.; and others.
WITH SUGGESTIONS AS TO INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS
REGARDING INVENTIONS AND COPYRIGHT.

LONDON:
LONGMANS, GREEN, READER, AND DYER.
1869.
“La legislation des brevets d’invention peut avoir l’effet d’entraver
notre commerce d’exportation, et de priver l’industrie nationale de
débouches utiles.... Un brevet est un privilége et un monopole. Pour
que le monopole puisse être reconnu par la loi, il est indispensable
qu’il repose sur un droit certain ou sur une utilité publique
parfaitement établie. Le peu qui précède suffit ce me semble a
démontre que l’utilité publique n’existe pas.... Le brevet d’invention
a-t-il pour base un droit positif? Il semble pourtant que non....
“Telles sont les réflexions qui sont venues à un certain nombre
d’hommes éclairés depuis quelque années et qui ont l’assentiment
d’un bon nombre d’hommes des plus notables parmi les chefs
d’industrie. Elles ont de l’écho dans touts les pays civilisés, et en
Angleterre pour le moins autant qu’en France—(1) Elles ne tendent
à rien moins qu’à renverser le système même des brevets
d’invention, sauf à rémunérer par une dotation spéciale tout homme
ingénieux qui serait reconnu, après un certain temps d’expérience,
avoir rendu à la société un service signalé par quelque découverte.
C’est ainsi qu’il a été procédé en France à l’égard des inventeurs de
la photographie.”—From the Introduction to the “Rapports du Jury
International de l’Exposition 1862, publies sous la direction de M.
Michel Chevalier, President de la Section Française.”

“Selon moi donc, le char du progres social doit être mu par

l’industrie et dirigé par l’esprit chrétien. Il s’arrête à défaut de travail,
il déraille à défaut de charité.... Et s’il est prouvé que c’est industrie
qui nourrit l’humanité, que c’est elle qui la chauffe et la préserve
contre toutes les intemperies, n’est il pas juste de dire que pousser
au développement du travail, comme nous nous proposons,
répandre dans l’esprit des travailleurs des idées qu’ils peuvent
féconder pour arriver à une invention, a un perfectionment, a un
nouveau procédé quelconque diminuant le prix de ce qui entretient
la vie, que c’est là, messieurs, de la bienfaisance par excellence.”—
President’s Opening Address of the Industrial and Scientific Society
of St. Nicolas, 1866.
 CONTENTS.
PAGE
Prefatory Note v
Letter from Professor J. C. Thorold Rogers viii
Remarks on an Article in the Westminster Review 1
Petition of the Newcastle Chamber of Commerce 8
Notes of Mr. Macfie, M.P., for Speech upon Motion, 28th
May, 1868 9
Speech of Sir Roundell Palmer, M.P., on that Occasion 93
Speech of Lord Stanley, M.P., on same Occasion 109
Paper by James Stirling, Esq. 116
Papers by M. Benard, “Are Inventions Property?” 124-150
Speeches of M. Chevalier and M. Paul Coq 164
Papers by M. Benard, “Results of a Bad Law” 175-180
Message of Count von Bismarck to North German
Parliament 185
Debate in the Netherlands Second Chamber 197-204
Extracts from a Memorial of the Dutch Government 225
Other Extracts regarding Abolition in Holland 226-229
Speech of E. K. Muspratt, Esq., in Liverpool
Chamber of Commerce 231
Letter of Sir William Armstrong, C.B. 237
Letter of John Thomson, Esq. 238
Letter of Andrew Johnson, Esq., M.P. 239
On the Distinction between Copyright and Patent-right,
by Mr. Macfie, M.P. 241
On Patent Monopoly, by Mr. Macfie, M.P. 243
A Scheme for International Patents, by Mr. Macfie, M.P. 250
Article from the Times on the Debate in Parliament 251
” ” Economist ” ” 255
 ” ” Spectator ” ” 259
” ” Saturday Review ” ” 263
Extracts from Recent Periodicals 268
Report of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce 272
Extract from M. Bastiat’s “Harmonies Economiques” 276
Extract from a Letter of M. Paillottet, his Editor 277
Extract from M. Vermeire’s “Le Libre Travail” 277
Extracts showing Movements in Belgium, Germany, and
Holland 278
Extract on Perpetuity of Patent-right, by M. Boudron 281
Extracts on American and British Patent-Law 282
Classification of Patents 283
Illustrations Drawn from the Copper and Iron Trades 284
Note on Working Men as Inventors 286
Note on the Inventors’ Institute 287
Note on State Rewards 288
Note on the Patent-office 289
COPYRIGHT.
Observations on Remunerating Authors by Royalties 293
Suggestions How to Give Effect to this Mode 296
Extracts Showing Mr. Watts’ Opinions on this Mode 297
Chapter from M. Renouard’s “Traité des Droits
d’Auteurs” in Favour of it 301
Extract from Dr. Leavitt’s Cobden Club Essay on
International Copyright 305
Extracts on the State of the Question of Copyright in the
United States and Canada 307
Statement of Mr. Purday on Same Subject 313
Letter from the Same on International Copyright in
Musical Works 314
Extracts from Papers laid before the Canadian
Parliament 316
Tendencies of Copyright Legislation, and Extracts from 320
Recent Bill regarding Copyright in Works of Art, with
 Remarks on it
Duties on Books in Several Colonies on Behalf of
Authors 326
On Trade-Marks and the Customs Establishment 328
The Export Book Trade of Various Countries Exhibited 330-331
Extract from the “Beehive” 332
 To all who are serving their generation as employers and
employed, in the Arts, Manufactures, and Trades, of Leith,
Musselburgh, and Portobello, and have seen and felt the evils
inherent in the present State method of dealing with Inventions,
these pages are inscribed,—with congratulations that in the front
rank of statesmen, as well within the Cabinet as beyond it, there are
earnest advocates of that emancipation of British productive industry
from artificial restraints which is the needful accompaniment and the
complement of free trade;—and in hope that public attention will now
at length be turned towards procuring such a solution as will satisfy
at same time all just pretensions of meritorious inventors and men of
science.
My own bulky contribution to the attack on the last stronghold of
monopoly is to be regarded as but a rough-and-ready earthwork
thrown up by a pair of willing hands in front of powerful artillery
whose every shot is telling. It comprises the jottings and materials
which I collected for a speech intended to be delivered on 28th May,
when proposing a motion in favour of abolishing Patents for
Inventions.
Notwithstanding imperfections in execution, the present
compilation may acceptably supply a desideratum and prepare the
way for further discussions, and especially for the Committee which
Her Majesty’s Government continue to view with favour and will
heartily support.
R. A. M.
June 9, 1869.

While in the hands of the printer, fresh matter has, through the
kindness of honoured fellow-workers in the cause, reached me
almost daily, part of which is added. The reader will find in this
accession to the testimonies on behalf of freedom of industry,
besides some new arguments, such a striking concurrence and
oneness in the principles enunciated, and even in the illustrations
made use of, as, coming from various quarters independently, may
fairly be regarded as presumptive proof of their accuracy.
The Government has been so good as agree to produce, in
conformity with a request from Parliament, any documents in
possession of the Foreign-office which show the reasons or motives
of the Prussian and Dutch Governments for proposing the abolition
of Patents in Germany and the Netherlands. The adoption in the
latter country of abolition pure and simple, without (so far as I can
see) the slightest indication of a substitute, may well reconcile
professional inventors and all who unite with them to the propositions
with which I close my “speech.” Now that the continental stones are
dropping out of the arch which forms the System of Patents, the rest
cannot long keep their place. The antiquated fabric may be expected
to tumble. For public safety, the sooner Parliament and all concerned
set themselves to take it down, the better.
A communication from Professor Thorold Rogers, and remarks on
a recent Review, are given herewith, the former on account of its
value as a vindication of economic truth and justice, the latter by way
of correcting the reviewer’s accidental mistakes.
The Daily News, in a leading article on the 27th July, having
attached importance altogether undue to a small meeting called
under peculiar circumstances on the 24th, which was supposed to
express opinions and wishes of artisans and operatives,[1] I
addressed letters to that influential paper, which will be found in its
issues of the 29th, 30th, and 31st. Of course Sir Roundell Palmer,
who did the promoter of the meeting the honour to take the chair,
had not, any more than myself, the smallest connexion with its
origination and arrangements.
Appended are suggestions and information regarding Copyright,
which came in my way while in the press about Patent-right, and
which may be useful if international negotiations are contemplated
for one or other or both of these kindred subjects.
I hope imperfections of translation, which I regret, and errors of the
press, for which I take blame without correcting them, will be
indulgently pardoned, as well as faults entirely my own in the
unaccustomed part of advocate and compiler.
July 31.

⁂ No rights are reserved. Mr. Macfie will be glad to be favoured,

at Ashfield Hall, Neston, Chester, with a copy of any transcripts
made or any printed matter illustrating the question of Patents.

[1] When members of “Inventors’ Associations” ask mechanics

to join a crusade against freedom of industry, the best rejoinder is
to ask a statement in writing to show how it can be for the interest
of the millions to perpetuate fetters for the sake of investing a few
hundred individuals with a chance of obtaining personal
advantage by means of the power of fettering.
 LETTER FROM PROFESSOR
THOROLD ROGERS.
My dear Sir,—.... The fact is, no one, I presume, wishes to say that
an inventor is undeserving and should go unrewarded. All that the
opponents of the Patent system do say is, that the present
machinery gives the minimum advantage to the inventor, and inflicts
the maximum disadvantage on the public. Besides, in ninety-nine
cases out of a hundred, the patentee is only a simultaneous inventor
with a number of others, who lose their labour and ingenuity because
one man happens to get in first....
It has always seemed to me that the weakness of the inventor’s
case lies in the fact already alluded to, that he rarely is the sole
inventor. Hence the fundamental distinction between Invention and
Copyright, though I am no fanatical admirer of the latter privilege.
Now, if a law can confer a right on one person only by inflicting a
wrong on a number of other persons, it is intrinsically vicious, and
cannot be defended on the ground of its intentional goodness.
Yours faithfully,
James C. Thorold Rogers.
July 29.
 REMARKS ON A RECENT ARTICLE.
The Westminster Review for July contains an article on Patents.
Its proofs should have been corrected with more care. In my answer
to question 1947 in the Royal Commission’s Report, the word
“patented” in the following the Review misprints “neglected:”—

As a matter of fact, patentees have patented things of so

little value.

And in question 1954 a worse mistake is made by substituting

“some” for “none” in the following:—

There being 400 Patents now in existence affecting your

trade, none of which are made use of by you.

I have right also to complain of mistakes which do not originate

with the printer. The following opinions and arguments imputed to me
I disclaim:—

Had Mr. Macfie said this, we should not have been

surprised. It closely resembles his contention that a book
should be protected because it is something tangible,
whereas an invention is something which, if not invisible, is in
the nebulous condition of an idea.

What I wrote will be found below, page 241. My argument is, that
the subjects of Copyright being tangible can be identified as the
author’s production, and nobody else’s; and that the subjects of
Patent-right being modes or plans, belong to the region of ideas
which may easily occur to anybody besides the first inventor.
 Again: the reviewer says of Lord Stanley:—

The latter, while supporting Mr. Macfie on the main issue

distinctly repudiated his leading arguments.

This would be strange if true, seeing I coincide in all his Lordship’s

arguments. How, then, can he, twelve pages further on, say again:—

As for Lord Stanley, he did not hesitate to dissent from Mr.

Macfie’s arguments, while giving a qualified support to his
motion.

Perhaps I should object to the following representation:—

It has been proposed to replace Letters Patent by grants

from the national purse. This is to revert to an obsolete
custom. During the eighteenth century it was fairly tried, and
the result should serve as a warning now. Seventy thousand
pounds were distributed among plausible inventors in the
course of fifty years. The advantage to the public was nil. The
encouragement given to impostors was the only tangible
result. Johanna Stephens obtained 5,000l. for disclosing the
secret of her cure for the stone. A Mr. Blake got 2,500l. to
assist him in perfecting his scheme for transporting fish to
London by land, while a Mr. Foden was greatly overpaid with
500l., “to enable him to prosecute a discovery made by him of
a paste as a substitute for wheat-flour.” Give a man a sum of
money for his invention, and you run the risk of paying him
either too much or too little. Give him a Patent, and you
secure the invention for the public, while his remuneration in
money is absolutely determined according to its value.

The system of State-rewards has not been tried. The reviewer’s

cases do not apply. The scheme that I submit could never be abused
so as to sanction such follies. It may not be a generous and royal
way of dealing with inventions, but it is equitable and safe; whereas,
pace the reviewer, the remuneration from a Patent is not at all
“determined according to its value” (that of the invention).
This interesting article is remarkable for what it omits rather than
what it contains. Like almost every, if not every, defence of Patents
which I have seen, it ignores the grand objection to Patents—their
incompatibility with free-trade. From the beginning to the end there is
not in the article the slightest allusion to the hardship they inflict on
British manufacturers in competing with rivals in home, and
especially in foreign, markets. Reformers of the Patent system fail to
realise this—that no conceivable mere improvement, even, though it
should clear away the present encumbrance of a multiplicity of trifling
Patents, can be more than an alleviation of the mischief now done.
The remaining few would be the most important and valuable ones,
and therefore the most burdensome, because those which, on
account of the heavy royalties that will be legally claimed, must
subject British manufacturers to the largest pecuniary exactions—
exactions that they cannot, but their rivals often would, escape.
The writer of the article has a way of pooh-poohing adverse
arguments, even when he mentions them.

That no two men produce the same book is true. It is

almost as difficult for two men to give to the world two
inventions identical in every detail, and equally well-fitted to
subserve the same end. Much has been said about the ease
with which this may be done, but authentic proofs are lacking
of this having been done on a large scale.

And

Again, then, we ask for proofs of the allegation that six men
are often on the track of the self-same invention.

Why, the simultaneousness, or rapid succession, of identical

inventions is notorious.
 He goes in the face of the strongest evidence when he says—

It is doubtful even if these objectionable Patents do any real

harm. An invention which will answer no purpose is simply
useless, whether it be patented or not.

And, elsewhere,

The truth must not be blinked that, if a multiplicity of

worthless Patents be an evil, if the profits of manufacturers
are diminished owing to the battle they have to fight with
patentees, if the bestowal of Patent-right be the source of
mischief and the occasion of pecuniary loss, the like
complaint may be laid at the door of Copyright, and its
abolition might be demanded with as great a show of fairness.

How lightly he can regard arguments of his opponents is also seen

in the following passage:—

Another of Lord Stanley’s objections is that the right man

hardly ever gets the reward. As he puts it, litigation being
costly, and the grant of Patent-right merely amounting to
permission to take legal proceedings against infringers, the
poor man has no chance of asserting and defending his
rights. “If a poor inventor took out a Patent, and the Patent
promised to be productive, in nine cases out of ten he was
obliged to sell it to some one who could command capital
enough to defend it in a court of law.” We submit this proves
nothing more than that the poor inventor, in nine cases out of
ten, deserves our pity. But then, if these nine inventors are
unfortunate, that does not justify the ill-treatment of the tenth.

The source of the writer’s idea, that cessation of Patents is ill-

treatment, lies in the assumption which pervades the whole article,
that to inventors belongs property in inventions—i.e., exclusive right
of property; or, in other words, right to require the State to use its
power to prevent other persons from doing what they do, and what
every other man has a natural and inalienable right to do.
Still further: shutting his eyes to the difficulty of mollifying the
grievance of invention monopoly by means of “compulsory licences,”
which the Royal Commission declared they found no way of
rendering practicable—and, I add, if practicable, would be no cure of
the evils, which are radical—he writes—

If to this were added a system of compulsory licences, the

amount of royalty to be determined by a tribunal, in the event
of the parties failing to come to terms, nearly all the really
serious and valid objections to the working of a Patent-Law
would be obviated.

Yet, believing himself the friend of the public, in spite of all the
strong arguments against his views and the little he himself adduces
for them, he very complacently tells us—

Speaking on behalf of the public, we maintain that a Patent-

Law is necessary in any uncivilised community, because,
without its protection, industry cannot flourish, and ingenuity
can have no scope for its triumphs.

The reviewer can hardly have consulted any practical man when
he pronounces it—

absurd to plead that a Patent has been infringed in ignorance,

when it is certain that the ignorance, if not wilful, is wholly
inexcusable.

Undoubtedly, infringements often are not acts done blamelessly in

ignorance; still, I would be surprised in most cases if the infringer
knew he was infringing. He is not likely to know it in making trivial
improvements, for how can he know without subjecting himself to no
small trouble and expense, such as ought not to be laid upon him.
There is an important point as to which the reviewer and I perhaps
differ, “the extent to which Letters Patent give a monopoly in ideas.”
The fact is, that the whole breadth of a principle is patentable,
provided any single mode of applying it can be specified.
The reviewer, adverting to the changes which have taken place in
the Law of Patents since the days of Elizabeth, characterises them
as “changes towards greater freedom of action on the part of the
State, and greater liberty of choice on the part of the people.” This, I
confess, I do not understand, except so far as it may mean there has
been less and less control exercised by the State, and more and
more advantage taken of this supineness by all sorts of persons. I
am quite prepared to admit that in my speech I have exhibited rather
a popular than a strictly legal and logical view of the meaning and
legitimate applicability of the words in the statute, “nor mischievous
to the State by raising prices.” All that I maintain is this,—that the
spirit of the proviso is opposed to any individual Patent that keeps
prices up at a level below which, if there were no grant, they might,
by the natural progress of industry, be expected to fall, and to a
Patent system that characteristically has that effect and is also
chargeable with “hurt of trade” and “generally inconvenient.”