The Sun. — London, England, 1855-05-01 00:00:00

Maer I VIPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition from Shef field, praying for a vigorous prosecution of the war. The Ossett Gas Bill was read a second time. Hill's Estate• Bill was read a third time and passed. THE SARDINIAN CONTINGENT. _ . The Earl of ELLENBOROITGI4, seeing the noble . earl the. Minister for War in his place, wished to call his attention to a circumstance that had appeared in the papers of Saturday. A letter appeared, dated the 22d inst., from Genoa, by w hi c h it appeare d that, . reference to the Sardinian troops that had sailed for the East, the Commissary-General in the Crimea had declared himself unable to supply those troops with provi s i ons . U n l ess th ere was a secret mili tary convention entered into between us and the Sardi nian Government he did not think that this . Government bound itself t o su pply th e Sardinian contingent with commissariat stores. If the British Commissariat had bound itself to supply provisions to the Sardinian troops as well as the Turkish troops, it must be prepared at least to meet a demand of at least 70,000 rations a day. He begged to ask the noble earl the Minister of War for, information on the subject. Lord PANMURE bad heard with some surprise that the necessary supplies for the provisioning of the Sar dinian army had not been sent out with the troops to the Crimea. In the first instance, it was understood that the Sardinian Government was to send a transp or t withonemonth's provisions beforethe sailing of the troops. There was no second convention entered into with the Sardinian Government, but Commissary-G enera l Filder had received instructions to supply th ose t roops u pon the usual regulation prices, and he had no doubt that that officer would find any difficulty in doing so. By the last mail a letter was received from Sir J. ArNeil, who had been, sent out by the Government to make special inquiries into the state of the commissariat, and that letter of the gallant officer stated that there was an ample supply o f meat and grain to b e found in the Crimea to meet the demands of the army, and, therefore, no apprehension need be entertained as to the falling off or scarcity of provisions. MILITIA (IRELAND) BILL. Lord PANMURE moved the third reading of this bill. The Earl of WICKLOW complained of the manner in which this bill was being hurried forward. The noble earl also objected to the manner in which the bill was drawn up, as bethought it most unfair to demand a higher qualification from Irish officers in the militia than were required by the English militia. He concluded by mov ing the addition of a provision to one of the clauses, rendering such officers eligible upon the qualification: which they possessed at the time the commissions issued, or which they possessed at the present time. Lord PANMURE had no objection to the alteration proposed by the noble and learned lord. After a few words from the Earl of DERBY the amendment was agreed to. Lord PANMURE proposed another amendment, which was also agreed to. The bill was read a third time and passed. TROOPS ON BOARD THE ALMA. The Marquis of SALISBURY put a question to the Secretary for War, relative to the embarkation of troops on hoard the Alma. The troops were embarked in their old clothing,' without any sufficient provision for the summer months, and without the new clothing which at this season should be supplied to them. They were also sent with their old arms, and without that invaluable and indispensable arm, the Mieie r:fle. Lord PANMURE said, with respect to the arms, he could not believe it possible that the report to which the noble marquis referred had any foundation, or that any of her Majesty's troops had left this country for the Crimea armed with the old musket. The noble marquis should know that every regiment in the service now in the Crimea had the ride. He should, however, make strict inquiry, and he would admit the whole ground of complaint if it should turn out to be true that the troops had left with the old arms. With respect to the sun- - rner clothing, the Guards always embarked with a suit of clothes peaty worn, and not with their new suit ; but the new was sent alter them. THE VIENNA NEGOTIATIONS. The Earl of DERBY rose and said— If I knew what member of her Majesty's Government I could address myself to, I would put a question of considerable im portance, inasmuch as we have arrived at a period in the great struggle in which we are engaged when it is essential for the Government to lay before Parliament the fullest information in their power to afford. We have forborne putting questions which might embarrass her Majesty's Ministers during the progress of the nego tiations which have been going on, but as we have been given to understand that these negotiations have alto gether terminated, that all hopes of peace are at as end, and that her Majesty's plenipotentiary has returned and is in this country, I have been in expectation that her Majesty's Government would have felt it to be their duty to make, without any question being asked, a state. ment to both houses of Parliament, describing the actual condition of affairs, and informing them of the nature of the propositions made by her Majesty's Government and her allies and the result of those propositions. (Hear, hear.) I do not see the noble earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his place. A. Noble Lord—He was here a short time ago. He was sum moned by her Majesty.] Perhaps some member of her Majesty's Government will be good enough to acquaint the house whether a statement will be made on the pre sent position of affairs, and detailing what has taken place at Vienna both by the Allied Powers and by Arm tria, and what was the character of the answer given by Russia to the propositions made to her ; likewise, whe ther it is the intention of the Government to lay before Parliament the nature of those propositions, and a state ment of their views as to the actual position of the pre sent critical state and threatening aspect of foreign affairs. (Rear, hear.) • The Marquis of LANSDOWNE replied—My noble friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs hai , been in the house till the last ten minutes, when, I have reason to know, he was sent for by her Majesty. Had he been here he would, I am sure, have given an answer to my noble friend. lam confident that it is the inten tion of her Majesty's Government at the earliest period, on a very speedy occasion, to lay before Parliament what has taken place, and I have no doubt that my noble friend will make such a statement, though I am not prepared to name a day. I will, however, consult with my noble friend, and he will be able to state to-morrow or the day after when he will lay whatever information he can communicate before the house. FLOATING BATTERIES. Earl TALBOT wished to ask a question respecting the floating batteries. Re desired to know who wag the designer of these batteries, which he thought would hardly answer the purpose for which they were intended, and what was the contract price for constructing thorn Lord PANMURE said he would answer these ques tions on a future day. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY. The SPEAKER took the chair at fOur o'clock. LORD JOHN RUSSELL. The noble lord the member for the City of Lender: , was led to the table amidst cheers by Sir G. Grey aura Mr. Masterman, and took the oaths and his seat on his re-election after having accepted the office of Secretary of State for the Colonies. THIRD READINGS. The following bills were read a third time and passed: —l3ristol and Exeter Railway ; Newport Corporation Sturbridge Gas ; Surbiton Improvement ; East India?. Railway ; Madras Railway. The following bills were ordered to be considered:— Dundee and Perth and Aberdeen Railway ; Maryport. and Carlisle Railway ; Oldham Gas and ,Pater; Regent'.' Canal (Hertford Union Canal). The Edinburgh Lands Bill was read a second time. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ENGLAND AND IRELAND, Sir W. lIEATHCOTE moved that the third report-. of the Select Committee on Railways (19th April, 1848), and the report of the select committee on the Chest,r and Holyhead Railway (11th May, 1843), be rt ferred ta the committee on the bill for Improved Com munication between England and Ireland. The motion was agreed to without discussion. PETITIONS. Petitions were presented—by Mr. H. W. Wickham, from the inhabitants of Hartehead-cum-Clifton, in the county of York, against the Maynooth Endowment ; also from the board of guardians, Bradford union, York coulit', preying that provision may be made by Govern ment for the support of the wives and families of mili tiamen when on duty with their regiments ; also from* the licensed vicValler3 in the borough 2 a o na parish of'Bradforcl, Yorkshire, to the number of , Praying f or t h e repea l o f th e act passed last session gin. tituled an Act for further regulating the Sale of Beer and other Liquors on the Lord's-day ;by Mr. Pellatt, from Sqntilwark, for improvements in the Management of the Metropolis Bill, and from a place in Kent, for thr, abolition Martin's Spooner, from St. o a f ud ehu s r t ch rates ; by 3 r. against theThomas's parishes, Thrmingham, v ar i ous par ,_ Maynooth grant, and petitions from grant may a of the kingdom praying that the the Manches with drawn ; by M r . H a dfield, from bodies i n favour ter of ttalw Association an d o th er s i m ilar from Sir 3. pechea e T estamentary Jurisdiction Bili ; drolitrighton, fo: the abolition of churchaates ; by from the north of Ireland, .aerl, a number of petitions cttiinst the Maynooth grant ; by Mr. Cowan. petitione tr.to in favour of the Lord Advocate's places in Scotland koinsl; the Maynooth grant. a Education Bill, and reference to the letter THE BANK OF EN GLA . N. ,. f results. Mr. HILD YARD asked, with --.l).Mr. BASS inquired what part Turkey had taken in fr.)m the Governor and Deputy -G tlated the i the conferences? (A laugh.) overnor of of England to the Chancellor of the Excheque th e Bank \ the Lord J. RUSSELL—I cannot go into details, but 14th day of March, 1855, lately laid on the tabler, Turkish plenipotentiaries were of the same mind as house, the Chancellor of the Exchequer whethe)f the the i Plenipotentiaries ..of Great Britain, France, and any objection to lay on the table of the house the helethtad stria. '(Hear, hear, and laughter.) from the Governor and Deputy-Governor of the La n k e o r r , LOAN BILL. the 12th 854 therein referred to, and also t h . E . , "n the orde f Oct.,' P to b. considered r the day for the Loan Bill, as amended, Opinions of the standing counsel of the Bank, and of M r . 1 Sir, Itoundell Palmer, also therein referred to ? ! F. KELLY , omitted. I rose to move that clause 22 be The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said no 1 impolitlc n doing so, he alluded to theanomalous and eolly of any such letter bad come into his possession, 1 Parliarne eonrse : bieh it involved in ' aud it was impossible et to a 0 fl A pledging future „, _ impossible for him to produce it. ! policy. (H ear ~‘-' Pt a particular course of commercial Ittrmy -- TED RAISING OF THE SIEGE OF i The CHA.N, ,hear,) .1. CELLop , SEBASTOPOL. ' explaining briefly 41., 'of ...e gro the EXCHEQUER, after In r.,ply to Mr;IV traduce • this clause iat th edS which had led him to in- Sir C.- WOOLP - iiaI4 4RNERY fair prospect of dimini o el --e bill, said the telegraphic line was now corn- cently created.that it afforded un g the capital it a plete from the tor% of the debt re sh Coast but - , they were not . . ... aware Mr GLADSTONE • w hethtr it was_complete ' said that if th - ' Ari - 2),' across the Danube. With re- i 4.4 . 'vision he should feel it % (Int incur, e eittion went to -i ,- y 33ent upon him The house then went into committee on this bill. to vote with his honourable and learned friend op posite (SirF.Thesiger) in accordance with the opinion he had previously expressed. relative to the clause now under consideration. (Hear.) He objected to the Par . . . li.tment of the year 1855, undertaking to determine by adopting a particular • line of fiscal and commercial policy, the financial policy of Par:lament to 10 or 15 years hence. (Cheers.) He contended that Parliament was going entirely out of its province by so (king. His right hon. friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had expressed, as one of the reasons for the adoption of the clause, that it afforded a fair and rea sonable.prosPect of diminishing the capital of the debt proeressively. Now, it.appeared to him that, under the present circumstances of the law, this reason would prove fallacious, and the clause itself would turn out to be quite inoperative. Suppose, for instance, that peace were proclaimed, and twelve months had elapsed, ac cording to the provisions of the clause, the next year there might be a surplus or there might not. But it there were a surplus of a million the clause would be inoperative, if the law was in force, as was proposed, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be bound to apply it to the extinction of the debt just incurred, instead of applying it, as would be done under the present financial law of the country, to the reduction of the pub lic debt in the most advisable and expedient manner according to the circumstances of the times. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) Thus the clause would not only prove innoperative but a positive mischief. He therefore hoped that the opinion which had been so strongly ex pressed by the house against the clause would in duce his right honourable friend to withdraw ft from the bill without the alternative of taking the sense of the house more emphatically on the point by going to a . division. (Hear, bear.) Mr. HENLEY also said a few words against the im policy and injustice of the clause. _ _ _ M. LABOUCHERE remarked that if this measure went to a division he should feel himself obliged to vote with the honourable and learned gentleman oppo site. At the same time, he was bound to say that he approved most highly of the finan cial scheme which his right hon. friend had brought for ward with the,exception only of the clause now before the house ; and he, therefore, trusted that the right hon. gentleman would take into consideration whether it was worth his while to press the clause to a divi sion after the very forcible opinions uttered by different hon. gentlemen in that house. It was his own firm conviction that it was not expedient to vote a million per annum for the purpose implied by the clause ; and he moreover feared that a question might be raised as to whether the Government could pledge succeeding Par liaments to adopt the course it involved. (Hear.) , The question generally had been so well argued by the hon. Member for the University of Oxford, that he should only he wasting the time of the house if he went over the same ground ; and he would only express a hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not press the house to a division on the subject. (Hear, hear.) Mr. T. BARING rose to express a contrary hope to that of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Labouchere). He hoped that when a clause had been proposed, which bore upon it the stamp of honesty, the Government which was bold enough to bring it forward would be equally bold in supporting it. (Hear, hear.) To reject the clause would be tantamount to saying " we do not wish or expect you to ever reduce the debt." Mr. RICARDO hoped the clause would not be pressed, especially as he understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say, the other day, that if the feeling of the house were against it, be did not intend to press it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was under stood to dissent from this. Mr. RICA.RDO begged tho right hon. gentleman's par don if he had misunderstood him. Mr. J. WILSON said, if one opinion had been more generally expressed than another with regard to the prin ciple-on which loans should be created it was, that loans should be of a terminable nature. The form of loan which bad been most favourably received on all sides of the house was that of terminable annuities; and the prin ciple of such annuities WAS involved in the clause under discussion. Mr. DISRAELI said the hon. gentleman had Argued on the assumption that the house had sanctioned the principle of borrowing on terminable annuities, whereas there had been no vote on the subject. He regarded terminable ar 'unities as a very questionable means of raising money. The idea might be popular in that house, but if they went into the City and consulted men of business on the subject, they would be told in what the fallacy of terminableannni ties consisted—that it was, in fact, borrowing money to create a sinking fund. The 22d clause was neither more nor less than a recurrence to the system of creating an artificial fund, and to 4is mind nothing could be more ob jectionable than that. He though this clause would inter fere with the action of the present law with regard to the sinking fund, to the principles of which ho firmly adhered, believing that it bad worked advantageously for the coun try. At a time when they wero borrowing money, it ap peared to him very undesirable to infuse into the public mind the notion that it was very easy to get rid of national incumbrances. He hoped the clause would not be pressed. Mr. GLYN, while he congratulated the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon the course which he had pursued, re gretted that he had not taken advantage of the recent opportunity to raise a loan of 20,000,003/. Such a course would have prevented the great increase which had taken placed in the unfunded debt, an evil always to be avoided. With regard to the matter immediately under considera tion, he considered that the reasons given by the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli) were such as ought to lead the house to vote for, rather than against this clause. merely by the operation of seeking stamps - , I thought it was better to reconsider the (tatter, and accordingly asked the committee to postpotie the clauses and report progress. I have since reconsidered the matter, and, after the best consideration I can give on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that, on the whole, it will be the safer course for me not to interfere with the existing law, but simply to leave it as it now stands with respect both to registration and securities. These will be applicable to all newspapers, accoeding to the terms of the act ; and, though we shall certainly leave in operation the difficulty which the Board of Inland Revenue has found as to the interpre tation of the word " newspaper." that difficulty will bo considerably diminished when the operation of the com pulsory stamp is removed. Ido not think the state of the law will be altogether satisfactory ; but, on the whole, I am disposed to stand on the existing law, and allow it to be enforced by penalties. I therefore propose to omit clauses 4,5, and 7, and, with regard to clause 6, which shall remain, I shall propose some ver b a l alterations re quired by the omissions that are to take place. On the question that the 4th clause be omitted, Mr. G. BUTT said, he understood the Chancellor of the Exchequer to mean that he intended the law- as to regis tration and giving security to remain applicable to all newspapers. By the bill as it stood before the Govern ment intended to confine the obligation of registering and giving security to those particular publications that chose to avail themselves of the postal advantages proposed to be given ; but the effect of the omission of this clause, as he understood it, would be to relieve particular publications from that obligation. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—AII par ticular publications that are not newspapers. The clause was then ordered to be struck out of the bill ; as was also clause 5. Mr. JOHN MACGREGOR agreed with the hon. gentle man who last addressed the house, that it would have been better for tbe Chancellor of the Exchequer to have gone into the market for a larger loan than the present. Had he done so, he would have been able to make better terms, and to avoid the complicated system of terminable an nuities in which he had involved himself. He (Mr. Mac gregor) saw no use whatever in the clause under consider ation, believing, as he did, that the idea of a sinking fund was an exploded absurdity. In fact, he should describe the whole affair as a fiscal view of a promised land. Mr. CARDWELL said he should be obliged—if the clause were pressed to a division—to vote against it. Lord PALMERSTON—I certainly concur in the wish which has been expressed by hon. members, that this bill should pass without any division of the house, but at the same time I think the principle involved in this clause so important that the Government ought to take the sense of the house upon it. I take the question to be this. When Parliament and the country find themselves pled - ged to a specific debt, ought we or ought we not to make an effort to reduce in future years that debt? It is obvious that no country can face a great emergency arising from a war in which great efforts are to be made without providing means over and above the ordinary revenues of the country. In fact, no war of magnitude can be undertaken by any country whatever without a loan upon honest principles or without forced contributions. Now, according to the ar guments of the right hon. member for Bucks (Mr. Disraeli) or at least, according to some part of those arguments, a country ought never to make an attempt to redeem any por tion of its debt. At the same time, in another part of his speech, the right hon. gentleman praised that system by which the surplus income of the country is applied to the re. demption of its debt. But how does that surplus income arise ? Did it not consist of the surplus of the proceeds of taxation over the expenditure of the year? (Hear, hear.) I think it desirable that this country should lay down, as a principle, that which has already been established to some extent in practice, viz„ that there should be in every year a surplus income applicable to the reduction of the national debt. Much had been said as to the policy of raising money by means of terminable annuities, and undoubtedly had that syeem been followed in the last war much of the burden weighing upon this country would have ceased to exist. But there are great difficulties in contracting a loan of any amount upon the principle of terminable annuities, and I admit the statement of the right hon. gentleman opposite (Hr. Disraeli) that it may be doubted whether it is an economical method of providing for the reduction of debt. No doubt the most economical mode is to raise a loan in that kind of stock which will yield the largest amount of money in return, and then to apply the surplus revenue to its reduction. That is the principle of the pro position of my right hon. friend. He has negotiated a loan upon the most advantageous terms, and he now proposed by this clause to provide for its gradual reduction. The argu ments by which this clause has been met have been directly contradictory. Some hon. members have objected because it was a mere nullity; but, on the other hand, it has been objected to because, it was said, some years hence a Chan cellor of the Exchequer will find himself embarrassed with a pledge from which he will find it impossible to free him self. My opinion is that the not will be, like all other acts of Parliament binding upon Parliament until it is repealed. Hence, so long as it remains unropealed, it will be the duty of every Chancellor of the Exchequer to frame his esti mates in accordance with its provisions. If unfortunately circum , tances should arise which would make it impossible to continue the annual payment in reduction of the debt, it will be for Parliament in its wisdom, to consider the question. (Hear.) I cannot, therefore, admit, either that this is a valueless provision, or that it will be considered as an obligation which ought not to be fulfilled. It is but just in pringiplq, that while on the one hand wo are adding 16,001.000/. to the debt, on the other we are providing a bona fide surplus, for the purpose of meeting it. (Hear.) The house then divided— For the clause 2lO Against lll Majority —99 The bill was ordered to be read a third time to-morrow INCOME-TAX BILL. Clause 6 was agreed to, with certain verbal alterations. Clause 7 was struck out of the bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he had now to propose the clause of which he had given notice, limiting the retransmission by post of periodical pub lications. He proposed this clause as being a reasonable limitation in the right of retransmission. In practice it was found that persons in possession of newspapers, and wishing to send them to a distance, transmitted them by post merely to be used as waste paper, and without any view of their being read. The privilege of unlimited trans mission led to large quantities of waste paper being thus sent by post ; the right of transmission was abused, aryl additional cost was thrown upon the conveyance of papers. He therefore proposed the reasonable limit of 15 days. Mr. G. BUTT directed attention to some confusion which be feared would arise under the act as it was now proposed to stand, owing to the adoption in different clauses a the terms " periodical publication" and " news paper," when the same thing was meant. He did not oppose the clause, but he tho ug ht th a t it wou ld b e neces sary slightly to alter the language, in order to make the different parts of the bill harmonise. The CHANCELLOI? of the EXCHEQUER said that it would no doubt be necessary carefully to examine and compare all the clauses of the bill. He did not think that there was any error in the present clause, but he was much obliged to the hon. and learned gentleman for drawing his attention to the subject. Mr. SPOONER inquired whether it was intended to give the right of transmission and retransmission through the post as frequently as one chose within. the 15 days ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that it was; but beyond 15 days from the date of publicatiog no newspaper would be entitled to the privilege of trans mission through the post. If the period of 15 days were thought too limited it might be extended. The clause was then read a second time, and was or dered to be added to the bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER next pro posed clause B, for determining how questions as to pe riodical publications should be decided. It provided that, so far as referred to their transmission through the post, the question should be referred to the determination of the Postmaster-General, whose decision, with the consent of the Treasury, should be final. The clause was agreed to. Clause C, relating to the manner in which warrants and consents of Treasury were to be given, was abandoned. Upon clause D, which provided that actions or suits might be carried on in the name of the registered pro prietors of newspapers on behalf of themselves and co propriet ors, Mr.HILDYARD moved, after the word "respectively," in the first clause, to insert "if such annual value or amount shall reach or exceed 1501.; and an additional rate and duty of ltd, for every 20s. of the annual value or L.rnount of all such property, profits, and gains respec tively, if such an annual value or amount shall reach- or exceed 1001. and not, reach 100/. This would limit the in crease of taxation upon incomes under 1501. tb Lid. in the pound. The sum which the Chancellor of t e Exchequer would lose by this would be but small, and in a case like the present he thought the right hon. gentleman would not rely upon that argument as an answer to this-motion. Colonel SIRTHORY supported the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was title the exemption proposed by the hon. and learned ' member would make very little difference to the Crown ; but it would also make very little difference to the tax payer, not more than six shillings a year. He did not wish, however, in any way to pled ge hi mself against the principle of a discriminating duty respecting incomes of different amount ; and as the hon. and learned member Mated that the amendment substantially interested of li !Lilted income, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) should not think it his duty to oppose it. (Hear, hear.) The amendment was agreed to. The remaining clauses and the preamble were agreed to, aid the house resumed. NEWSPAPER STAMP DITTIES BILL. Mr. G. BUTT said ho thought, if the right hon. gentle man-the Chancellor of the Exchequer would consider the laws which were applicable to this class of subjects generally, that ho would come to the conclusion that this was a clause which ought not to be adopted. It contained a provision which was perfectly new to the law of the country, and if it were adopted it would apply to no other publication except a newspaper, because no other publication was required to be registered. The effect of the clause was to enable the registered pro prietors of newspapers to sue in their own 11311103, with out joining all the parties in the concern as plaintiffs in the action. Bet upon what principle was this to be done? If there were a firm of booksellers they must all be joined, and what reason was there for taking the proprietors of newspapers out of the operation of the law as it stood ? The proposition which was now before the committee was not properly analogous to that contained in the Joint Stock Act, which enabled prbprietors in com panies where there were many partners, upon registering themselves and continuing to register any alteration in the firm as it arose, to sue in the name of the registered officer. That act also provided, if the registered officer failed in his suit and judgment went against him, that it would be a judgment against all the partners in the concern ; so that if the registered officer were a pauper all the partners would be, as theyought tobe, amenable for the judgment obtained against them iu the name of their registered officer. In the present case, however, there was no such provision, and the clause standing therefore in the isolated position in which it (lid was clearly contrary to every principle of existing law, and to every act of Parliament which had ever been passed for giving facilities to partids for seeing and being sued. Suppose that a newspaper were the property of six proprietors, what reason could there be for exempting them from the responsibility of their ownership? Of course he spoke not, of the respectable newspapers in the metropolis and throughout the country, the registered proprietors of which would, no doubt, be answerable for any judgment which might go against them ; but he would take the case of smaller publications, in which it might be convenient to register as the proprietors persons who had no funds whatever, while there were other partners in the concern who might be capable of answering any judgment which might be obtained against them; and he said that, under the clause as it was proposed, there were no means of meet ing such a case. The General Joint Stock Act, 7th and Bth of Victoria, chap. 110, contained proper provisions for doing justice, and rendered it necessary for every change in the firm, the addition of every new partner, and the ceasing of a man to be a partner to be registered ; and the public officer was obliged once a-year to make a return of every and all such alterations. He must give in a list of the whole of the prop:ietors, and should any alteration be made in the period which elapsed between the times of making the general returns it was duly noted. It was provided, too, by the Joint Stock Act that a suit should not abate by reason of the death of the plaintiff, for the reason that he was merely the nominal plaintiff, and a judgment was in effect a judgment against the whole of the parties concerned, so that a sufficient re medy was given. But here them was a palpable omission. The right hon. gentleman could not have known the state of the law ; for if he had intended to adopt the law to be found in the Bank Act, or the Joint Stock Act, be had so worded the clause as to render it entirely ineffective, and would enable a paper which was started for the purposes of piracy, or as a vehicle for slander, to register a nominal man, who would sue and be sued, and the consequence would be that the defendant would b 3 without remedy. There was no principle of law which, if a debt were due, for instance, ou a bill of exchange to newspaper proprie tors, would enable one party to sue, when if a respect able firm, composed of six persons, had a debt due from a newspaper proprietary, they would all be obliged to join in the suit. The clause was not so worded as to do justice between parties who might be plaintiffs and de fendants in a suit, and any bon. gentleman conversant with the law would tell the right hon. gentleman that such a principle was totally unknown to it, and was no* for the first time imported into the house. At present proprietors of newspapers wore registered for the purpose of giving facilities to the pursuer in fixing the parties in cases of libel; but the registration of a portion of them did not hinder him from joining the whole of the proprietors in the suit if he pleased. On these grounds he submitted that the clause was not a proper one, and moved its rejection. The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUER said that at present the registered proprietors were subject to legal pro ceedings, and might be made defendants to any civil nation. Mr. G. BUTT.—Not to civil actions. It relates to actions for libel, and not for debt. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.-At all events they were subject to criminal proceedings, and it had been represented to him as a hardship that, while they were thin subject, individually, to be made defendants, no relative right was given them of sueing. Any two regis tered proprietors were subject to a judgment in an action. He apprehended that the principal persons registered would be the printer and publisher, and no doubt they would have sufficient funds to give security for costs. The object of this clause was to place them in tho same position with regard to sueing as that in which they were when they were being sued. Mr. G. BUTT again explained that the provision of re gistration did not limit the right of parties to sue the re gistered proprietors only, in cases of contract. They might if they pleased, sue all the proprietors. It was, therefore, impossible that this clause could be supported on any prin ciple of law, and ho trusted that the right hon. gentleman would not press it. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it was a clause in which the Government had no interest what over, but it had been suggested with a view of doing away with a hardship exi s ti ng under the present law. Ho had no objection to postpone its further consideration till the third reading. The clause was then postponed. Mr. WHITESIDE inquired whether any determination had been come to with respect to the registration ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Those clauses have been withdrawn for the present. I now beg to move the clause which proposes to give the protection of a copyright of 24 hours on certain articles in newspapers. The present copyright, in its interpretation clause includes newspapers, and it certainly appears to have been the in tention of the Legislature in passing that act to give the• full benefit of copyright to newspapers as well as to all other classes of printed publications. But the clauses introduced into that act seem to have been formed principally with re ference to encyclopaedias, reviews, magazines, periodicals, and works of larger bulk and less frequent publication than daily or weekly newspapers, and imposed certain conditions with respect to copyright which could scarcely have been ful filled in the case of newspapers,_ and therefore practically nullified the benefits which the act appeared to concede to them. Inasmuch, however, as it has been imputed to the Government that in introducing this measure,which affects large daily newspapers, conferring upon the public great good by collecting and diffusing intelligence at great ex pense through all parts of the world, it gives facilities for pirating the information they contained, and disseminating it without any cost—inasmuch as it has been charged upon the Govern went that they wished to encourage a dishonest course of that sort, and having had no such intention,they feel it incumbent to lay before the house a clause like the present, in which a copyright is given to the articles in news papers;and a remedy for the infringement of that copyright. The mhdel of this cheap remedy already exists in the act with respect to the copyright of designs, which has received the sad ction of Parliament. I• am free to admit that if this clause should be rigidly or vexatiously enforced by the ]eadiu* metropolitan newspapers, the rights which have by consent, hitherto been exercised by the London evening ate I weeklY newspapers, and by th e coun try newspape rs , wou l d be materially abridged. It is undoubtedly true that the it e other n l i Leong; t e h f e p r a e r p l i o a r te t s e n o :, f t t h h e e r d e eb pe a r t t e e s i of n p this e e d a an e d gs th in e courts; of justice, the reports of the transactions at public meetiags,and on other public occasions, which are obtained at a considerable cost by the proprietors of the leading metropolitan journals, are transcribed into other papers simply by the mere process of copying, and without any The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—The committee will remember that when this bill was last be fore us a question was raised on clauses 4,5, 6, and 'i, relative to registration and securities. A discussion took place on the structure of those clauses, and it was pointed out that certain inconveniences would arise under their operation ; that, in certain cases, a sort of publication not e)ming within the range of the original acts would be in cluded, and that, in certain other cases, particular publi catiOns that did coma within the operation of the original acts would be excluded. I felt that these remarks had in them some foundation ; and, though the clauses referred to were framed on the principle of removing penalties and securing the obligation of registration And securities THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, EVENING-, MAC' 1, 1855. expenditure, of money. That practice has grown up and has been acquiesced in by the principal newspapers for a long series of years ; and it certainly would be a consider able detriment to th public at large if any attempt should now be made to abridge the rights thus conceded by prac tice ; but it is not my belief that the leading London news papers would seek to exercise the powers which this clause would confer in anyharsh and oppressive manner. (Hear.) The proprietors of newspapers, like other persons in this country, live under the influence of public opinion. Though newspapers, to a great extent, act as the guides of public opinion, they are also th emse l ves i n re t urn pecu li ar l y amenable to the influence of public opinion, and it is not my belief, looking to the manner in which the principal metropolitan newspapers are conducted, that their pro prietors would seek by a harsh, novel, or oppressive use of the powers of this clause to prevent that, transcription of intelligence from their columns which practice has hitherto sanctioned. My belief is that this clause would merely be brOught into use in cases where a newspaper might be set up with the deliberate intention of pirating the principal newspapers, and of transferring into its columns intelli gence, articles of original composition, and other com munications, animo furandi —with the deliberate inten tion of making the profits of the newspaper depend on such ill-gotten gains. Under these circumstances it was desir able that a cheap, quick, and certain remedy should be afforded to those newspaper proprietors whose intelligence was so taken from them. The right hon. gentleman con cluded by moving that the following clause be inserted in the bill : " The proprietors of every newspaper shall, for the purpose of protection against piracy, be entitled to a copyright in every original article, letter, paragraph, communication, and composition which shall be for the first time published in such newspaper in this country ; and if any person shall, within 24 hburs after the first publication of any original article, letter, paragraph, communication, or composition in any such newspaper, print and publish any copy of such origi nal article, letter, paragraph, communication, or composition, or of any material part thereof, or any colourable abridgment or alteration of the same, such person shall for every such offence forfeit a sum of not less than 51., nor exceeding 301., to the proprietors of the newspaper against whom such offence has been committed ; and it shall be lawful for the printer or publisher of such last-mentioned newspaper, on behalf of the proprietors thereof, to recover such penalty by a summary pro ceeding before a stipendiary magistrate who has, or two justice s who have, jurisdiction where the party offending resides, who shall issue a summons requiring such party to appear on a day and at a time and place to be named in such summons (such time not being less than two days from the date thereof); and every such summons shall be served on the party offend ing, either in person or •at his usual place of abode ; and, either upon the appearance or the default to appear of tho party offending, such magistrate or justices may proceed to hear the complaint ; and upon proof of the offence, by con fession, or upon the oath of one or more credible witnesses (which oath such magistrate and justices are respectively hereby authorised to administer); may convict the offender in a penalty of not less than 51. or more than 301., as to such magistrate or justices may seem fit ; and if the amount of such penalty and the cost of the proceeding, which shall be, assessed by such magistrate or justices, shall not be forthwith paid, the same shall be levied by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the offender, and such magistrate or justices shall grant warrants accordingly." Mr. WHITESIDE was of opinion that the proposed. clause would not accomplish the object which the right hon. Igentleman had so clearly explaiued—namely, to protect the rights of the proprietors of the principal newspapers.. In that object he (Mr. Whiteside) entirely concurred, but it was to the clause to be moved by the hon. member for Pontefract that he should give his support, being of opinion that it was unjust to visit with restriction any journal—he did not care what journal it might be—on account of its success. He regarded, therefore, the clause of the hon. member for Pontefract more as a matter of benefit to the community than to any particular paper. But he confessed that it appeared to him that the house was now called on by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to, do what was never done before—to limit the bl ess i ngs o f priuting, and stifle the electric telegraph as far as possible. {Haar, hear.) Of thiS ho was satisfied, however, that the clause was wholly impracticable. He agreed in the argument used by tho right hon. gentleman, and which had been used elsewhere, that a newspaper, though it did not invent news,yet some times he should say otherwise—(a laugh)—hough it did not invent the facts which occurred at Vienna, if any facts did occur there—(laughter)—still it carried the intelligence with great speed and industry, and with his consent it should be paid, if that were possible, for its extraordinary diligence and speed iu carrying facts. But, what was the meaning of a copyright in news he could not imagine. News must exist, and halt-a-dozen men 'nigh., carry news from Vienna, but one, might carry it more rapidly than another, and the propcstion should be to pay the parti cular journal which, by zeal and activity, got the news the soonest into this metropeis. He admittcd that origi nal articles of great ability appeared in tho principal news papers, but it was a complement to quote them—(a laugh) —and a testimony to the talent and ability with which they were written : But it might be said that original articles were not so much the matter of transcriptions as the striking descriptions of the Battle of Inkerman and other battles inserted in two of the metropolitan journals, written, he was happy to say, by two of his countrymen, and which were pirated ; and in Dublin the clubs received holographic despatches conveying the substance of any article of interest in an hour or an hoar and a half after it was written. But how was that to be stopped ?Of all the extraordinary devices which ever entered the head of a financier for effecting that object this clause certainly was the most extraordinary. Whether one man had stolen the ideas of another was often a difficult question to determine with respect to a literary work; but when several men had obtained any particular fact at Vienna, and the editors of newspapers had commented on th a t fact, then the question would arise whether one had stolen it from the other ; and according to this clause the editors of the ,Exct miner, the Spectator, and the Press—all men of great talent —might be pulled up by the neck before a magistrate to find out whether they had stolen their ideas from the edi tor of the Times or the editor of the Morning Chronicle. Then, to try the question, there had been selected through out the country curious literary tribunals, and he must ex press his desire that Ireland should be exempted from the bill, for much as he respected the stipendiary magistrates, he should be indisposed to place at their control the press of this country. (Hear, - hear.) It was impossible to find men so unfit for the duty proposed to be imposed on them. He was not speaking disrespectfully of them—(a laugh)— for they were never intended to decide questions of copy right. It appeared to him that every provincial editor, unless that merciful and charitable feelins , adverted to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer should enter into the minds of the London editors, might -find himself taken before a magistrate, who might easily be satisfied of the violation of copyright, and fine him from 5/. to 301., and thus the provincial press might easily be suppressed. The copyright of designs had been adverted to, but he was not aware himself of any analogous provision to the one proposed, and the propositions to give up men's minds and ideas to the judgment of police magis trates was intolerable. If this clause were to be enforced, let it be enforced by a more competent tribunal ; there might not be much objection to the tribunal which was now the greatest in the land, he meant a county court. Ques tions of copyright might then be submitted to j uries, which were generally disposed to take a lenient view in such eases, but it would be out of the question that two stipendiary magistrates in Ireland, or two county justices in England should be allowed to decide whether a local journal, to the politics of which they might be opposed, had invaded the copyright of a London journal. The right hon. gentleman would not be able, and he ought not, to carry a clause to that effect. Pid the right hon. gentleman intend to include the press of Ireland ? That was a question which he might call a puzzler. (A laugh.) Would it not be hard that a London newspaper should not be looked into for 10 or 12 hours after its arrival in Dublin, for fear any one might extract the intelligence it contained ? Eien if the Dublin newspapers published intelligence of their own in the morning, a question would arise whether it had not been stolen from a London morning paper, and would have to be determined by a 'lance magistrate. His view was that it would be right for them to protect good news and valuable commentary if they - could do so (hear)—but they could not, and it was useless to make the attempt. (Hear.) If this section passed, one body of men, the law yers, and the country attorneys especially, ought to return thanks to the house, for every newspaper in the empire would be brought into a police-Office. He submitted that if the right hon. gentleman would remove the objection as to weight which affected a particular journal, he would do well to take the advice given him a few hours ago, and to leave the , question of copyright as it was. Tho great journals here did not suffer so much as they supposed from the grievance, which it was now sought to redress, and the effect of the right hon. gentleman's pro posal would be, that all the respectable provincial journals would perpetually be fined, and the London journals would be worried by a law which they did not desire. He should, upon these grounds, (Troia the clause. (Hear, hear.) Mr. PHINN said, the that question to be decided was, whether it was desirable that there should be a copyright in news, when newspapers had gone to great expense and made great exertions to obtain it? If they thought it was desir able they their came to the second question—whether the means proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for that purpose ought to be adopted ? The hon. andlearned gentleman (Mr.Whiteside had put extreme cases ; he would put a case the other way. The morning papers went to more expense and made greater exertions in order to collect intelligence than any other newspapers in the world; they had agents and correspondents all oyes the globe, in every great capital, and in many of the secondary to wns, mind the English public were supplied with news vary often long before her Majesty's Government were prepared. to com municate it to the house. The Times, or the Morning Chronicle, or the Morning Herald, might be obtained at 6 in the morning, and by half-past 8 or 9 a newspaper might be circulated through London, containing all the leading articles, and the chief intelligence, political, I:te racy, and legal, published in those journals, at about oue third of their cost. Was not this a great wrong, and ought it not to be redressed ? (Hear.) 'Would not the hon. mem ber for Manchester exclaim against spring patterns in cot ton being pirated, and effereeto the London houses at half their proper price ? He admitted that the morning papers might exaggerate the grievances under which they suffered, but the effect of a system of piracy such as he had described would be to diminish their circulation, to lessen the object for which they incurred expense and made exertions, and so to diminish the value of the article which they supplied to the public ; he was now, therefore, pleading for the public rather than for the proprietors of newspapers. All public men sometimes fell under the lash of the press, 1 ' but he belie ve d our newspapers were, on the whole, the best condu c t e d i n th e worl d . God forbid that they should over resemble the newspapers of America. He agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman that the remedy proposed by the right hon. gentleman was not a good one. He thought 24 hours was too long a period for copyright in news to continue, as six or eight hours would produce the same practical effect. Distance as well its time was an element in the question. The London newspapers would have reason to complain if a newspaper pirated from themselves wore circulated in London, but if the news contained in them were telegraphed to the Dublin or Edinburgh news papers there was no competition, and they would not el a copy tho less in those places. He thought some means ought to be adopted to repress the piracy whom he knew would be committed upon the morning journals. Tho hon. member for Manchester (Mr. Bright) might shake his head, but he (Mr. Phinn) know that preparations were at that moment being made in London to publish the principal leading articles and the most important intelligence con tained in the mornin,; papers by 10 o'clock. With regard to the means by which this grievance ought to be redressed, he admitted that be was not willing to devolve upon police magistrates a new and arduous duty for which they were most inadequately paid. The Legislature was every day heaping upon public functionaries new and unpopular duties which they had never contemplated when they had accepted their appointments. Tho Chancellor of the Ex chequer was right in saying that they must trust to the forbearance, moderation, and discretion o' the newspaper proprietors—(cries of "Oh ! oh !")—for the efficient work ing of the clauses. He believed that they would not think it worth while to institute proceedings except in cases of systematic, piracy, continued week after week. There was considerable difficulty in the choice of a Gard to the reported raising of the siege of Sebastopol, a despatch had been received that day from Lord Raglan, and he made no mention of any such intention. (Cheers.) In reply to Mr. GROGAN, Sir C. WOOD said be had no objection to state the whole contents of that despatch. It was simply that Lord Raglan wished to know when the Sardinian con tingent was to sail. (Cheers and laughter.) INCOME TAX—CIVIL SERVICE. Mr. MACARTNEY asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it was his intention to make any exception with respect to the income tax chargeable upon the salaries of the civil servants, who were subjected to a charge of five per cent. in addition to the present income tax (nearly 6 per cent.), making together about 11 por centum levied on their limited incomes ; also, whether he was prepared to state on what day he would lay on the table of the house the proposed bill for altering and amending the law respecting the Civil Service Super annuation Fund The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Income-tax Bill affected all public officers with certain exceptions. Gove rnm e n t were not prepared to make the exception indicated in the question of the hon. mem ber, as that could not be done to one part of the public service, and not to others. SALARIES OF COUNTY COURT JUDGES. In reply to Mr. Low; Mr. WILSON said the Government, in respect of the great duties some of the County Court judges had to discharge, had decided on raising the salaries of some of them to the maximum rate of 1,5001. a year. THE VIENNA CONFERENCES. Mr. DISRAELI—Seeing the noble lord the Secretary for the Colonial Department once more among us— (laughter)—l take the liberty of inquiring whether it is the intention of the noble lord to lay any papers upon the table with respect to his late mission, or to make any statement to the house with regard to it, and, if so, when ? And whether it is his intention, by any other means, to afford the house any i n f orma ti on as t o th e proceedings of the last two months at Vienna? (Hear, hear.) I should be glad to hear from the Government wb'st their intentions are on this subject. Lord PALMERSTON—Before my noble friend re plies to the question, I wish to correct an answer I gave to the hon. member for Manchester the other evening in reply to his question whether the Russian Plenipoten tiaries had made any counter-proposals to the Conference atter the rejection of the proposals made by the English and French Plenipotentiaries. I then answered from a telegraphic message, and such messages are generally rather , short— (a laugh)—but from despatches subse quently received it appears that cYrnter-proposals were made by the Russian Plenipotentiaries, those counter proposals, however, not being deem e d either by the British, the French, the Austrian, or the Turicish Pleni potentiaries as calculated to produce a satisfactory con clusion. Lord J. RUSSELL then rose, and was received with some cheering. The noble lord said—ln reply to the questions which have been put to me by the right hon. gentleman, I have to state, in the first place, that I do not think it is for me to decide what papers shall be laid upon the table of the house. I may say, however, that I believe her Majesty's Government intend: very shortly to lay upon the table the pro tocols of the Conferences which have taken place at Vienna. Those protocols will convey to the house in formation of the substance of the negotiations that have taken place. Perhaps I may say a few words more, without intending to go into any detail as to the nege- Cations. The first meeting of the conference was on the 15th of March. The negotiations with respect to the first two of the four points with which the house is acquainted lasted until the 26th of March. On the 213th of March the third point came under consideration. It was suggested by the plenipotentiaries of Austria that the plenipotentiaries of Russia should themselves make a proposal calculated to satisfy the exigencies of the case. '1 he plenipotentiaries of Russia replied that they had 'no instructions to do so, but they asked for time to refer to their Government. The consequence was that the conference was then adjourned, and that no meeting for the transaction of business took place until the an swer was received from St. Petersburg. On the 17th of April another conference was held, when the pleni potentiaries of Russia informed the conference that: they had received instructions from their Go vernment not to take the initiative of any proposi tions, but that they were ready to hear and discuss ' any proposal which might be submitted to the confer ence. The representatives of the allied Powers then re-1 quested 48 hours to consider the form in which they should make their proposal, and on the 19th of April the plenipotentiaries of France and of Great Britain, sup ported by the plenipotentiaries of Austria, laid their proposition before the conference. The Russian pleni potentiaries, on their side, asked for 48 hours in order to prepare their answer to this proposition. Accordingly, on the 21st they gave their answer totally rejecting the Propositions which had been made to the conference. They stated to us, however, that they had propositions to make on the part of their Government which they conceived would be in accordance with the demand that Turkey should be united more closely with the mainte nance of the balance of power in Europe, and that some restriction should be placed upon the preponderance of _Russia in the Black Sea. The plenipotentiaries of Aus tria, France, and Great Britain found those proposals of Russia entirely unacceptable, and refused to consider them in detail. The plenipotentiary of Austria then said, although these propositions had been rejected, ho trusted, that all the means of reconciling the belli gerent parties by peace were not yet exhausted. To this the plenipotentiaries of France and of Great Britain replied that their instructions were exhausted, and that they had no powers to consider any further, propositions. I then considered that the best way of performing my duty would be to re pair to my own Government, and to lap before them the whole state of the case ,with respect to the negotia tions at Vienna, and the manner in which the confer ences had been suspended. Two or three days after wards the Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, having requested the orders of the Emperor, came to a similar deternaihation. I belie've he was expected to arrive in Paris last night, and I have no doubt he will lay before his Government his account of the occurrences that have taken place in the course of those negotiations. Mr. DISRAELI-I wish to inquire whether, before the protocols of the conference are laid upon the table— and I trust they will be produced with all possible de spatch—her 2ajesty's Government have any objection to give us some preliminary papers—for instance, de spatches of our ambassador or plenipotentiary at Vienna, which will afford us an authentic and official description of what, the fuur points are ? The noble lord will per haps recollect that at the present moment we have not. the four points on the table of the house in an official form. I think, therefore, it would be very much for the convenience of the house if, without loss of time, we were ptit in possession of these preliminary papers, so that, before the protocols of the conferences are in our hands, we may understand what were the data and the bases upon which those conferences took place, and why they were brought to an end. Lord PALMERSTON—I think the protocols them selves will pretty clearly explain what the four points were, but if the protocols do not afford sufficient infor mation ,there can be no objection to laying some paper on the table that will give the requisite explanation. With regard to papers belonging to the long coarse of negotiation that preceded the conferences, I think there might be great objection to their production ; but I will take care that the house shall be in lull possession of a knowledge of the four points that were brought under the eonsideiation of the conferences. Mr. DISRAELI—Perhaps I did not make my ques tion sufficiently clear to the noble lord. I have no doubt that when the protocols are in our possession we shall clearly understand the nature of the four points— (a laugh)—but, as the Government have only given a vague promise to produce the protocols, and have not fixed any time when they will be placed on the table, what I wished to know was, whether the noble lord would have any objection to afford the house at once some authentic knowledge of what the four points of which we have heard so much consist ? I should not, of course, press the Government for any private des patches ; but if they would lay upon the table the single despatch in which the nature of the four points was communicated to her Majesty's Government, so that the house may at once be placed in possession of teat information, I think such a course would be highly satisfactory to hon. members generally, and could not ire attesdeci with any inconvenience. Lord PALMERSTON— Whatever papers can be produced will be laid before the house as soon as' pos sible, and I do , not think their production will be, de layed so long as the right hon. gentlem - an supposes. (Laughter. Mr. DISRAELI—I wish only for complete and sa tisfactory information. The noble lord repeats that he will lay before the house as soon as possible the protocols of the conferences, but does ho mean at the same time to produce the correspondence which took place between cow plenipotentiaries at Vienna and her Majesty's Go vernment in pursuance of the treaty of December 2 ? That is the information the house would be desirous of having. PALMERSTON—I cannot at present say what papers beyond the protocols will be laid upon the table, but the Government will consider the subject. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE understood news had been re ceived from Vienna that negotiations had been opened between Russia and some of the gentlemen who had been left behind by the rplenipotentiaries. (A. laugh.) .3e wished to ask whether any negotiations of any sort or kind had been resumed at Vienna since the departure of the noble lord opposite ? fritLaodrdierPtAirLiNelnEnaßSsTomONe psraoi4athtahtadsinbceeen h m is ad n e ob t i, y e Russia, t wh e ich s ofwtahsenootthedrepenoiwederlsikteolylebad to satisfactoryy any of the L.- preseataiv proper tribunal for the trial of questions of this kind. If there were a summary jurisdiction there must also be a power of appeal ; but he supposed no one would wish an appeal to be given to the Quarter Sessions. He was not sure that the county courts would not be the best tribunals for the purpose, as there would be an appeal from them to the superior courts, and by those courts the principles upon which the law was to be administered would be settled. He regretted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not proposed a newspaper code ; but as the house would by this act give great opportunity for the commission of piracy, he hoped, however impracticable they might think this clause, that they would not reject the principle upon which it was founded, namely, that some protection ought to be given to newspaper proprietors, who expended much money and much trouble for the service of the public. Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE agreed with the hon. and learned member for Enniskillen in thinking that it was impracticable to establish a copyright in newss One argu ment advanced by the hon. and learned member for Bath in favour of the present clause had certainly astonished him—namely, that they might trust to the moderation of the proprietors of newspapers that they would not exercise the right they might acquire by this bill in a rigorous spirit. He knew it was the fashion to praise the press, but he very much doubted whether, in the exercise of power, the pro prietors of newspapers displayed a spirit which showed them to be exceptional to their species. But, in addition to the objection to the clause on principle, the house must see that it was totally objectionable in respect to its prac tical operation. It not only provided against the pirating a whole article, but also against "any colourable abridg ment of the same." Now, it would require the most cri tical mind to describe what a colourable abridgment of a newspaper article was. What was a newspaper ? Au ephe meris, an insect of the day, which, having performed all its functions, in a few hours disappeared. It could not for a moment be put on the footing of great works—such as those of poets, orators, and historians. To place on the same level with the writings of the hon. member for Edin burgh the correspondence of a newspaper from Vienna and Berlin would be most preposterous. Mr. BENTINCK entirely agreed with the hon. and learned gentleman who had just spoken as to the want of force in the argument advanced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer—namely, that he was prepared to trust to the good feeling of the editors of newspapers in carrying out this clause. Without reverting to the able remarks of the hon. and learned member for Enniskillen, who, he believed, had shown that the clause could never be practically car ried into effect, he thought there was another ground of objection to the clause. He could not understand on what ground any man was to claim a copyright in an anonymous article in a newspaper. The law of copyright applied to works of durable interest, or, at least, to works on some independent awl continuous subject, the authors of which were known ; and he thought it impossible to le g islate ou the same principle with r es p ec t to su ch wor k s and to ephemeral and anonymous articles in newspapers. It was absurd to say that there was any copse ig,ht possessed by pro prietors of newspapers in articles appearing in their journals when they all knew that in nine cases out of ten they were not written by the proprietors. But while he considered it objectionable to attempt to enforce a copyright in the case of newspapers, when they had no possible means of ascertaining in whom such a right existed, he still re tained a strong opinion against the whole measure. He believed the inevitable result of it would be to produce such a revolution in the newspaper press that for the sake of the public and for the sake of the respectable portion of the newspapers themselves, it wouldbe absolutely necessary to make new laws altogether on the subject of the press. If this bill passed into a law they ought to require a signa ture to every article in order to determine who were the responsible persons, and thereby maintain the stability of the respectable portion of the press, and counteract the in undation of mischievous papers which must inevitably follow such a law. He believed, from all the information he had been able to acquire, that the effect of this law would be to ruin the whole of the respectable portion of the country press. Without referring to the discreet or indiscreet use required from the proprietors of London papers of the power that would be vested in them, he believed that the respect able portion of the country press would cease to exist— a press which in some places, in point of talent and circu lation, equalled the press of London; and that in' their stead they would have an inundation of small publications which would beecome the curse of the country. Mr. GIBSON did not think that the hon. and learned member for Bath had advanced any great argument in fa vour of the clause now before the committee. He remem bered the right hon. gentleman the member for Bucking hamshire once made an observation to the - hon. and learned member that he liked his principles and admired his speech, but he could not vote for hie resolution. So the hon. and learned gentleman now said he liked copyright in newspapers, and approved the policy of the Chancellor cf the Exchequer, but that he did not like his plan. But that was the very question the committee had to consider. The question before the committee was not a mere ques tion of abstract justice, but of practical policy. A gen tleman was examined before the committee who, be be lieved, was at that time editor of the Daily News. He stated that the proprietors of that journal had reason to complain that, after they had been at great expense for the transmission of Indian news, the country papers had taken it from them without any acknowledgment, and he thought that a short copyright would put an end to such practices ; or that, at any rate, their permission should be obtained. He (Mr. Gibson) recognised a sort of abstract justice in this claim, but he was perplexed as to how they wore to act upon it. Before Parliament made a law to meet an evil, it ought to be satisfied that the evil was of sufficient magnitude to make a remedy necessary. The electric telegraph of which the hon. member for Stoke-upon- Trent was chairman, was charged that very day in the Times with acts of a piratical character,by sending news extracted from the Times to the local papers in the provinces. He would leave it to his hon. friend to explain to the house tho proceedings that had taken place under his presidency. But it appeared to him strange that if this operation was of so oppressive a nature the London morning papers should- now come forward for the first time to ask for a remedy. He should like to know whether the house would have heard anything about it if it had not been for the Newspaper Stamp Bill ? If a copyright was proper to be had the proprietors of newspapers ought to have it whether there was a stamp duty or not. The provincial papers took as much now from the London papers as they were ever likelyto take; and if it were necessary that they should be punished for that offence after this bill should be passed, it was equally necessary that they should be pun ished now. But this clause was in reference to the pirates who were to come. They were looming in the distance. Let us wait and see whether they came or not. He was one of those who did not believe that there was this great army of pirates approaching against the London press. He was therefore prepared to abide his time, and see whether the emergency was so imminent as to necessitate this great change in their legislation. He doubted whether, practically, it would be possible to accomplish the pro tection proposed for a narration of facts. (Hear, hear.) It appeared to him from the article in the Times news paper of that morning that they had great doubts themselves whether the hill would be of any practical be nelit to them. If it would be of no benefit to them—they being the parties who made the largest expenditure for news—it was clear that neither they nor any other London proprietors cared much about it. Indeed, they as much as said that if the halfpenny tax were only removed from their second supplements the other newspapers might plunder them as much as they pleased. Thus by the by the Morning Chronicle, the Daily News, and all the other morning con temporaries, it appeared, might be plundered as well as themselves, if the cheap postageOf ld. for any size or weight were granted to the Times. Only Concede this boon, and they would bid defiance to piracy. This apprehension of piracy, therefore, could not be very well founded. The edi tor of the Daily News, in his evidence, stated that nobody could complain if a provincial paper announced, 'as a fact, that a London journal said so and so. Now, here was a copy of the " morning express," which was sent down to Manchester that day' by the hon member for Stoke upon-Trent's (Mr. Ricardo's) company, and which was described aspiratical :—"9a.m., April,3o. The Post believes that despatches were received on Friday from Ge neral Canrobert, and on Saturday from Lord Raglan throughthe new submarine telegraph, stating that the bom bardment of Sebastopol bytheallies had not been attended with such success as to justify an assault." Was the state ment that the Post thought or believed that such a des patch had been received to be considered as piracy ? Well, -this was the form of the announcement generally made by the electric telegraph. They ran thus 1—" The Times says so and so—that Sebastopol had been taken" for instance. (A laughs) These were matters, the circulation of which it would be impossible to stop. The London correspon dent of a country newspaper searched the contents of all the journals and telegraphed down to the provincial edi tor such portions of the news published in the metropolis that morning as he thought fit. The provincial editor received his intelligence from his correspondent, but he did not know whence the latter had obtained it. The correspondent was a collector of the news brought to London by the Times from Vienna or elsewhere ; he telegraphed what he read and heard ; and, therefore, to make a provincial editor penally responsible, merely be cause he inserted a paragraph communicated by an inde pendent source, and which might have appeared in some London morning journal, would be perfectly Mon strous. Again, the power of evasion would be so great that it would be impossible to enforce the law without creating all sorts of vexatious litigation —a consideration surely forming a valid argument against any new legisla tion. Literary newspapers were, no doubt, entitled to a. copyright, if they contained a series of letters—" Mrs Cau dle s Curtain Lectures," for instance—(laughter) —or any other, provided the proprietors registered those particular compositions, which, being produced from the mind of some individual, were entitled to the same protection as books. The right, however, to narrate a fact, when that fact had been previously narrated by somebody else, was a totally different thing. It, was to be hoped, there fore, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, seeing the difficulties incident to the subject which had occurred to the house, and considering that the danger sought to be guarded against was altogether prospective, would consent to postpone, for the present at least, the extension of a copyright to newspapers. Lord LOVAINE said that this was the first time in the history of this country when a copyright was asked for articles of the most ephemeral description, which were written one day and forgotten the next ; and certainly if the Tress of our day needled this protection it must have become weaker than it used to be. Recollecting what the daily newspapers assumed to be their functions, how they controlled, or attempted to control, Ministers of State, and interfered even in the oper a ti ons of army, affording in formation to the enemy on points which it was of the high est importance should be concealed from him—in which reprehensible practice, according to the statement of a late Cabinet Minister, they could not be restrained—it was rather curious that they should come before the house at that particular moment in the attitude of suitors seeking a copyright as a protection. It was a question whether, according to the law of England, any man had a right in another's wrong ; for it was notorious that the press circus lated calumnious accusations and vituperative charges against individuals, who had no means of clearing themselves in the eyes of the public. Those charges were reiterated from day to day—some of them had even been repeated in that house in the face of the most solemn denial; an d was it fitting that a right of property in articles of that charac ter should be created or protected? Again, magistrates by the law of this country were not allowed to settle the com monest question of right—such matters must be referred to a jury ; and yetin a case of this importance, where the news papers exercised enormous and irresponsible powers, it was proposed that they should be permitted to go before such a summary tribunal to enforce their alleged rights. Why should not the persons whose characters were assailed and aspersed by the press have an equal right to go before a stipendiary magistrate, and obtain damages against the proprietor of the journal that had injured him ? But, further, it was the printer or publisher of a newspa per who was to sue for the penalty provided by this clause. Why should it not rather be the editor, the person who could prove by whom the articles the right involved in which was asserted were originally furnished? This bill also proposed to relax the existing law for protecting pri vate character from the anonymous libeller. Journalism in this country required the exercise of as much talent and ability as any other profession, and why, therefore, should not dit 3o boldly d l thosey and who openlypursued before it b t o h n: buted, instead of meanly skulking behiud-th?oe „, pro . and reputation due to thee for the articles anonymous writing ? The noble lord conclud o i l u A ra hle posing the insertion after the words, " anY• c ;fL ee onera abridgment of the same," of a proviso limitier, In,l-ee,o. tion of the clause to such original articles, parrreeLtrunder municatiens, &c.,' as were signed by an d pubas o _C ar ti• the true names of the writers, with the exceptio of tiallY hi cles from foreign countries relating wholly or par the public policy of such i countries. could iwt N fi vo d r e ld a , s cl a a n im aiv: g ea . t c hi : on : d o r wheth er • move his proviso until the committee had decid The CHAIRMAN said that the noble loratondshY the clause should be read a second time. considerable difficulties involved in the questic!i? i _l o P e been The SOLICITOR-GENERAL —There are, n o ..te n iv i t paper copyright; but, at the same time, it won( l u deal with very improper if my right hon. friend, measure like the present, had not atter» elter of it. 'The subject is one which should be disc Ater• , merits, and stripped of all that-epecies of misreprr I in which hon. gentlemen delight to indulge. ( saetii all There is nothing at all about news in the clau"ropro. these humorous 'statements whict have been m,,bieet, sent that the clause is, directed entirely to one i Li e t ed one wer r e e _,. the whereas it is directed to another. If any to put his finger upon that portion of the literatne b° way present day in which, as a matter.of coinpositiocin the take a just pride, he might point to that which is i ig L ive re pu discussed se n ad i i e t t u t e r p 0 0 d % ti i tt c : i : ri g eo,lll ephemeral literature of the day—as if on that h, ', L o d that less deserving of encouragement—and he would n_leyetl the greatest labour, expense, and anxiety are e%heri upon these sources of information. I desire hon. o n' ste d to • to ask themselves this question—is any ene prep, bill 111/ deny that, as soon as the change effected, he does not expect that, day by dal. , : 0 pri ce ,' publications will issue forth unstaniped• nar i t n t este*" whatever, and feeding entirely upon the hp n. Relied newspapers ? I will ask my right Jaen. friend member for Manchester whether he does noisesalithiu there will be established newspapers aPP pabliOo few hours—probably within one or two—after the most or tion of the London newspapers, containing the u r w o ooa • h the et , portant articles and communications which , ex pos, proposed by toiood of: press has gathered with infinite labour and vast this S" (Hear. hear.) My attention has been directed to Ivo o r. ject from the personal experience I have had• ue d th o : three years ago there was started a p a per dal, , Politician, which appeared regularly (W l ' and dal' half-past nine o'clock in the morning, . i of •, for the breakfast table. That paper consisteur,s pl l O 5 the leading articles in the morning nevc c irthe l e lished within five and seven o'clock, and _, Till important articles and statements of those PP: 7;00 1 .! newspapers combined in a body to put down tlg i d a ltY . 7 but from the state of the law there was grea t d i,. be L " . effecting that object, and I think it could har, •iol right complished. Now, what is the proposition 0- , t h e rigT s hon. friend ? It is divided into two parts —fin„. tbo I of ceypright which it gives, and then the 1,11'19 Jraobe, applies. I agree with my right hon. friend tl ° t a bat for Manchester with. regard to the remedy that Bat the ' deal may be said in opposition to it. (Cheers.) 4 . 0 seen c° same may be said of every proposal which"desireic; pl: push that which cannot be attained without t _ ti dal! ) . of much that we have been in the habit of co o o' ecl:g°r; as necessary to justice. A prompt, sPee d h e e l s.° d a r, t mical remedy is desired, and in proportion ~f ici ' 3 ,, this we must give up much of the dignitY tb ; dllteat9. we have been accustomed to connect witt isio ,. ministration of justice. It is said finalh ,% L ie , letts there shall be a property in every orig ar,.... 0 wlti e paragraph, communication, and corapeelo"sneper.t.l shall be for the first time published in every ne w ri tioe il l : e , this country. This clause is distorted the.r,,,,,,/t?_ , it introduces the word "news." This is entre y ter tr ~ offence :—" If any person shall within 24 bon e aro graP e e ; first publication of any original article, letter , E co ptv communication, or composition .in any ,uen,_i e , let to t'.: , print and publish any copy of such original e r rtw e 0 ,01 t '. paragraph, communication, or composition, 0 A. ° or a lto *, terial part thereof, or any colourable abridgnien!)r3ted C°sP(t, tion of the same." Now, the identity of the Pi e 01 a tli •• with the original is to be ascertained in the Pin or , c os 6 . more g is now ascertained with regard to larg er ant the l evgn o f ' publications—namely, by the identity with iongo oeo / ia which the communication is made. If the firmed cop/ the original communication and that of the P o l i ,iig e o s, are so plainly identical and so nearly r° ill , c,'LL I other thatit is impossible to mistake, that iv" '' h „, eta°. men-sense case criterion in the one case as . i,e, ed " . I ~,,vi as to the fact of piracy having been c onalrun', o t oeeT ir . surprised to find my hon. and learned friend the e co l °o for Leominster putting his finger upon tangwr` t i ne d 10 0 , able abridgment," because, if my hon• r a t to law tio is conversant with the law, he wouhlknow-of tbeL*terotot the words which enter into ' every expressionsi i one ur t it now stands on this subject. The remedy , the Itlo i a. right hon. friend (Mr. M. Gibson) out to lby ', o r' object to, since it is taken from an actfram° Act 0 f 10 chester Protectionist—(a laugh)— I refer to t l '. o „ . (li tlo i liament brought in to protect copyright of d eei ' s - tipor Lihi ,jer Yet you have no difficulty in committing t e lifficUlt, Cl , ill magistrate or two justices of the peace th dit li o ret e ; tion of copyright of design, while you h ev l 9 ' of ' 1°9 14 trusting these justices with the opportunt Y ut, the P i a ,I' what every man of common sense could poin t ° right e ll 0 ,6, of a paragraph o r ar ti c l e a llowed to be coloYr:t the s* a , lowing them to s a y w h e th e r the langu a g e is 4. so pea rl c ii * or whether the language of the one doe!, n° id the °n sr 1 prach to that of the other that it might Pe e f t he OI t ot piratic il abridgment or imitation e ~e rbi e , e i think that any justice of the peace could dn' t . al 011 duty, and that this is the proper occasion for;t7tationi;a"ei the present state of the law to pass without .7tiug Defying to introduce some improvement in the L l ' l deo° e hti the la*. I think my right hon. friend ''''!„ o h/Au m to more than his duty. If, however, the he? Dog e r i ielr r i a n l i l u y oel t td h h i eS n T k dAi t s h Ne a uL t ssE t i h oyn e . publie interests do no b le•th ml !, it• proceed further, he will no doubt be conteertheri Prof suggested the improvement, and will not fti t words #°„ c oo' distinction betweenri s t. Solicitor-General, it would almost be,er he - 40balh w ho u l had admitted a copyright The r. andie) a na a lb t o Gipaioogfkitinsentraie:;'eilv it ee - cot eic i. si 0 a r i ar ciebtiestlit t i i i: e rt, , t a h n e o r n e y na m i e g u b s t ly b . e a(Hpieraare,yrear.) They would e on that and hand; it was argued that originalthe matte • stage n ot L ; of r n , - making public of that which had. taken Pla ° ,10 0 • ! 1 •:,li subject of copyright. The subject, therefore ",i- s tiag; il.' bya legislative enactment they could attemp t t 0 . faie ncei 4: between the statement and the comment--theit,,, no t *,.,,, the fact upon which it was founded. Fie. 03 01.. 3 to iii tempt to solve that problem, and he beli evea cell r4 .o l absolutely insoluble. It was admitted that .*. t ioe - eg t could be given where the original coraillo n e t - g's 0 ;0 1 : copied word for word. Here there was some basis • -0( upon, but if they trusted to similarity of arg il o tere i identity of ideas upon public questions and /11 0: 00 00 , general interest which were employing at the ; ds < meet the minds of hundreds an dthTettsa„n d .„ l d e ) a P(j ek they might be doing great injustice. Nu' s- e . l) e....a"4 cwoa o oue f hu t ta e lt tt n tbile i bew t e ahs experiencec a lme p av p nei e ds n el i e w eohtfahootdafftiws argument pttabiesngnt distinguishing heouinreigeagnr might iindependentsgbt worksof: rp ,el ec yn,o fo r ; 0 0 7i # much. in the same words ? (Hear, hear.) ',he, be 0/ present appeared to him iinpossi i b n" l a e— tlit h a e scrat'eurrij- lo i rF; have supported the clause. As it stood n° alined the clause would be perfectly impracticable , u eh " . f tlic , law. Mr. MILNES hoped that before the Ch anceli ge l° L e# ' 'Exchequer withdrew the clause he would giv e del l dl'; an assurance that he would devote his best ene 4 001 irt to devising some mode of reconciling whothe u" - t their hearts that some alteration of presee- the needed. l t ied ir l* Mr. FOX said, the great evil to be apprehen . 1. w as oa omission of some such clause as this• from rascallyh' tiv olt, i o , the:establishment of a cheap press, living pi; pig L og • existing newspapers, would lower the character c'o'boierth journals, and would destroy their superiority i n n i n g f°i c e , , extensive and accurate information, and in c i , e i i se. n r• la, talent of the highest 'description for the Pu' - ',., -c ers."llli; 1 (Hear.) It could not possibly , answer for nesc sl7 ' . „' of in e el , out large sums of money in obtaining some Pi c- to eiL l e ,4 l . gene() from a considerable distance, if it were IT u diaiu;iif • rtioo publishingbr a e t c e o d m b e y : i the tth. e ppTarhosespieportgroyovfientfchiiatshleelpaapupuseebr:lic, or e f s l i °Oil, interposing between the public and the Purr' t be „ o il, as e co b u ti ll g o p a e rr pa r o o r ; for of course all the respectable provincial new4 l l :l)°, e , ar prietors would make their arrangements with v 10alnief, papers, who went to the expense of obtaining 11 h , 0 Jo telligonce. They would pay their fair share ho s e eilL e „,ll/ -1 so incurred, and it would be only fair that t,, z olie,' fof, , knownn) b o k t gan a a y i Int s cgo h oi o r ant u htp l ee d ol sl r g .iingt o hie w onen i cbs t ei h t a o li n t t e t h e e f n t e b w e s n locality t i l it b 0 egev:ool 'oft i l , considerable amount ori cur these heavy expenoes if their best corepositionoco% Self, o , t a nd n ee d stlbatm ; f b w o u r a t o s w u e r n b :b r t e rn i s o t:n::: a i s n p v d : o p t tr eb i r c i ess o i l r er e ee i t :ra o le I mmediately pirated by a a warm of cheap publictfor 'tee . p . ~ ivae m igel e e yksl a p.y :o ppTa t eh h pris e esi r rnf e s was a weekly paper which re, eu el the,,o l r., , largo circulation by getting early copies or l',toty; - „te - 1 be a great falling off in transferri ngtwPlaoaut' frdi boe bretreat i ti h lbieetn e eny i oc r t;efil b ,de e dese s; oiii a li r t tp ot hpb i o c es: 1 1. ; Ig ard iootunevi isttio .": ol : o bi; 00 0 :0 ; expense for intelligence or oli now characterised our press. This would. cowl' o ei/ e ativ balance every advantage which the press migh t re s taniV o the repeal of the stamp duty la rosent th e p C r, tb t did render it necessary the . t there P should b° rt for tali . amount of capital and intelligence forthcoralveoftce so establishment of a newspaper and a certain d egr : e110,.. c1i displayed in its management, but, without soit - ,• e l• 0 7 this, all would be pulled down to one cotairn`f j i - e sleiel' e „il had been said of the American journals ; 131-1 " 4 . 0 the"ol3 . ,', lcvi conduced eitheree n r a y rd: s c o ie r ndw r y nt eio t tw o ht see l, re regard grv o iaag u rli r dub eati journals oanaca broughtonydignity mcomposition,ou sofowr d tri o hoi 7 teio : ugy w ii s b iort i: io, ~,,otl , o e t i , generally from any desire on the part of t ' the li Wt tb°oll°uleirsL ' Nt such voerro a m s a yi rle t ot e pt m odln. -e' D e w u t () s i t s P ebnaredoaitot:e, bett e o c g i u,efttbohrufegtororstwfitomearnrpodl ono ohspt.ot b e r p : :bo l ejvi l sep ost rt , ~ ;e 1 to e. s c i i o 0 : nience of those arrangements by which several , tL 'Ott'f a P " s e J r w s u o p o rri n r r e . o s t ; weree lettersanonymousof ~Runnymede,cont ri bu ti o w n s h i t o e hi i t). e th o 0 03 to . o t i em i ; more recent times, was had also produced considerablepolitical effec" ~resc A 0 1 ',1 ' had first created thet'ebli° ell it not impreasion on the had o ile o it o f respect to the conduct of the war which n' . , ti a h , 01 ce,c compelled 'that in • 1 press, country and a was i ts inquiry now in progress ~ , , cil, ,rP', been for the press, should we ever have ha" - „Van: 5•P d I . lnravelling any of the causes b which o ur g - oo ss ', v ie w it not th-eoairticles in the . its.. ,e -in the Crimea had been b 'lto so sad i , e „, h eo, e ,lli v , u p n re d g e r r ee g e r w ea a t e m e o u n gl o i b g j a .e t e i t on w s li t c o h ' o l ; o ry lsr P h i - t o V,,i : man ought te prize and endeavour to prolt et o e i io t 1 - e ' though e gard to the difficulties which it was said sto. ht be ot icei (4 , f b enforcing the law of copyright, these nrgttotiecortiLi legal w opponentshould b the e clause eied allowedsbetie i c tr : i i i , ti i ti o t e e h r : oo f t e fri , , e o, not see, since it affected the' pocl.ets© ef bo i r ree e tee ii re or . , ii, large body of respectable persons. The .he P e tlole li ' Electric Telegraph Company (Mr. Ilioa rde r, / n o'4 welts itww would l s a l b et a rne u l i t l n toab them id o follow wr him, tt ies c a o n na d p _pe country.be r y li ip E ms & se t : h b e y : i t u p e 0:0- net : Dro , e , it the l f., the,' so , who collected news for them at 'Vienna, an ir. 3 l l ' i ' s I' e communicate it to the leadin journals? -11,nlotilrYllelt lie did not see what greater r g i ht they had - .00 . , - , 0- #. which came under his notice , fit of this news than a clerk ingthe Post-offiee,rieeh'3ol ' l ff to take advantage of the contents of 60. Lb° 'er° ° 't;' out scribed 'l - he could not av,fficiently admire t i, t. 0 , . gra ' ~ de ,13° of the - of establishing newspaper copyright, it were 0 - ti g 3 He esphroepaeddseoemmeuemhortv%7olsde ti the 1 1 1 :10 0 ~ would inflict an injury on the press $' destroy the benefit intended to be conferre— co •0 0 is abolition of the stamp. ;, tt eo b he r ,„, Oa Mr. RICARDO could not allow the '720 I c r o oeltal tamed in the latter part of the hon. 113 0 ,2: - boa., '62"' Wohtilichervroniailovi tp pass without an immediate answer., .ji .. 1 1,000 0 0 seemed to think that the despatches will"' ,'"..1 r '