The Sun. — London, England, 1832-06-15 00:00:00

B :he caricature shops. A newspaper was, in truth, almost the only publication that the poorer classes were ever tempted to read, and, shove all, it was the only one in which th• y could learn thee laws, for the transgression of which igno rance wast no excuse.—(Hear, hear.) Thus it had het n well remarked, that every account of a trial, every aenterc • In Bow street, every dogma of my Lord Mayor—(A latrel.)—had for them not only an interest and s e amuse ment, but also a warning and a moral, A newspaper, then, was among the most popular and effective motley of instructing the people; and now mark the interdict they bad laid on the newspapers. Th e present taxes upon near - soarers consisted nrst of a duty of 3d. per pound werelt on the paper, or alrout a farthing . a al. net ; next of a duty, nominally 4d., but subject to a diet tint of 20 per cent., and thirdly, a tax of 3s. Gd. upon every ad vertisement. The wh o l e d ut i es, w i t h t h e pr i ce o f pr i nt i ng anti the news agency, amounted 54d, for every sevenpenny copy of a Lyndon parer. Now lit them glance rapidly at some of the consequences of the high prices at which news papers sold. In the first place, owing to that price the in. rat - re:tie:l they contained did not travel extensively among the poo r; i n th e secon d pl ace as on l y t h e hi g h er an d t h e mornin g orders could afford in general the luxury of these periodicals, so it was chiefly to the tastes and interests of those wealthier orders that these journals addressed them selves. They contained, it was true, much that was valu able, Tench that was nece•eary to the poor, hut they did not give to them that advice, and those frequent sugees. tines and admonitions upon matters of train, or points of law, which would necessarily be the case were the poor among their customary supporters. Even in mere style, that which suits the higher orders is not familiar to the low, r ; and thus, as in this free country, yott cannot pre vent men of all ranks from seeking political intelligence, the lower orders finding themselves debarred from the general use of these expensive papers, and finding, when they do obt in them, that they are not often addressed in a stye attractive to ahem, are driven almost inevitably to those illegitimate, those dangerous productions, cheaper in price, and adapted almost exclusively to themselves, it was thus that the real education of the people was thrown into the hands of the wildest, and sometimes the most pernicious teachers; and while they were erecting new props and buttresses to the gorgeous palace', and solemn temples of the Constitution, they were suffering that dark and stealthy current of opinion to creep on, which, if not speedily checked, must sap both temple and palace in the very midst of their labours.—(Cheers.) He should like Hon. Members to know the real nature of publications thus circulated ; he would not read any extracts to the House, becatire be knew the House objected to that course; but he denied that there was much justice in the argument, that by so doing they should give notoriety to prblica tiors otherwise obscure. The fact was, that for the class to which they were addressed they were not obscure.—( Hear) Were Hon. Members au-are that many of these publi cations circulated to the amount of several thousand copies weekly ; that their sale in several instances was larger than the sale of the most popular legitimate papers ; that their influence among large bodies of the working classes was much greater? A very intelligent tnechtnic, in a ma nufacturing town, with whom he had occasion to corre spond, said, in a letter to hint, " We go to the public-house to read the sevenpenny paper, but only for the news; it is the cheap penny paper that the working man can take home and read at spare moments, which he has by him to take up, and read over and over agin, whenever he has leisure, that thrills his opinion."—( Hear, hear.) " You ask me," said another mechanic, " if the Penny Maga zine will not counteract the effect of what you call the more violent papers ? Yes, in sonic degree ; but not so much as is supposed, because poor men, anxious to better their condition, are always inclined to politics, and the Peen!, .magazine does not touch upon them ; to cor rect had politics you must give us not only literature, but good politics."—(Hear, hear.) Did Hon. Members know the class of publications thus suffered to influence the ori niona of their fellow-countrymen ? He spoke not about such as were aimed at mere forms of Government ; hut were they aware that some of them struck at the root of all property, talked of the injustice of paying rents, in. slated upon a unanimous seizure of all the lands in the kingdom, declared that there was no moral guilt in any violation of law, and even advocated assassination itself ! Thus, then, it was clear, that the stamp duty did not prevent the circulation of the most dangerous doctrines. It gave them, on the contrary, by the interest which the mere risk of a prosecution always begets in the popular mind, a value, a weight, and a circula tion which they mild not otherwise acquire. Above all, le, them recollect, that while these were cir culated in thousands, the law forbade reply to them—or if, in de spite of fact, you call the legitimate Papers a reply to them—then, even by your own showing, you sell the poison for a penny, and the antidote at seven pence. His proposition was not at present to touch the paper duty ; it was a tax which, in the present state of the revenue, might be fairly spared, and which, though a grievance, did not fall nearly so heavily on the public as the two taxes he would abolish. The first of these was the stamp duty—the second the advertisement duty. Take away the stamp duty and the sevenpenny paper would fall at once to 3."1,1; but he was inclined to believe—and in this he was borne out by many impartial practical men on the subject—that owing to the great increase of Bile, which the cheapness of the article would produce, to the vast competition which the opening of the present monopoly would create, and to the greater number of advertisements which the abolition of the advertisement tax would pro.. duce—the newspapers would be enabled to sell at a much lower rate than Sid. and would most probably settle into the average of two pence each. The great point, and the first to consider was, would the number of newspapers published through the year increase to any very large ex tent ? All his arguments rested upon that point—partly as related to the diffusion of knowledge—partly to the pro fits of a postage. To him it seemed a self-evident . pro position, and when it no longer required a vast. cambi— a capital between 30,000/. and 40,0002.—t0 set up a daily newspaper, when it was open to every man of lite rary talent with a moderate sum to attempt the speculation there would he a vast and sudden increase of newspapers. To him it seemed equally evident, that when newspapers w e r e so (-heap as to be within the reach of a'most any titan, there would he an enormous addition to the present number of readers—that many who hired a piper now, would then purchase it—that many who now took one paper would then take two—that the intelligent mechanic vsho now in every town thronehout the country com plained that he could not afford to purchase a paper, would spare at least once a week his twopence or his three pence from those ale-house expenses he now often incurred for the very sake of reading or hearing read—(Hear, hear)—the paper he could then buy—that, in short, when a weekly paper cost only twopence, there would scarce be in this great community a single man who can read, who would not be able and willing to purchase one ; but he would rt st no part of his case on proposi tions only—however evident the y seemed to hitn—he would not stir a step without the support of facts. Hon. Members had often heard of a certain contraband paper, set up by Mr. Carpenter, called the Po:itind Letter—it was published at fourpence; of this paper the average sale weekly was 6,000 copies. Allele sanguine by his success, Alr. Carpenter took out a stamp, and his paper became '7d, What was the consequence? Why, the paper could no longer txist ; from a sale of six thousand copies it dwin dled down, from the very first week, to the sale of five hundred.—(Hear, hear.) A most important fact—for here was a journal in all respects exactly the same, excapt in price, but it could sell six thousand copies one week when sold for 4d., and only five hundred the next week when sold for '7d. There had lately been a sensible falling off in the sale of these illegitimate papers. Why? Not from the increased severity of the law—not from any want of political excitement—not, surely, from any great prospe rity in trade, which usually deters men from any inflam matory speculations ; no, but because of late a great num ber of penny literary papers had been set up, and there had been found to interfere with and contract the sale of the contraband journals. Now, as literary papers, after all, were not what the poor particularly wanted, how much more would the sale of these illegitimate journals have been crip pled—had some of these innocent literary papers been inno cent political ones? But the great sale even of these cheap literary papers (the Penny Magazine, for instance, is said to sell 120,000 copies) proves how general is the desire of the people for such periodic ils as they can afford to buy; and how great would be the increase of political periodi cals were they made as cheap as his motion would make them ? But besides these proofs that the cheapness of pe riodicals will '.ncalculably increase their sale, we have the experience of other countries than it does ; in America a newspaper sells for lid.—(Hear, hear.) What is the result ? Why, that there is not a town in America with 10,000 inhabitants, that has not its daily paper. Com pare Beaton and Liverpool—Liverpool has 165,175 inha bitenta ; Boston had, in 1829, 70,000 inhabitants. Li. verpool puts forth eight weekly publications ; and Boston, with less than half the population—with about a fourth part of the trade of Liverpool—puts forth eighty weekly publications ! In 1829 the nuualter of newspapers pub irshed in the British Isles was 33,050,000 or 630,000 weekly, which is one copy for every 36th inhabitant. In Pennayl van i a , w hi c h h a d on ly in that year I,2oo,oooinha bitants, the rewspapers amounted to 3,000 copies weekly —or, a newspaper to every fourth inhabitaut.—(Hear, i ear, hear.) What was the cause for this mighty tliff.r --,„, The cause was plain. • The newspaper in erne country Pali for a fourth of what itsells fur in the other. The newspapers in America sell for 1 id., and in England Int 7d. From all these facts (to which be c 'tilt' add in numerable others), they had a right to suppose, tl at it newspapers were as cheap as they would he if his oldjeer were carried, the number of copies would be prodigi iu•ly increased. Thus information would circulate far more eetensively—thne, matters connected with tr idle, science, sod law, would become more familiar—(Hear, hear, lu sr)—thus there wculd be a thousand opportunities for retnevine those prejudice's among the poor which now so often perplexed the wisdom and benevolence of legislators. A great number of trades would have journals of their own, a great numher of the more temperate and disinte res-ed fr'ends of the people would lead themselves to their red instruction, and, by degrees, there would grow up that community if intelligence between the Government and the. people which it was the more necessary to effect at a time when they were about to make the people more powerful.—( Hear, hear.) It is thus that Ministers would have it is their power to those lion. Gentlemen, who had said the wrrking ciasses were too ignorant to be trusted with the elective franchise—at the same time that they granted the trust they would dispel the ignorance ! Mini stern had been told they had created a monster they could not control. No ; on the contrary, they had won the monster to themselves; instead of making a ferocious enemy of a eigentic and irresistible power, they had sof tened it by kindness, lePthern, at the same time, enligh'en it I,y knowledge.—(Clieers.) Lord Eldon, on the 19th of Nevemher, 1830, at the time of the agricultural insur rections, lied made use of these remarkable words : " Many, very many of the agricultural insurgents were not aware of the criminality they had been led to commit; that there could not be an act of greater trercy to the misled anti deluded people, than to have the nature and provision of the criminal law expl tined. He did hope that those learned men who were to be sent into the dis terhol districts, would take tl e trouble of explaining to their deluded and mistaken fellow-countrymen, the law of the land, and the reason of the law, and the reason why it was for their interest and the interest of the commu nity at large that it should rem +in the law of the land." In those words Lord Eldon did lint adopt his principle, but with this difference ; when it was too late. He made the warning go hard in band with the punishment, and he sent the people instructors, and a Special Commission at the same tune.—(Hear, hear, hear.) He had one more argument for urging the immediate adoption of his proposal— one reason for considering it a necessary appendix to Reform—they had pa , sed the Re form Bill. Suppose they did not break the present mo nopoly of the five or six newspapers, which now concen trate the power of the Press, what would be the conse quence? Why, this? In a Reformed Parliement, would not a Ministry too entirely depend on some one or two of the most influential newspapers for support ? What the close boroughs had !,con, might not the existing journals become ? Did I.e speak against the respectability of the present Press? No, considering the vast power they possessed, the wonder was not that they had so often, but so seldom abused it. Was he, then, opposed to granting that power to the Press? Absurd ! While types and paper existed, that power must continue. But then, it should be a free Press, and not a monopoly. Every shade of opinion should find its organ. Power should exist, but that power should he a representation, not an Oligarchy. Why exchange an oligarchy of boroughs for an oligarchy of journals? But would he injure the interests of the ex isting papers—injure their sale? He thought he owed too deep a gratitude to their services for him willingly to do so. If the stamp duty were the pernicious tax he had attempted to show it to he, what should they say of the advertisement duty? Advertisements were the medium of commercial intelligence of sale and barter. The first principle of a Statesmen was to encourage that intelligence; yet here they laid an interdict of 3s. 6d. on every an nouncement of it. In the encellent letter which the Edi tor of the Scotsman had addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the ill effects of this tax on our commerce was shown by a reverence to America, in which advertis ing was untaxed. In one year, twelve of the daily papers in New York had published 1,456,416 advertisements. In the same year the four hundred papers of Great Britain and Ireland had published 1,020,000 advertise ments.—(Hear.) So that there were nearly a half more advertisements published in the twelve daily Papers of New York, than in ad the 400 Papers of Britain and Ire land, including the London Journals. What was the cause of this preposterous disparity ? Was it not the Fice ? The price of an advertisement of twenty lines, in a London Paper, if published every day throughout the ) ear, would amount, at the year's end, to 2021. 16s. In New York, the same advertisement, for the same period, would be 61. 18s. Sd.—(Hear, bear.) Was not that a sufficient cause fur the difference? Need they look fur ther ? Might they not cell this tax, in the words of the Scotsman, an engine for extinguishing the business, for obstructing and depressing all the various branches of trade ! If such be the effect of this duty on their com merce, how did it affect their literature? A book must be advertised largely in order to sell, —advertising was the chief expense. What was the consequence? Why, that as it costs as much to advertise a cheap book as to advertise a dear one, the bookseller was loth to publish a cheap one. Ile cared more about the number of p 'get; in your work than the number of facts. You told hint of the materials you had collected, and he asked it he could sell them for a guinea ? This operated two ways : Ist, it degraded literature into book-making ; 2,11 y, it was a virtual inter dict upon cheap knowledge. Jr. both ways the public were irreparable losers, and all for the paltry sake of about 157,000/. to the revenues of the wealthiest country in the world.—(Hear, hear.) So much for the taxes he would repeal. Ile now came to that which he would substitute. He did not think, however, that it would be a sufficient argument from the Noble Lord to say the revenue would nut bear the loss of these taxes. While there was any other conceivable source from which revenue could be drawn, it was not the amount of taxation under which we groaned, it was the method of taxing—it was too much, for instance, that we should make knnwle lge as dear as pos sible, and gin as cheap ; that we should choke the sources of intelligence, and throw open the means of intoxication. What volumes in the mere fact, that at Manchester there were a thousand gin-shops, and not at Manchester one daily paper.—(Hear, hear.) Squeeze, then, new profits from the excise duties—augment the assessed taxes, any tax was better than the one which corrupted virtue, and the other which stifled commerce. It was not then enough to reply that the Government could not spare these taxes, and therefore, even if his sub stitute were doubtful, the doubt made not against his main proposition. His plan was a cheap postage in the following manner—all newspapers, poems, pamphlets, tracts, circul as, printed publications of whatsoever de scription, and weighing less than two ounces, should cir culat, through the medium of the General Post at the rate of one penny—if into the 2d. or 3,1. post, at one half penny. He would also propose that all works under five ounces should circulate through the same channels at a low and graduated charge. The principle of this plan had been successfully adopted in France and America. In Fraece they might see how little it operated as a check on the circulation of the metropolitan papers. For if we looked at home, we should find that from 1825 to 1829 there bad been little variation in the number of ccpies sent from London into the country, while in France, where the cheap postage was adopted, the number of pa pers sent daily by post from Paris was 25,000 copies—in 1829, it was 59,000 copies, and it was well stated by Mr. Chadwick, a gentlet.nan connected with the Examiner newspaper, and admirably acquainted with these matters, that while, during those years, letters in France had in creased 50 per cent. newspapers had increased more than 80 per cent.—(Hear)—an important fact in answer to those who contended that persons would be unwilling to pay a postage, and that such a plan would operate against the diffusion of the metropolitan papers. He bad proved there would be a vast increase of papers if the stamp duty were abolished. What might that increase reason ably he supposed to amount to? In America there was one newspaper, weekly, to every fourth person. Suppose one newspaper, weekly, to every eighth person in Eng land—he took that calculation from the reading propor tion of our population—the publication of weekly papers, throughout the year, would then be one hundred and fifty million copies—but the present total numaer of sheets, weekly and daily, published throughout the year, was thirty millions, so that the increase of weekly papers • alone over all now published would be 130 million sheets yearly. Now, the weight of daily papers of the largest s.ze is 8811 e per 1,000 copies, which pay a duty of 3,1. per lb. or 226. per 1,000 copies (say 205.) ; this makes tae paper duty 1,000/. sterling for every million of sheets. Now, we found at present that two-thirds of the London papers went by post; suppese for one moment that this ration continued with the increased number, the account to the revenue would stand thus:— Postage of weekly papers Extra paper duty for the extra 120 million sheets ... 120,000 Total X 536666 • (Hear, hear.) But this is only for weekly papers; add now all the daily papers—those published twice or three tithes a week—toe pamphlets--the tracts—the prospec tuses—the various publications sent through the post, and if you only calculate these at an equal sum produced by the weekly papers, the results would be more than a tnill,on ; trout which it you took 300,000/. to pay the expo uses of carriage, distribution, &c. (a most extravagant calcula 1 clop) you would still leave more than the profits of the two 'I•XCS he wished to repeal? A more minute calculatico , ould produce a far higher result. When they remem erect all the complicated interests, the vast trades, the nu merous intellectual wants of England, that the average ta m nt and enterprise here was equal to that in the United Stites—capital greater, printers' labour cheaper, and that increased appetite for intelligence would be produced by increased freedom in our institutions, was it unrea sonable to suppose that the demand for raprrs might a , length equal that in the United States ? But there, to every ten thousand inhabitants there is a gaily paper, sell ing at the lowest ratio, 2,000 copies. Suppose the same in Great Britain and Ireland, and fir a population of 24 millions, you would have 1440 millions of sheets rib fished yearly. Now reckoning that two-thirds of these would be transmitted by post, the result would be four millions sterling; add extra paper duty of 1,440,000, and the total was 5,440,0001. And now suppose two-thirds of the papers would not go through post ; he did not be lime they would—suppose not one went through the pie.'—suppose they did away with the postage altogether, still the extra paper duty alone would be 1,410,0001., viz inure than doub:e tl e whole of the two taxes he asked them to repeal.—( He ir, hear.) So profitable might be the diffusion of info'inatien. If knowledge was power. to its possessor, its diffusion was wealth to a State. He came to the last consideration—the method of transmission through the post. In France the plan hail been so syste matically arranged, that the best way would be to borrow their details. The main machinery was already formed ; if extra expenses in distributing were acquired, the enor mous profits would cover those expenses. They might s'e what those profits would be to Government, by ascer taining what they were to an individual speculator. The average weight of the I irgest-sized daily paper is 881bs. per 1000 copes ; say 901b'. Now, persons engaged in transmitting luggage by the swiftest conveyance, compute the charge at Id. per lb. every 100 miles ; this for 901bs. would be 7s. 61., the price of carriage; but the 1000 newspapers at Id. each, would be 41. 3s. 441.—Cerainly an ample profit to allow for the expense of distribution, which leaves a clear profit, after all the expenses of car riage are paid, of 3/. 154 10:1. This was all he thought it necassary to say sif the plan of a postage at present, for his Resolution only went to appoint a Committee to consider the propriety of adopting such a plan ; and farther details were, therefore, at present unnecessary.—( Hear.) He had been the more anxious to submit his calcul aim' on this head to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because at one time it was understood that the Noble Lord contemplated not the repeal, but the reduction of these t ixes. Now, he would consent to a large reduction in the adver tisement duty (though he thought the total repeal most desirable,) but he could conceive no reduction in the stamp duty which would not leave in equal, if not greater force, the obnoxious principle—the tempting premium and the unjust prosecution. He had now nearly finished. He had attempted to show that the stamp duty checked legi timate knowledge (which was morality—:he morals of a nation), but encouraged the diffusion of contraband igno rance; that the advertisement duty assisted our finances only by striking at that very commerce from which our finance, were drawn—that it crippb d at once our litera ture and our trade—that the time in which he called for the repeal of these taxes was not unseasonable—that it would be no just answer that the revenue could nit spare their loss, and yet that he was provided with an equivalent which would at least replace any financial deficiency.__ (Hear, hear.) Do not let us, said the Hon. Gent. in conclusion, do not let us believe that there is anything in the diiltision of information which i s hostile to cur political security ! At this moment, when throughout so many nations we see the people at war with their institutions— the world presents to us two great, may they be impressive examples ! In Denmark, a despotism without discontent —in America, a Republic without change. The cause is the same n ith both, for in both the people are universally educated. What consoles mankind for inequality in condi tion like the consciousness that there is no barrier at least to equality in intelligence ? We have heard enough in this House of the necessity of legislating for property and intelligr nee—let us now feel the necessity of le gislating for poverty and ignorance ! At present we are acquainted with the power part of our fellow-countrymen only by their wrongs and murmurs—their misfortunes and their crimes—let us at last open happier and wiser channels of communication between them and us. We !wee made a long and fruitless experiment of the gibbet and the hulks—in 1825 we transported 283 persons, but so vast, so rapid was our increase on this darling system of legislation, that three years afterwards (in 1828) we tran ported as many as 2,419. During the last three years, our gaols have been sufficiently filled ; we have seen enough of the effects of human ignorance—we have shed sufficient of human blood—is it not time to pause ?—is it not time to consider whether, as Christians and as men, we have a right to correct befere we attempt to instruct? Whether, by sentencing to criminal penalties men ignorant both of the nature of the offence they commit, and of the penal ties to which they are subject, we do not reduce for them all legislation into one great ex post facto law? Is it not time to consider whether the printer and his types may not provide better for the peace and honour of a free State, than the gaoler and the hangman ? Whether, in one word, cheap knowledge may not be a better political agent than costly punishments ? Deny my motion, you cannot deny try facts—by these facts alone, and the attention which they have received. I have made no inconsiderable progress twards the attainment of that object I have so dearly at heart.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member then moved the following resolutiotas : " That it is expedient to repeal all taxes which impede the diflbsion of knowledge. " That it is peculiarly expedient at the present time to re peal the stamp duty on newspapers. " That it is also peculiarly expedient to repeal, or to reduce, the duty on advertisements. " That is expedient, in order to meet the present state of the Revenue, to appoint a Select Committee, to consider the propriety of establishing a cheap postage on newspapers and other publications." Mr. O'CONNELL seconded the motion. Lord ALTHORP complimented his Hon. Friend on the ability which he had displayed and the manner in which he had brought forward his facts, and oa the eloquence with which he had enforced thetn,—(Cheers.) In a great part of Lis observations he entirely concurred, and he could not deny that the diffusion of knowledge would pro duce many of those beneficial effects to which his Hon. Friend had alluded. SHI, though his lion. Friend averred, that even if the revenue were to sutler by taking pro• yheosef ithe measure; taxes, wouldt soro ) l e n t not alter d place p off riet t h admittedthatis opinion'it I . o v n ou t l h e although he was not in a position to deny some of the the argument in a more questionable point of view. Now, grounds brought forward by his Hon. Friend, yet he must say that he considered many of them much exaggerated. Ile was not going to answer his lion. Friend. He could not say that the stamps upon newspapers ought not to be reduced, for it would he in the recollection of tl.e House that lie himself had entertained a similar proposition. But under existing circumstances, and at the conclusion of a Session, he was not justified in consenting to the investi gation of a question which was of the greatest possible importance, and the result of which would affect the whole population of the country. Though he ad mitted the fact, that the Stamp Duty did not prevent the circulation of mischievous publications, yet he thought it would require touch more consideration than he had yet given the subject, to satisfy him that the circulation of these bad publications was capable of being counteracted by the circulation of cheap and useful ones. He trusted that, on investigation, he might find it to be the case; but he was not prepared at that time to go into the investigation sought for by his t lion. Friend ; theteby pledging himself and the House to adopt such a proposition. With regard to what had been stated, of the relative difference between the price of advertisements in America and in this country—his lion. Friend stating that in America the expense of a daily advertisement throughout the year was 61. 18s., whilst in England it would be 2021. I6l.—his Hon. Friend did not appear to take into consideration that the duty formed but a small portion of that sum, that the duty amounted to 601. only. Bulwer made some remark which did not reach the Gallery.] Well, ire might not be quite correct in the amount, but that was about the sum, and his Hon. Friend, therefore, exaggerated very much, when be calculated the abolition of the duty would place the price of advertising here on a level with that in America. Though he did not deny that some advantages would accrue, he thought those advantages had been very much exaggerated. His Hon. Friend proposed to substitute a postage on publica tions. That was not going upon a proper pr i nc i p l e , it would be taxing the distant parts of the country in order to relieve the metropolis. And as the metropolis possessed greater facilities of acquiring knowledge already than the country towns, he did not see how such a tix accorded with the object which his Hon. Friend professed in his motion. The present means of conveyance would be by no means sufficient, not merely for such an increase as his lion. Friend anticipated, but even for any considerable increase. Much inconvenience had, indeed, been felt already fry the Post Office whets any extraordinary editions of newspapers bad been issued. On these grounds, therefore, feeling very great doubt as to the correctness of the conclusions to which his Hon. Friend had come --thinking that such a queetion was batter in vestigated in the closet than in that House, and thinking also that this was not the most fitting sitne, be could not acquiesce in the proposition. The Hon. Gentleman had, it appeared, altered his motion; had be persisted in mov n;.l for a Committee of the whole AMIV, he sh old have hail no difficulty in negativing it ; but he had now drop ped that and moved his first proposition, that all taxes \vbich impeded the diffusion of knowledge were inimical to the best interests of the people. This was a proposition which he could not deny ; hut as no practical good could result from its affirmation, he should meet it by moving tho previous questimn. The SPEAKER then put the question, on which Mr. O'CONNELL rose, but would not detain the House after the speech of his Hon. Friend who brought forrard this motion, hut he wished to reply to the obser vafpus of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the :id vertis , ment duty. He said the repeal of that duty would only strike off 601. out of the 2021. But did the Noble Lord forget that in fixing the price of advertisements the news • paper proprietor charged for interest upon his capital, and did he also forget that the price was considerably aug mented by the monopoly which existed ? Even now dif ferent papers charged different prices, and if the monopoly wtre to be abolished, snore competition would arise, and the public would have advertisements cheaper. The re duction would operate two ways—directly by making it cheaper to the amount of the tax t ken off, awl indirectly by promoting competition. The argument of his Hon. Friend on the subject of postage was unanswerable, par ticularly after the examp'e of France, where it had ben tried with so much success. The effect which it would have on public morals was most important. It was im possible to stop the sale of these cheap and obnoxious publications by fiscal laws ; and the success with which th. y were broken, the sympathy excited in favour of the off nders, and the assistance which they received, only g, , ve encouragement to others to pursue the same course. Not less than forty persons had been captured by the police within the last fortnight for selling these works. Law could not check this ; the only effectual check would be the diffusion of sound and cheap knowledge. He should give his cordial support to the motion. Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said the proposed measure was undefined—it was too magnificent—it was illimitable, and could not be reduced into practice. He did not think the knowledge disseminated by the press was of the most philosophic or useful character. The press wis a very extensive and valuable right of property, and he was not much disposed to see the capitals of the owners of established newspapers so materially injured as they would necessarily he, if the Honourable Member's motion were carried. It would he quite ruinous to those who had embarked a large capital in these, investments. The substitution of the postage had been well exposed by the Noble Lord (Althorp.) It would he taxing the rural districts for the benefit of Cie metropolis. Ile did not think, that if the Honourable Gentle tan's plan were car ried into effect, his object would be accomplished, and the less the House interfered ill such matters, unless they would come forward with some distinct legislative enact ment, the better. Sir M. W. RIDLEY supported the previous question. Mr. WARBURTON considered that his Hon. Friend had nude out a prima facie case for a Select Committee. Mr. STRUTT said that the working classes were look ing with intense interest and anxiety to the decision of the House on this question. The law, as it now stood, w a s injurious to the rich as well as to the poor, because it k e pt ti e poor in ignorance of the principles of good go vernment, and he really could not avoid thinking there was gross inconsistency in persisting in that system of ex elusion at the present morn. nt, when they were conferring on the poorer classes so large an addition of political power. He thought that it was the duty of the House to increase the instruction of the poorer classes by every means in their power ; and he hoped, therefore, although the Hon. Member's present motion might be rejec , ed, that the sub ject would engage the attention of the House at an early period of the ensuing Session. Mr. ROBINSON concurred with the Hon. Member for St. Ives (Mr. Bulwer) on the propriety and advantage of the me inure he suggested ; but in his opinion, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown his rejection of the proposition on the ground of mere expediency, it would be better to leave it so, rather than by pressing the matter to a division, to pledge the Houe, as it were, to a positive rejection of the principle. Taxation of all kinds most be remnode•lled in the new Parliament, and the taxes on knowledge would then he placed on their proper basis. Mr. JOHN CAMPBELL was favourable to the repeal of the taxes on knowledge. Mr. HUNT was anxious also for the removal of the restrictions on knowledge, in order that that the news paper press might be stripped of its monopoly. If the motion was pressed to a division, he should certainly vote in favour of it. After a few words from Colonel EvAlrs, which were not heard in the gallery, Mr. BULWER replied. He said he had faken several notes in answer to remarks that had been made ; but in consequence of the turn the debate had taken, he would net detain the House with more than two or three obser vations. He was surprised that the Hon. and Learned Member of Borouglibridge had been the only Member who had opposed the motion, on the ground of injuring the ex isting papers. What ! he whose vivid eloquence had so often thundered anathemas on the licentious, the revolu tionary Press, now wand up as i s advocate ! Impossible ! The Hon. and Learned Member could not be serious. But, in fact, his motion would not injure the existing Papers ; for it left them their capital and their ability ; and he was quite sure the Times and Herald, to which the Hon. and Learned Member alluded, would not suffer in their pecuniary interests by the removal of the taxes, al though, from the industry and competition of other papers their influence might certainly be diminished. In con curring (and bow could be avoid ii ?) with the unanimous feeling of all his HMIs Fr iends, whom he knew to be us cordially as himself attached to the principle of his motion he wi.h e d it to be distinctly understood that the Nob e Lord agreed with the principles of his nation —that the time only was in fault—that his facts had been unanswered—and that it was universally allowed that his motion bad, even in present defeat, or rather delay, con siderably advanced the principles he had advocated. For the sake of the question itself, and that no vote might appear a gainst it on the ground of the season, which hereafter would be given to the principle, lie y ielded to the universal sense of the House and withdrew his motion, pledging himself to it in the next Parliament, should it be his fortune to have a seat in it. The motion was then withdrawn. BOROUGH OF STAINIFORD. In amtver to aquestion from Mr. TENNYSON. Lord John RUSSELL understood that flesh informa tion was on its way relative to the boundaries of Stamford ; and, under such circumstances, the Government could have no desire to press a decision with respect to that bo rough. ADMISSION TO THE INNS OF COURT. Mr. D. W. HARVEY, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to empower the Judges of the Court of King's Bench to issue a mandamus to the Treasurers of the several Inns of Court, and to frame ordinances to regulate the admission ..1 persons claiming to become .Members of such Inns or to be caled to the Bar, said, that he should set out with two principles, which he apprehended would be recognised without hesitation. The one was that principle admitted by writers of every party, that there was no wrong in this country without a remedy; or in other words, that there was no right without its vindication ; and the second was, that no punishment, how ever small, could he inflicted, un less it was the result of a trial before the Peers of the ac cused, under the sanction of responsible judges, and regula lated by the known and accredited laws of the realm. One of the most cheering consolations to the struggling people of this country was that there was no station of life, how ever honourable, which was not open to the lowest mem ber of the community, who could render himself worthy of filling it. With the exception of the crown, which, for wise purposes, was placed beyond the reach of ambi tion, there was no post of profit or influence unattainable. But of all the eminent stations of lite, those con nected with the law were above all the people's patrimony.—(l-[ear.) In some of the public professions, s uccess might be unconnected with merit. The mitre might fall on the heads of those whose only clains were those of family or ancestry. The crosier might be placed in unworthy hands by political intrigue. But there was no instance of a man who bad risen to eminence without having distinguished himself by the powers of his mind; and in most cases without having vanquished obstacles of the most serious kind. But would the House believe what he was about to state, namely—that the bar of England—that high road to profit and honour—was made a monopoly? If any Hon Gentleman opposite were to present himself to-morrow morning for admission to the bar, he could nut demand that admission. He might have the highest pretensions—he might have the most un equivocal certificates to his character, but he would be ordered to call again ; and when be did call again, a verbal communication would be made to him, that his ap• plication was rejected. Why ? No reason was ever ass igned. On applying to the Benchers, stating the severity of the case, and applying again for admission, he would receive a letter from the Secretary, telling hint that his letter had been read, and that his request could not be complied with. Against that decisi in the individual had no redress. \Vas that an imaginary case ? On the con trary, he would refer to a case already in the reports. The Hop. Gentleman here detailed the case of Wooler against the Benchers of Limeo'n's lon. Ile had thus made out his proposition, that the bar of England was eloseu to every candidate, unless be was a student of one of the feer Inns to which he applied fur admission. All who [new Mr. Wooler must be aware of his peculiar fitness for the profession; and, indeed, during the case which hr lad just mentioned, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court ef King's Bench had acknowledged his ability. Rejected by the Benchers, Mr. Wool , r, feclieg as an Englishman his right, and as a man his opacity, applied to tle Court of King's Bench for a mandamus to the Bench ers to assign their reason thr the rejection, and supported the motion in a manner which abundantly testified his quedfication. The lion. Gentleman here read from the Term Reports the judgment given by the Judg e s seria tim ; . the substance of which was, that the Court had no power to direct the Benchers to admit, and of course could not compel them to assign the reasons of their refusal to admit. Now, in what caees ought the power of that House to be enforced ? In all cases in which a sulii•ct was denied his rights, and had no other redress. Were these Gattons and Old Sartuns of the profession to be per petuated ? Were institutions, merely because they were old, to be respected ? Were the Benchers, however learned and respectable, to stand at the gates of jurispru dence, and say who should enter and who not ? If they were to hear such doctrine from a reforming Attorney- General, at least let the people know the fact. Respecting young men, of whom nothing was known, some inquiry might he necessary ; but what could be said, when in the case of a man like Horne Tooke, of whom it was known Thurlow had trembled, the arm of power ungenerously interposed, and on the plea that he had been in orders forty years before, such a m in was declared to be unfit for a barrister ? He, who of all men was the best prepared for the profession, was not admitted into it on the ground that clerical purity was an objection, and that whoever had been once clothed with the ecclesias tical, must for ever forget the legal character. How could any one know what selfish and ungenerous feelings had been at work in the case of Mr. Wooler ? No one who hid ever heard him speak, and had marked the quickness and subtlety of his mind, but must acknowledge his pe culiar fitness for the profession ; and was such a man to be stifled by a set of cloistered benchers ? Here was the citizen of a free state denied the means of access to the highest honours of that state. His (Mr. Harvey's) remedy was that Mr. Wooler had sought in vain, and what the Judges told • him it was not in their power to grant, a mandamus. Was this any novel proposition? A writ of mandamus was as ancient as the Constitution. There was no object so vast as to elude its grasp, no interest so small as to apply in vain for its protection. Let the House consider the injury that might be done to the character of the rejected. If a Bencher of Lincoln's Inn were present, be would ask why Mr. Wooler hail been rejected ; but no answer would he given. A malignant world was left to form malignant conjectures on the subject. Although no express statement was made, yet to those conjectures those who had inflicted the injury might nod assent. Nor were those who were engaged in the profession of the law wholly exempt front mercenary feelings. It might leirpen that those wtio were thus to pronounce on the future fortunes of an indi vidual, had children or dependents whom they wished to provide for in the colonies, and were anxious not to in crease the number of those who might share in such ap pointments. He proposed two things. First, that when a person applied to be admitted t student in any of the four Inns of Court, and was refused, he should be entiled to obtain a mandamus from the Court of King's Bench, calling upon the Treasurer, or some other officer of the Inn, to state the grounds of his rejection. Let him him not be misunderstood. He did not me in that any per son applying for admission should lie admitted by complying with the rules and ordinances of the institution. It must not be supposed, however, that the Inns of Court were the pecu liar seats of learning. Nothing could be Si) ludicrous as the course prescribed to students in them. The student must remain on the books for five years ; and by keeping twelve Terms, spread over those five years, and eating two dinners a week in each Term, he was considered sufficiently initiated in the laws of the country to be admitted a. a Barrister, to argue points of law, and to give grave opi nions upon cases ? His object, he had observed, was two fold. The first he had already described. The second was, that when a person who had become a student sub sequently asked to he cilled to the Bar, and was refused, he should be entitled to apply for a mandamus calling on the Benchers to state the reasons of his rejection. This he considered the more important proposition of the two. For if, in the first place, a young man was intercepted in his progress, and refused admittance as a student, he might direct his attention to other pursuits, and thank God that he was saved from an association with persons of such narrow minds. He would mention to the Heuse case of hardship, to the accuracy of which he would pledge himself, and all the details of which he was pre pared to prove. In 1813, an individual, then in practice as a solicitor, applied to be admitted into the Inner Temple. He was told that before be could be admitted he must bring credentials from two respectable persons, both as to his knowledge of law and as to his character. Those credentials were produced, and he was admitted. Until 1818 he took no further steps. But the circum stance of a portion of his fellow-citizens appreciating him in a manner that rendered it desirable that he should be called to the Bar, induced him to apply to be ad mitted to the second stage. He was told that he must bind himself to conform to certain rules, and pay 1001. Those things he did, and was allowed to enter upon the severe study of eating dinners in Term time. At the end of three years, having complied with every thing required of him, he applied to be admitted as a barrister. And here he legged to observe that the miserable monopolists in question would not admit a man who was practising as an attorney, probably because his knowledge of law might render him an unpleasant competitor. He must, therefore, forget all that knowledge. He must apply to the Court of King's Bench two years before he wished to he called to the bar to have his name craned from the Rolls of that Court. The person in question did so apply ; and that at a time when his pratice as an attorney was worth net less than 2,500/. a year, with every pro spect of augmentation. Here, therefore, was a premium paid of 5,000/. flaying in all things perfected his title, he applied to be called, and was rejected. He complained that there was nu appeal, except to the fifteen Judges as visitors. The individual to whom he had alluded made that appeal, and he was accordingly called on to make a defence to an undefended action,—a mere question of rrieum and tuum—on which a Jury had given a verdict ; and the Judges confirmed the decree of the Benchers, and refused to call him. But upon what grounds ?—on the ground that there was no agreement—in favour of which there really was stronger evidence than that upon which Christianity itself rested. The Hon. Member next pro ceeded to contend that nobody who was unfit to be a bar rister should be a Member of that House ; and stated that the individual in question would place his case in the hands of any six Members, and it their unanimous de cision were not in his favour, he would be ready to vacate his seat. He also related how the individual had been re stored to the Roll of Attorneys on application to the King's Bench. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, as a Bencher, and now Treasurer of Lincoln's-Inn, felt much indisposed to enter upon the questions raised by the Hon. Member. He stated he would stand on the question, if it WM proper or not to introduce the innovation now proposed. He did not deny that a mandamus was a great writ for the benefit of the people, but he doubted whether the Hon. Member bad stated the law correctly. He denied that no right existed upon the part of any body to exclude a Mem ber, without establishing that there were charges against him which admitted of a direct inquiry and a direct proof. There were some points of the Hon. Member's speech too, to which he found it very difficult to reply, but he thought they rethertmade against his arguments. He admitted, that perhaps there might be too much readiness on the part of the Benchers and the Courts in admitting men as students of the Inns of Court and attorneys, without due inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) But this was not the question they had to consider simply whether there was now any improper exclusion of students in the first place ; and, se condly, whether these students should or should not he ad mitted to the bar, at the oiscretion of the Benchers, sub ject to an appeal to the Judges. Now there was an in quiry, and he contended there ought to be an inquiry, to ascertain whether the applicant was fit to associate with gentlemen—( Hear, hear, hear).—whether be held a fair reputation in the world—and whether his character and conversation were such as to afford good security that he would conduct himself as a man of principle and honour towards those who might intrust him with their affairs. The Hon. Member contended that no man should be re might be , c:p made seeocciile t; fused, except upon facts which Member of subject of a mandamus. But he ap i i i i e te t a h a, er i the bosom of every Gentleman pr e a s G ent ._ oars hear.) possible to agree to this the subject of S things which could not be made putt, which charge to be tried by a Jury, w • should, nevertheless, moreover, that the right enjoyed by the Nobody could be blind to trremPfaCstittmhi'l; there were many Benchers bad been exercised with singular wildness. It was difficult to find even three cases. And as to the mo tives attributed to the Benchers, when it was said they incapacitate e G a p e a n c t i l t e a m te en a . maFnroirmowt thee"Hmoinn.g excluded a man on account of his great abilities, because they leered his competition with their sons and nephews, it was really too ridiculous. He could not, indeed, trust himself with :speaking on this subject, lest he might WA language which he could nut choose bat regret. fh, right of exclusion too was enjoyed by all profeesiuns as w e ll t y the lakv ; the Crmlieers—at the Univer ities--the dical profession—the clerical. The Bishop might re -1,1,c to ordain, and he was responsible to none 'or his de ci ion ; he hid only to st rte that he had made the inquiry an I was sa.ti•fied. He was not called upon to state the fic•s on which he had decided. In alluding to the case of Mr. Wooler, he stated that it was in kindness the Matchers had refused to admit him a student ; had they 'home so, and suffered him to waste his five years, and then ref use to call him to the B tr, he would have had just cause complaint. Believing that there were circumstances w'iich rendered it improper to call him, the Benchers were ri _ht in declaring their objection at once. The other ease —that of the Hon. Member himself—was forced upon him (the Attorney-General) by the Hon. Gentleman's making it the chief ground for calling fin- the Bill he pro premed: He would, therefore, advert to it, although unveil liegly, hut would first rematk, that, in speaking of the case imf Mr. Wooler, the Hon. Member had neglected to state that Mr. W. was known as the author of a publication coiled the _Black Dwarf, which the general majority of the Watchers sincerely believed to be influnmatory and abo minable. The Hon. Member had said he wished there wis a Bencher of Lincoln's-inn present. He (the Attor ney-General) was a Bencher, and he was present on the occasion alluded to by the Hon. Member. 'Mr. Wooler had produced a high degree of excitement by his political W it;ngs, and it was just after he had done so, and while tl.at excitement existed, that he wanted to be called to the Btr ; and considering that he had, in his writings, as serted doctrines that many men thought most dangerous to the peace and h tppiness of society, it was very possible it night be considered by such persons that he was not a fit man to be admitted into an honourable profession, and to associate with the members of the Bar. Still, how ever, though the writings of Mr. Wooler, in a political publication, had been such as to exclude him, that fact, in that particular case, must not be confounded with any supposed rule, that the publication of political writings would he a cause of rejection. Whether the opinion was we I founded or not, be would not say ; but he could as sure them that the opinion was sincerely entertained by the majority of those who rejected Mr. Wooler's applica tion, that he had published a tnost atrocious lit , el. If the mandamus had issued, the Benchers would have been jus tified in making that return, and the Court could hardly have failed to admit its validity. He came now to the other else; and he must say, though he was compelled to observe upon it, he did so with great pain. In that case, an action of slander had been brought by the indi vi luol who bad been refused admission to the Bar, against the Benchers of the Inner Temple. The subject of the action was a statement that the individual in question, being himself au attorney, bad stolen a paper from another attorney's office. The attorney who had made the statement justified it, and pleaded that it was true, the c use was tried, and the Jury found that tie defendant had made out his plea, and that the charge was true. It was said, that another point re ferred to was a mere question of meum and tuum. Why, that question involved the possession of all the gro pe: ty in the country ; nay more—it involved the question, are you, or are you not an honest man ?" That ques tion was tried in an action upon a contract, where the point was-whether an individual haul sold property for a client, and got a profit on it himself; or whether he had, in the first instance, purchased the property, and afterwards re sold it, and so was fairly entitled to the profit he had made. It was said that that was a mere undefined case of contract. It might be so. He would not speak positively about it; but his impression was, that it had been afterwards dis cussed on a motion for a new trial. Of this, however, he was certain, that time whole matter had been brought before the Judges, who hail confirmed the decision of the Benchers. He (the Attorney-General) and the present Lord Chan cellor, had been charged with duty of defending that individual. He assured the House that they did their best in his defence, and had spoken with a strong disposition to persuade themselves that he was wrongly charged, and that even if the charge had some foundation, he might afterwards become a respectable member of society. He kemew that it was now asserted that the true ri ason for the rejection was the attack made by that individual on the practice of the Exchequer. That was not the case. He himself (the Attorney-General) had assisted in that House in making that attack, and the change that took place in consequence was almost the only legal Re form he remembered that haul been the consequence of a public complaint. He could not for a moment entertain the belief that the Benchers or the Judges had been in the least degree actuated in their conduct by the motive thus attributed to them. He objected to this motion, because it was unnecessary, since there must be a power of in qeiry. Time power now in existence had always been ex ercised in the most lenient and indulgent manner; and be thought the House ought not to interfere, since, though it liad existed so long, so few complaints had been made against it, and there was so mach reason to believe that it bad generally been exercised with moderation towards in dividuals, and with benefit to the public. He asserted that the free access to the Bar was not closed by these 111 , 24118 ; that it was open to all the world ; that any man might enter at any one of the Inns of Court; and that the o dy thing demanded of h.m was, that he should possess a fair character as his title to admission. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that they ought not to allow any body of men the power of capriciously disposing of the fortunes of individuals. There was one superstition sill remaining in England—it was the veneration for the Judges. How it existed he knew not, for all English his tory showed their characters to Lave been most deeply stained. Who were they that justified the levying of ship money, and who were they th it sacrificed the lives of numbers of innocent men on the accusation of Titus Oates? In both cites the Judges. It was they who put into the hands of that ruffian the dagger of the law to assassinate men by charging them with impossible crimes, end the Attorney- General of that day praised th,m as loudly as did the Attorney-General of this. For what was it that we were indebted to the Judges of this day ? Iliad Lord Tenterden offered them an admirable specimen of a firm supporter of civil and religious freedom, or had he shown himself anxious to put an end to the corruption and bribery—aye, and the perjury —that prevailed at elec tions by reforming the House of Gammons? The Hon. Aletnber might be defeated here, and now, but the subject would ulti'n itely triumph, and the Legislature would de clare that there should no longer be a tribunal which, like the Inquisition, conducted its investigations in darkness, and, like it, condemned a man unheard. Why, what had not these secret tribunals attempted? At one time they had p .ssed an order that Gentlemen who had reported debates in Parliament should not be admitted to the Bar ; and but for the eloquent exertions of a man whose honourable labours had enrolled his name in the annals of humanity, but for Mr. St e phen's speech, in the cave of Mr. Farquharson, that rule would probably not have been put an end to. But while the system remain d as it was, that rule might be renewed to morrow. Where was the necessity for this sort of caution with regard to the bar ? It was not employed with regard to attorneys, who really possessed more of the confidence of the public; and it could not protect the publics fur unless a barrister enjoyed those advantaged' that would 'sin him the confidence of the public, he would not be employed by them. The rules were not the same in this ind in the sister country, for in Ireland an attorney might practise us an attorney till the day before he was called to the bar, wbile bete he must give up bit practice five years before he was called to the bar. But then it wto said that, but fur these regulations, men might las admitted who were not fit to associate with the members of the bar . The bar did not need that protect;on—they could protect themselves ; they would not associate with a man merely' because he wore a bar wig and a bar gown, and the j° - vestigation into his fitness was only a pretence—it was only made just where it ought not. It was admitted tha t Mr. Woofer was a min of r espectability_that be was mail of talant ; yet he was rejected by a set of gentleme n will had assembled in a private parlour, because tiny thought he had been guilty of publishing a political libel. Fie was afterwards tried hsfore a jury for that libel, al ia • acquitted. —( Hear.) That was monstrous. That case alone was sufficient to show that this motion ought to be granted' Surely the law of libel was strong enough ; yet the j° l had acquitted Mr. Wool, r, but the Benchers found hin d 4uilry ; and it was astonishing to hear a patriotic, re, forming Attorney-General say, that such a system oug"; to go on. B ut far this shameful rejection, Mr. Woo l' might now have been a successful lawyer, occupying a d ie , tin gu i s h ed scat in that House. It was to be hoped t4,s, the H ouse would say the system ought to he abolishe° ' that a in , nriamus in every such case be g ranted that the return to the niandannia should state the c ireoir; stances fully, an d s h ou ld b e t raversa bl e; so th it it rive d iie brought h e lm s , who would again acquit, as '., the case Ol Mr. Woofer, the individual thus iniiiiroperl ;, ch irged.—(llear.) The evil of this country wa., the Judges had an undefined power, over everything t" - was law. Mr. J. CAMPBELL contended that the power sessed by the Benchers was necessary for the well being the Bar ; and if the Benchers misconducted thetnsei r tt e le there was an appeal to the Judges, w h o h a d done s v ° o good in disentangling the property of the country. respect to the case of Mr. Wooler, if it had been corr ett b, stated by the Eton. Member for Colchester, he thong • chat the Benchers had decided improperly. Mr. HUNT complained of the monopoly of the Beningi is, and supported th e mot i on . F or i nstance , 014'1 to lie two Baronets wh o re p resen t e d W es t m i ns t er , wishe"