Mr. HARDING, of Illinois. It is therefore 21 years of age. All this time it has been dragging its slow length along for a for tune in IlllnOlS. It h of full age. Now, sir, while I do not wish to be discourteous to my colleague, nor to oppose any interest of his constituents. I do suggest to him with great respect that there are other constituents besides this inventor who are interested in this question. Now, it is stated, I believe, in the report just read, that this claim or invention has been infringed upon by many machine makers in that State. At cast infer that fact. Iwillstate to the House that there are very many machines invented in Illinois for shelling corn, and I believe some few in other States in the West, and the effect of this reissue will be that in all cases where these new inventions haveinfringed upon this indorsed and confirmed right there is to be a lawsuit or a settlement made by which a considerable amount of money will be extracted from those infringers. The interests of agriculture in the West are not so flourishing and so lprosperous that this Congress should step in an take away the rights of the people for the benefit of an individual and now a gentleman has declared upon the subject of renewing patents that he stands forjustice; that he yiclds nothing to the presentation of the widow or the hospital cases that have justbeen passed. Now here comes a suggestion that there is some old man in this case. These things have of course no weight with the House; they are not designed to have an; the gentleman stands sternly upon the groun of justice and demands of Congress that we shall recognize the rights of men. That is what I will always do; I never refuse to do it. Now, I understand there is a contract between the Government and all men who will make useful inventions, by which they shall have the use and benefit of their inventions for a limited period of years; no more. no less. When that period runs out, then the invention belongs to the public; it becomes their propt. Now, who knows but what if this man had not been fencing with this subject some smarter man in my district would have made a much better machine? It does not follow that because there is money in this thing it should be continued for that purpose. The invention, if there is anything in it, belongs to the public, and not to this individual. A case has just been passed upon, where one man was ina prosperous hospital business, and another was abroad as a foreign minister or something of that kind. Now here comes a man who has been receiving large rewards for an invention during 21 years, and now he wants to continue the same business. Now I am opposed to it upon the general principle that it is giving away the rights of the people to an individual, and to the lawyers and others who are to prosecute his rights against an oppressed people for the purpose of obtaining money with rout earning it, or being entitled to it by strict law. These are my sentiments.