The Sun. — London, England, 1853-04-15 00:00:00

CLITHEROE ELECTION. A conference was held with the Commons, in which the managers for the lower house informed their lord ships that they had agreed on an address to the Crown praying for an Inquiry into the state of this borough. After a few words from Lords LYNDHURST and CAMP BELL, On the motion of the Earl of ABERDEEN, it was agreed to send a messenger to the other house to ask for a coPpy of the report of the Clitheroe Election Com- Mittee. Lord LYTTELTON presented a petition praying for the repeal of the taxes on knowledge. The Earl of WINCHILSEA presented a great num i)er of p e ti t i ons from different parts of England an d Scot 4i" against the College of Maynooth, and also against e admissi on of Jews into Parliament. THE CRYSTAL PALACE COMPANY BILL. On the motion of Lord REDESDALE, this bill was read a second time. VACCINATION EXTENSION BILL. On the mot i on of Lord LYTTELTON this b i ll passe d through committee. CONSOLIDATED ANNUITIES. The M arquis of CLANRICARDE gave not i ce t h a t he would call the attention of the Government and the house to the state in which the question Of the consoli- Zated , annuities in the Irish unions stood at present, and i e .,nat had passed between the deputation on the sub .' t , ,1 and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Their lordships then adjourned. li ° l : 3 SE OP COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.) The .'EVER took the chair at four o'clock. withlll T eignmouth Harbour and Teign Navigation Bill, -e) adtnents, was considered and read a third time. I Seve r4 PETITIONS. of the erCrf Q3 Petitions were presented against the openi n g Sir ' 8 4 41 Palace on Sund. . 1 1 •"„DtELLEY presented ays petitions from Bradford, op a n i T 7' ,tiuddersfield, and other places, in favour of fromtoe Crystal Palace on Sundays ; also, a petition o ddersfield, rayin for further inquiry into the practices at the last p electio g n for the borough. p rayi r t ; REWEN presented a petition from Sussex, ofl. g for the repeal of the malt and hop duties ; . al . so, etition from the same county, against the admission At WS into Parliament. Neo r. ELACKETT presented several petition from eecsastle - on-Tyne against the taxes on newspapers. L • 11. WALMSLEY presented two petitions from other, t A--r, one ag a i ns t th e a d ver ti semen t d u ty and the Ivr against all taxes on knowledge. COWAN presented a petition from Edinburgh, r°. favour of th e P u bli c H ouses (S cot l an d) B i ll ; a l so a lition from the proprieto r o f the Scottish Press against aol vertisement d u ty. r •MUNTZ presented a petition from the proprietor of th e zm ianghant Mercury, against the duties on ad 'Liseraents. • Mr. A. EIASTIE presented a petition from Glasgow _till fa vour of th e a b o l i ti on o f S cotc h un i vers i ty tests ; Tus° a petition fro m th e same c ity, praying for the gra al reduction of th e t ea d u ti es . p a ,Mr. W. PATTEN p resen t e d a p e titi on f rom Lanca "„re against the admission of Jews into Parliament. t air. CAIRNS presen t e d a pe titi on f rom t h e proprie ,er of the B e lf as t N ews L etter aga i nst t h e a d vert i sement Y. Mr. it. PALMER presented a petition from Berks, paying for the repeal of the malt duty. Mr. W. J. FOX presented a petition from the Oldham Lyceum against taxes on knowledge ; also a petition from Devon in favour of the Crystal Palace being opened on Sundays. Mr. M. CHAMBERS presented a petition from the editor of a Kentish paper, praying for the immediate re peal of the advertisement duty. Col. LINDSAY presented a petition from Wigan against the duty on soap. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented two petitions from the metropolis against the occupation of Rome by the French. t, r. COBDEN presented a petition from Hudders e.l, praying for the repeal of the taxes on knowledge. Sir G. PECHELL resented a petition from Norwich, 1 : 18 1.a Pn g for the amendment of the . Health of Towns Act; red " a Petition from Brighton, in favour of the mutual uetion of national armaments. 41.4 D. STUART presented a petition, agreed to at riblie meeting of rate-payers of the parish of St. Mary ; c e o e T i :' co mplaining of the water companies, and of the coons tied by the committee of the House of Com d - Pray B l " 'eh sat in 1852 on the water question, an . ng for the appointment of a committee to investi- Sir t i 'etks th •L.v- ge • k tl e A l n i etrop olis ANS presented several petitions from "wiedg e. Praying' for the revision of the taxes on kr, ER OF LAND IN IRELAND. t ' L e sh ' C IILLY gave no ice that on the 10th May "ue tt.a n r li er ' l lve for leave - to bring in a bill to facilitate titrp :f land in Ireland. r T ... " 11 SETTLERS IN HONDURAS. her for VANS inquired of the noble lord the me!n -tio44 , w - r v e . City of London, i in reference to late negotia- W hye t t s h h h e s theei.s erUnited or Central American States, the rights and interests of this country and of in Honduras and those of our ancient ser ved 0 'lief of the Mosquito Coast, have been pre- Lo d T r if modified, to what degree or extent ? Y ao t RUSSELL said, as the negotiations were to thee" completed, he could not give any positive ans G wef l 'ero, clue stion, but it had been the object of the ? e oun 7eat to preserve the rights and interests of this n " r7 ' and the British settlers in Honduras. the, SURVEY OF SCOTLAND. the, tLAIR asked her Majesty's Government whiteh reg ucy were prepared to state their intentions with th e to the scale on which the Ordnance Survey of au southern counties of Scotland was to be resumed ; still Whether it was intended to apply the survey on a u laa_rger scale t o t owns o f 4,000 i n h a bit an ts and pThr Wa s ~ 'ite ,`-'-'IIA.IsICELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he Sub. l t aware of the interest which was felt on his h o be et Scotland and elsewhere, and he wa : s m h u . c ged to the hon. and gallant member for giving him h()PP ortunity of answering the question w t h e t in a condition o Btate Put lie was no • • s of the o , definitively what the intention T h 'eminent were with reference to that survey. voic question was one of very great importance, and e in- Theved the expenditure of a very large sum of mon y. ecourse taken up to the present time had not been clear, consistent, nor did it appear certain that it was a e ar, or beyond doubt, what was the best course to pui . •- ue with regard to the scale of the large map which it sntended to publish. As to the small map, no doubt determi ned existed as to what should be done, it having been 11etermined to publish Aon a half-inch scale. The Go vernment were anx i ous , b e f ore they came to a fi na l settlement upon the large map, to ascertain the opinions of all the person s who were best qualified to give an PA i nion on th e su bj ect ; and they hoped to obtain valuable ' ll formati on from the county meetings which were shortly a bout to be held in Scotland. When they were in pos session of that information, the Gover nmen t wou ld l ose ne tim e i n com i ng to a definite decision in regard to the preparation of this map. TREATMENT OF PICTURES IN THE NATIONAL GALLERY. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he would take that opportunity of answering another question which was put to him the other night with re spect to cleaning the pictures in the National Gallery with warm water. The trustees of the National Gallery had the matter under their consideration, and they had furnished him with reports both from Mr. Unwins, the keeper of the gallery, and from Mr. Segar, who had the care of the pictures. Mr. Segar gave a very distinct account of the proceedings which he had adopted in re gard to the pictures, and it was his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) intention to forward his report, as well as that of Mr. Unwins', to the chairman of the commit tee, which was about to sit on this subject. It appeared that nothing unwise or indiscreet had been done, and that there was no reason to suppose that any injury had been sustained by the pictures. It was likewise stated that nothing further should be done as to the cleaning of Pictures in the gallery until the present session of Parlia ment came to a close. E CCLESIASTICAL COURTS IN IRELAND. Mr. GEO RGE wished to ask the Secretary f or Areland, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's re.vernment to introduce any bill during the present E cclesiasti ca l to r e f orm t h e testamen t ary j ur i s di c t ion o f the -c,eclesiastical Courts in Ireland, or to extend to Ireland a ny similar measure that may be brought in for England. Sir J. YOU NG said, that in answer to the question of the hon. gentleman, he had to state that it was not the intention of the Government to bring in any sepa rate measure for the purpose referred to, but when the flglish bill was brought forward, it would be found to Include all that was necessary for Ireland. M ISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES. Mr. SPOONER wished to ask the noble lord, th niernber for London, when it was his intention to pro eeed with the miscellaneous estimates. Lo rd J. RUSSELL sa i d that properly the votes N, ould stand for to-morrow. It was, however, his inten -11,11 to tak e t o - morrow, first, the Jewish Disabilities 1 ) , and, if by th a t ti me t h e bill of the Chancellor of t he ' f had been sufficiently long in the hands non. members, to take the second reading of it. If, 4uwever, such was not the case, the house would go into committee of supply. CLITREROE ELECTION. ugh of The liouse held a con f erence with the Lords of on the n ect of th e Address to the Crown, for a commi ss io n for Lae bor „cluiry into the corrupt practices at the last electio n o Clith XVYNOOTH. t l t'. SP e" e O ONER gave no ti ce that when the miscella 03tintates came before the house he should move Colallsfilen of the Maynooth grant, TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE. Mr. GIBSON rose to move the following resolutions: — ; "1. That the advertisement duty ought to be repealed. 2. That the policy of restraining the cheap periodical ' press from narrating current events, by rendering it liable to stamp duties and other restrictions, ' if any public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or any remarks or ob servations thgreon,' be contained therein, is inexpedient, and at variance with the desire now generally expressed in favour of the diffusion of knowledge among all classes ; and it appears also to this house that the law relative to taxes on newspapers, and other regulations affecting public prints, is in an unsatisfactory state, and demands the at tention of Parliament. 3. That the Excise duty on paper, while impeding the development of an important manu facture, also materially obstructs the production of good cheap literature ; and the maintenance of this tax, as a permanent source of revenue, would be impolitic and in consistent with the efforts which Parliament is now mak ing to promote education among the great body of the people." Mr. Gibson said that he submitted his motion to the house in the form of three separate resolutions, in conse quence of having observed, though the three duties or taxes to which his resolutions referred might appear in the minds of many to be unconnected taxes, that nevertheless for the last 130 years they had been dealt with by the Legislature at the same time, or nearly at the same time, and he viewed them as parts of a system, and of a policy which had been enforced in this country for, to a great extent, the purpose of restraining the press. (Hear, hear.) These duties had been imposed at the same time, and had been reduced at the same time ; but he did not now call upon the house, by embracing the three taxes in any one resolution, to commit itself by a single vote to the full ex tent of his proposition. The -resolutions would be sub mitted separately, and a vote for one would not commit any gentleman to a vote in favour of the others. He en tertained his own views on the expediency of dealing with them all, but he had not presumed to ask the house to go so far with him as to record its vote in favour of one broad and comprehensive resolution, embracing the three taxes. It might be stated, as a preliminary objection, that before bringing forward this question he ought to have waited until the house was in possession of the financial views of the Government, and had heard the Chancellor of the Ex chequer's statement of the position of the public revenue and expenditure of the country. He had had some expe rience in bringing forward this motion—though not in the present Parliament, yet in others, He had brought for ward the motion before the budget and after the budget, and his experience did not toll him that he was in the least benefitted by having deferred the proposition until after the budget. (Hear.) It appeared to him that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he was about to introduce any part of this scheme into his financial proposals, would not be in a worse position by having had a vote of the house in his favour. On the contrary, he conceived that the right hon. gentleman's hands would thereby be strengthened. If, however, the Chancellor of the Exchequer were not about to introduce any part of this scheme into the budget, who could say that a vote of that house might not suggest to the right hon. gentleman's mind that it might be desir able to consider, even between the present time and the period of his financial statement, the propriety of acquies cing in the views of the house? He did not imagine that he was in the slightest degree going beyond the legitimate functions of a member of that house in inviting discussion either before or after the budget upon any part of the taxa tion of the country ; for, besides the question of the amount of money to be raised, there was another question —whether the money was raised in that manner which best consulted the interests and the welfare of the nation. (Hear, hear.) There were many ways of raising a given sum, and the suggestion of better ways than those which existed of doing so was, of all duties, the one which most devolved on independent members, and constituted a mat ter fit for discussion independent of the amount of money required. Indeed he had observed that Chancellors of the Exchequer were always content with "the goods the gods provided them," and were seldom themselves willing to look into the mode in which money was raised, if the country were only willing to have it raised in the manner hitherto adopted. His first resolution for the repeal of the advertisement duty related to the small amount of revenue and he would show shortly that there were reasons for be lieving that the revenue would be replaced. His second resolution raised a question of policy, and could hardly be said to relate to revenue at all. At all events, he could show that it might be dealt with by parliament, and no considerable portion of the revenue sacrificed. He admitted that his third and last resolution did affect a considerable amount of the public revenue, something like 900,000/. ; but if hon. members would consider the working of that resolution, they would see that it did not pledge the house to any immediate repeal of the duty on paper. He only asked the house to record its opinion that to maintain that duty as a permanent source of taxation, as a good tax, was a policy that ought not to be sanctioned, and that as early an opportunity as the circumstances of the country and safety of the public revenue permitted ought to bo taken for the total abolition of this duty. It might be paid that this was an abstract resolution of no practical utility, and that it was wrong for the house to commit itself for the future in matters of this description. There was a force in that objection, but nevertheless they were not to sup pose that upon no occasion was an abstract resolution to be submitted to the house. He had known great and benefi cial results arise from abstract resolutions, and he would remind the house that one of the very first acts of the pre sent parliament was to cometo an abstract resolution, with the consent of both sides of the house, to the effect that they would maintain and prudently extend the free trade policy which did commit them undoubtedly to deal with the public revenue before the period when that precise proposition might be submitted to Parliament. So his resolution with regard to paper merely asked the house prudently and when the occasion befitted to deal with this tax as a tax adverseto the moral and educational interests of this country, and contrary to the policy which parliament was pursuing for the purpose of promoting education among the groat masses of the people. He might point out various mischiefs that arose from this tax in a commercial point of view, but probably his argu ment would be common to other duties of Excise, and perhaps of no greater weight than might be applied to soap and other existing Excise duties. But there was a certain peculiarity about paper, in being connected with the diffu sion of knowledge among the people, which did not apply to other Excise duties. In a commercial point of view there were also peculiarities about it. Paper was an ar ticle manufactured from worthless raw materials, the whole of its value consisting of the labour upon it, and the money expended in its manufacture was distributed among la bourers; it employed men, women, and children; it was a rural manufacture ; papermills were spread over the country districts, and there was no class iu this country so interested in widening and developing the manufacture of paper as the residents in the various counties. There was an uneasiness in reference to the greatly increasing de parture of labourers from this land. If they wished to stay the tide of emigration, then let them open the field of oinployment at home, and, by removing this oppressive Excise duty on paper, which prevented the development of an important manufacture, keep the labouring families in the agricultural districts by profitable employment there, and have their labour on the land; but if they allowed the field of employment to be narrowed by this duty, they must of necessity lose that labour, which would flee to other lands where such a manufacture was unrestricted. (Hear.) And what was going on now ? The refuse from which paper was manufactured was purchased by foreigners in this country to send it to land s where no paper duty existed, where it might be manufactured into paper and then sent into the British colonies to supply our own people. (Hear.) Could that bo a wise and judieious policy? This was no class question—no manufacturer's or country gentleman's question exclusively; the advantage would be shared, no doubt, by all classes ; but is reference to the development of the manufacture it appeared to him that, inasmuch as paper-mills must exist where there were pure streams and a country population, the representatives of counties, of all persons, had the greatest interest in getting rid of this Excise duty on paper. When the com missioners reported on the different branches of the Excise system, they recommended paper to be dealt with. They did not then recommend the paper duty to be a bolished, because th e c i rcums t ances o f the country did not admit of it ; but they took especial care in their report to guard themselves from being supposed to contemplate this duty as a permanent source of revenue ; for they said : " We trust that in submitting as the result of our inquiries into this branch of Excise taxation a recommendation for the diminution of the present rate of duty, rather than for its total repeal, we shall not be considered as conveying any ap proval of this head of duty." And they went on to say : " Iu the meantime, however, and until circumstances shall admit of realizing the still more beneficial effects which would result from a total abolition of the duty, we are satisfied that the reduction to one-half the present rate of duty would be very advantageous." by clip But the ground upon which he had connected the duty with his motion was its connexion with the diffusion of paper had an effect in knowledge (Hear.) The literature through the country. Legislature itrpre lia sve d ut a i d u m g i t t h te e d di t ff h t a is t iu t n he u r f lu k t u y uw on . ledge, for iu the ye That, as an encour o.t st her t e a N t v n a t s e s of el A aus nn e e, to w t h h e i n s t e b fr o je tt_y_ on paper was imposed, as shall from time to time be to learning, so much money printing any books in the for in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,rock,duty on paper, and in or Oriental languages, And at the present momen p t r t i h n o teNa p er duty was remitted shall be repaid." if theyin the Universities of Prin thought it necessary on Bibles and Testaments in the Latin, Greek, Oxford and Cambridge. But, ~ei ons to the diffu prepared to re commendto legislate specially for works or Oriental languages, why were thez..uV among the great u e r noanswer to the policy of removing obstructions large book sion of knowledge in the English.lan masses of the people ? (Hear.) It weal him to tell him that a three-volumed novel like M'Culloch's dictionary, would not beaeerseptil.rly cheaper if the duty on paper were repealed. The question was, whether the diffusion throughout the count r y of knowledge by cheap publications should be obstructed by a duty which raised the cost o f that p a p er far more than the amount of the duty. H e had received a communica tion from Mr. C. Knight, a gentleman whose name he had often quoted before in that house, expressing the pleasure he felt at this question being again brought before the House, a nd he put the case so forcibly iu his letter , that he (Mr.' Gibson) would read it in Mr. Knight's own words : During the last 20 years especially I have been labour ing to produce books which should unite literary excellence with exceeding cheapness. I paid 40,0001. for the copyright of the Penny Cyelopcedia. When the book was finished I had paid the Excise 16,5001. upon the paper used in that work. But the actual duty paid was almost doubled by the necessary increase of the manufacturer's price produced 1 y the duty, and by the accumulation of stock. That' great national work would only have paid its expenses had there been no paper duty at all. " But the copyright of that cyclopsedia. remains my pro perty, and I am about to produce an improved cyclopredia. If I produce an expensive edition which would remunerate me by a sale of 2,000 at a cost of 201. per opy, the paper vull cost about 5,0001., of which the actual duty will be about 1,0001. But if I rely upon a very large demand, and make my estimates upon a sale of 20,000 at 61. per copy, the paper will cost 30,0001., of which the duty will be 6,0001. If I produce a dear book for the few, the State will tax me 1,0001. if a cheap book for the many, I shall be taxed 6,0001." Was that a policy which could be justified, while they were endeavouring to promote education among the people ? (Hear.) If they raised the cost cf paper for cheap literature they struck at the fund from which authors must bo paid, and prevented the ablest talent from addressing itself to the great masses of the people. If they had this enormous sum of the duty on paper to replace by the sale of these cheap publications, they had nothing left to pay for the original authorship ; and he would ask whether it was wiser that the best minds of this country should be able to derive remuneration from cheap literature diffused among the great bodies of the people, or should be limited, as they are now, to the production of expensive works for the few ? The strongest argument against the duty on paper was, that it was antagonistic to good literature. Penny publi cations they could have, nut if they wished to combine goodness with cheapness they must endeavour to remove obstructions in the way of the cost of the materials of which those cheap publications were composed, or there would be nothing left with which to pay the author. (Hear.) He therefore confidently appealed to the right hon. gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take into consideration ' when the circumstnnces of the country should permit it, the oppressive nature of this duty on paper. Mr. Knight said in one of his works that during 20 years he had paid about 80,0001. to authors and literary men for their labours, and 50,0001. to the State for paper duty, in order to give to the public the benefit of the com positions of those authors and literary men. So that for 80,0001. worth of intellect and knowledge, before he could circulate it even in the limited way in which it was now circulated, he had to pay no less a toll than 50,0001. to the State, and that in a country which was constantly pro claiming to the world the great desire it had of diffusing knowledge and promoting education among the people. They were unable, from the difficulties of their position, to pass educational measures ; they were compelled to re sort to all manner of petty expedients and partial legisla tion in order to get legislation bit by bit through the country; but here was a plan at least which they could adopt, and which was free from religious controversies, as between voluntaryism and State education • all they were asked to do was to remove the obstructions which pre vented people from educating themselves. (Hear hear.) How much, too, was the risk of literary speculations in creased by the fact that the duty on paper must all be paid, that there was no drawback, no bonding of paper and taking it out as it was consumed ! When a man entered on a literary speculation, he must print the number of copies of the work he intended to sell ; and, if he failed to sell them, there was no return to him of the duty he had paid to the State in the ineffectual attempt he had made to diffuse knowledge among the people. If he was a dealer in tobacco or brandy he might pay his duty when ho sold those articles to the consumer, but if he was a dealer in knowledge he must pay all the duty on the paper in the outset ; and it was, indeed, a matter of serious considera tion whether he would pay a sum of 16,0001. or 20,0001., to be replaced, for paper duty, before he would undertake a large literary speculation. Many and many were the works that, even with a good sale, the duty on paper had prevented from leaving enough to repay the author. He would not detain the house, or he could mention numerous instances of particular books and publications which, when the duty on the paper was replaced, left nothing to repay the author for his labour, or to encourage literary men in future to devote their talents to enlighten the public. That was not becoming in a country in favour of education, because they ought to do all that in them lay not only to remove those obstructions to the diffusion of good cheap literature, but also to remove all the im pediments that prevented the ablest men from turning their minds to the instruction of their countrymen. He knew no way so calculated to promote the interests of authors and literary men, and to furnish rewards for good literary labour, as the repeal or the duty on paper. It could not be obtained by adding to the price of small publications. If they wanted to command a large cir culation, they must have penny publications. They could say that, in consequence of the duty on paper, it should be sold at a penny and a fraction. If they in creased the price to 10. or 2d., as Messrs. Chambers had attempted, the sale decreased, as they had not a sufficient circulation. They were limited to ld., and therefore they ought to remove this duty. But, having taxed the paper as a vehicle of knowledge, the State was not satified. It said there were two particular kinds of information ; that; if they were printed on paper, they should each, under certain conditions, bear other taxes ; the one was the duty of Is. 6d. on an announcement known as an advertisement —the other was a tax for the particular kind of knowledge called news. Was it conceivable that if Parliament had in former times had nothing in view but to derive a re venue from paper, it would, after putting a tax on paper, immediately impose other taxes to prevent persons from making use of the paper, and thus lessening the revenue, which it professed to have in view? (Hear, hear.) If they put a duty on carriages, would they also put a toll on every man that got into a carriage, and so make it his interest to ride in some other description of vehicle ? No ! They would rather desire, he should fancy, to increase the num ber of those vehicles, so that, having taxed them, they might derive the greatest amoun t o f revenue from "them. But there was nothing of that kind with reference to the duty on paper. Take the case of an advertisement. If a man made an announcement by word of mouth, no duty was put upon it ; if he made it by the crier, no duty was put upon it ; if he used an advertising van, no duty was put upon it ; but if had it printed on paper frequently and periodically, then the exciseman interposed, and charged him with a duty of Is. 6d. for each announcement, thus making it the direct interest of everybody to avoid making announcements in that manner ; and, as it was only leviable in the case of announcements being made pe riodically, it was a direct hindering of the growth of the periodical press. If a man advertised in a newspaper one would suppose he was attempting the most obvious and rational mode of making known his wants, because it was a newspaper, of all things, that, from its frequent publica tion, gave the frequent announcement so desirable for the advertiser ; but when he made such announcement he found the exciseman there, who said it should not be made without a tax to the State, It was a barbarous tax. Was there anything more desirable in society than that men should make known to each other their mutual wants ? And did not this tax lie at the very root of all commercial transactions ? It was by this toll that they prevented the knowledge of commercial tranactions that might be most beneficial to those who were engaged in them, and to so ciety. But what a monstrous thing it was, when the Amazon steam-ship was lost, or the Irish famine occurred, and it became necessary by repeated advertisements to arrest public attention to those calamities, that the excise man required ls. 6d. to be paid on every one of those announcements—(hear, hear)—thus converting the adver tisement duty into a tax on calamity, and causing the funds of the subscribers, who fancied they were contri buting to the relief of the Irish famine, or the orphans and widows of the men who were lost in the Amazon, to contribute to State necessity, and to pay a portion of their money to the revenue ! This was a tax which ought not to be encouraged in a commercial coun try, where everything impeding the intercommuni tion of information should be carefully avoided by the State. It was a tax, in fact, worthy only of a barbar ous country—a tax raising a very small revenue at the ex pensea n d n o o f t n m p e r o o b f a t b h l e y o d s e t s t v r a o l y u i a n b g l e iinterests ways f the a c o g r un e a t r y t e r , amount of revenue than it created. The pressure of this tax was limited to newspapers ; for, though by law all ad vertisements, whether in newspapers or books, ought to pay - the tax, those published in books were Mowed to evade the tax. How great an injustice was here ! Take the catalogue of the Great Exhibition. In that volume, purcha: .er ed e sby3 p thousands thousands a ds dv a:d .tisements in of persons not at Is., there which paid the duty ; and, no doubt, in the same way the catalogue of the Crystal Palace would have its 100 pages of advertisements, all equally exempt from that impost, c w i shei ch o w m a the s r jg isdtlryn struggling i a n c g t e d p r t o o p r t i h e e t last ois o f farthing a p b y e r s t h . e Euxe held in his hand another illustration of the grossly unjust competition to which the proprietors of newspapers were exposed with reference to advertisements. Here was the prospectus of a railway advertising association : " The importance of this novel system of advertising can not be two highly estimated, when it is remembered that rail way travellers include within their numbers every individual of rank, property, or influence in the three kingdoms, while the frequency of their journeyings may be calculated from the fact, that the number of passengers booked at the princi pal railways in Great Britain alone in the year 1850 exceeded 60,000,000. It must be borne in m'nd that these immense numbers—the possessors of the aggregate wealth of the coun try—are concentrated, day by day, at the railway stations ; and the circumstances of each journey are such, that either on the departure or arrival, or in the course of transit, every passenger must of necessity become acquainted with the an nouncements which present themselves to his notice. It may be safely asserted, that no other mode of advertising presents so favourable a means of*rtaching that class which the adver- tser desires most to attract." ' Now all this might be 'Very true, but was it just to tho nowspaper proprietor to tax the advertisements in his columns, and to leave untaxed advertisements published in railway carriages, under circumstances manifestly so advan tageous? (Hear.) The only remedy against this injustice was to repeal the tax altogether ; its mere reduction would leave the inequality and the unfair competition completely unredressed for the newspaper proprietors, to whom the advertisements should supply the fund mainly enabling them to diffuse that information which was becoming more and more emphatically a daily necessary to the people. He doubted even whether the remedy, if now ap plied, would come soon enough to save many of those pro prietors from the effects of that injustice to-which they had been exposed. The repeal of the tax had been opposed on the ground that we could not spare the revenue it supplied, but ho was satisfied that its repeal would, in reality, occa sion no loss to the revenue at all. (Hear.) The whole amount of revenue raised from this source was 178,0001. Even supposing that this 178,0001. were wholly lost, the House of Commons had on many occasions shown that for purposes infinitely leas important it was ready to sacrifice public money to a much larger amount. He denied, how ever, that the 178,0001 would be lost to tho public. The house should bear in mind that well nigh every saw:Also meut gave rise to more or less correspondence. (Hear.) Now, at the present time there were annually published in reat Britain 2,000,000 of advertisements, or perhaps somewhat more. In the United States, with the same population, there were 11,000,000 of advertisements pub lished. every year. (Hear.) There was no advertisement duty in the United States, yet under a free trade system wo were called upon to compete with a country which had thus the advantage of being able, without let or hindrance, to intercommunicate all the mutual wants of its people. (Hear, hear.) Well, in tho United States there were 11,000,000 of advertisements, in Great Britain 2,000,000 ; let him ask, was it not probable that in this country, similar as its population was in many respects to that of the United States, we might look for a correspond ing increase in our advertisements if this impediment were removed? ( Hoar, hear.) Ho had remarked that every advertisement well nigh gave rise to a greater or less nmn ber of letters in reference to it. He held in his hand a letter he had received from Mr. Edward Baines, the pro prietorntcaseumb be number i .s w o e the on f hfticht o t replieshLt Journal, eh e re e te d o s owtffiohrceeem nl .%vovaas sf informed e l Baw v ,b h : o rtuhttho s• o verage of advertisements in his journal requiring answers each advertisement, a n s 1 , 1 1 ppose suppose, an as d rhea t p h l e eks a n v to o e w r o a nn g ne e advertisement. But average sup pose, that, the tax repealed, there would be 5,000,000 of advertisements, thepresent lfeatitrleyrsfor revenue would speedily be replaced by the postage on the letters. ( Hear, hear.) illustrations :—A political association him give some p ar ti cu l ar association in Holborn inserted one advertisement in the Times, paying is. 6d. duty, and received 500 answers, paying to the Post-office 21.15. Bd. ;W. Byles, of Bradford, inserted • one in the Leeds Mercury, H . paying is. 6d., and 4s. received 50 answers, paying in postage., ,• - 2d Wat kinson, of Spaldin g , inserted th ree i n th e Spcdding Free Press, Stamford Mercury, and Lincolnshire Chronicle, pay ing.4.o, Od., and received 100 answers ; paying a postage -'----..---____ a of ) sav er the Pr . w Pil" 2 ount iclc i. ur Oil .irj• f. SV' avid i f 'brat, J. N''.Beii. liata ;ir G. low k. ;--;. :ir J. %var.' , laroC; i t ), ; rettll‘ll. r ra d elia s tIP II Alfrfpl Tom . .1- A' ,ptiti° d b It 1.. D• ). L'ari 3 A- v . g, char d 001d i1 0. I. ll ' { Fob" uon. d o eta P, C J• ¢ gig. 1. sV. s to", J. a' aas , J alOrtt 1 ' B. 0. ;tr 6* ,oun t J. _ s E. IriS• limo .4 110' I.A• 'xi of 0 ale ; 1~. ea S ~~ T , ~ MPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock, The Earl of EGLINTON presented petitions against the Maynooth grant-- against the admission of Jews into Parliament-- and agains't the Canada Clergy Reserves. The Earl of WICKLOW presented petitions to the same effect. THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL l5, 1853. of Bs. 4d., to which he wrote 100 replies, paying another Bs. 4d. ; various persons inserted 25 advertisements in the Leicester Mercury, paying 375. 6d., and received 300 answers, paying in post age 11. 55., and Henry Pitman, of Guildford, inserted one advertisement in the Times, paying is. 61, and received 43 answers, paying in postage 3s. 7d., to which he wrote 42 replies, paying in postage 3s. 6d. He trusted that, on the basis of such facts as these, the house would think he had ma d e ou t a f a i r case for the re- Nal of the tax. (Hear.) He should add that the unfortu nate proprietor of periodicals was not required to pay the tax merely on the advertisements for which he himself re ceived payment ; he had also to pay it on those which ho inserted for the purpose of giving utility to his paper, such as announcements of coming events, pieces of intelligence, of news, in fact, for the insertion of which he received no payment. This was a great injustice in itself, and a great impediment to the diffusion of information, and, as such, various subterfuges were practised for evading it so far as was possible. For example, when new books were an nounced, in the Publishers' Circular say, the practice was to state that such or such a book had been published, but the information to the public was left incomplete, because, in order to avoid the impost, the publisher's name was omitted. New periodicals would gladly insert such an nouncements for the public information free of charge to the book publishers were the tax repealed. (Hear.) Hav ing thus disposed of the subject of the advertisement duty he came to the second resolution he had to propose, with reference to the policy of restraing the cheap periodical , press from inserting news. He bad good justification for submitting this matter to the house. He had been chair man of the committee of that house which, in a former Parliament, inquired into the working of the stamp duty on newspapers. The report of that committee recom mended that the attention of Parliament should be drawn to the anomalies of the stamp duties, the state of the law on the subject, and the expediency of the policy of pre venting the cheap periodicals from containing news. He would not read the words of the report, but he had referred to it as a justification for calling the attention of the house to the subject. It was said that this was a question of re venue; in the first place, he was prepared altogether to con test that view of the question. From the time when the press first had influence in this country there had been legislation for the purp ose o f res t ra i n i ng it—th ere h a d be e n th censorship, there had been the licensing system, both of which were abolished in 1699, and throughout there had always been a great jealousy on the part of the authorities of what was called news. (Hear.) It had been said that extreme political writings, and writings questioning the truths of religion ought to be prevented ; but, if they looked into the proceedings of past times, they would find that there was something else which the authorities had always been very much afraid of, and that was the circula tion of news— the narration to the country of the current events of the day. (Hear.) In the London Gazette of May 5, 1680, there was this announcement : " This day the judges made their report to His Majesty in Council, in pursuance of an order of this board, by which they unanimously declare that His Majesty may by law pro hibit the printiug and publishing of all new books and pam phlets of news whatsoever, not licensed by His Majesty's au thority, as manifestly tending to the breach of the peace and disturbance of the kingdom. Whereupon a proclamation was issued restraining the printing of newspapers, books, and pamphlets of news without leave," This restraint upon news continued down to the end of 1694, when the licensing system expired. The authorities then went on for a few years without interfering with the wparortteoM.rf the Hrealilganmof Queen Anne, in his r r e e s,,s 'u Llr but newspapers," the a p latter ers Constitu tional History,-- " Not merely designed for the communication of intelli gence, but for the discussion of political topics, obtained great circulation, and became the accredited organs of dif ferent factions." _ _ _ " The Tory Ministers," added Mr. Hallam, " were annoyed at the vivacity of the press, both in periodical and other writings, which led to the stamp duty, intended chiefly to diminish their number, and was nearly producing more per nicious restrictions, such as renewing the Licensing Act, or compelling authors to acknowledge their names." They did not renew the Licensing Act, indeed, which had been abolished, but with the same intention they adopted the stamp duty on newspapers for the purpose of lessening the number of those papers. If hon. gentlemen would look over the journals of the house at that period they would see that Ministers had come down, time after time, for the purpose of doing something to restrict the press, until at last a Committeo of Ways and Means suggested that the object in view, of restricting the press might be accomp lished by a heavy tax on all newspapers and printed pam phlets. That was the origin of the stamp duty on news papers. He now come to the act of 60 George 111., chap. 9, one of Lord Castlereagh's Six Acts, the pre amble of which fairly set forth :—" Whereas, it is expedient frem to restrain press in great numbers, and at a lowrestrain the small publications which issue price, be it therefore enacted that a stamp duty shall be imposed on every paper containing public forpos elBl9, theof Lordlle n asupply news, intelligence, occurrences , or any remarks or observa tionsp the' upon a t j press. e t s y N s thereupon." The act, than, was not "for the pur ,.e"wblsuputappaioeswmteandmelryp, granting purposeE be of ruh t restraining said,ohis f Act : " It was not against the respectable press that this bill was directed, but against a pauper press, which, administering to the prejudices and the passions of a mob, was converted to the basest purposes—which was an utter stranger to truth, and only sent forth a continual stream of falsehood and malig nity—its virulence and its mischief heightening as it pro ceeded. If he was asked whether he would deprive the low est classes of society of all political information, he would say that he saw no possible good to be derived to the country from having statesmen at the loom and politicians at the spin ning jenny." (Hear, hear.) At present, however, we legislated against the very things which were the antidote to the poison ; for by preventing the circulation of facts, and of the current events of life, we prevented the circulation of the antidote, and permitted men to become the dupes of political or other imposters. Lord Erskine was so impressed with this at the time, that he left upon the table of the House of Lords the following protest : " Because by the stamps imposed by this bill, and by its further directing recognisances to be entered into by the printers and publishers of the pamphlets and papers therein mentioned, and in sums so large and disproportionate to the probable credit of such persons, or the profits of such small publications, it is manifest, and has, indeed, been not very indistinctly 'admitted, that a discouragement amounting to almost a prohibition is thus suddenly aimed at a very large, and often useful, branch of trade ; because the great mass of British subjects have no such means of being informed of what passes in Parliament and in the courts of justice; or of the general transactions of the world, than through cheap publi cations within their means of purchase ; and I desire to ex press my dissent from that principle and opinion that the safety of the State and the happiness of the multitude in the lab )1-Rn - is condition of life may be best secured by their being kept in ignorance of political controversies and opinions, as I hold, on the contrary, that the Government of this country can only continue to be secure while it conducts itself with fidelity and justice, and as all its acts shall, as heretofore, be thoroughly known and understood by all classes of the people ; because this obstruction to the sale and circulation of small periodical publications is not confined to those of a political character, but most unaccountably extends to all such as shall contain any public news, intelligence, or occurrence, or any remark or observation thereon, or description which obviously com prehends and involves all the transactions of human life upon which reasonable beings, putting national freedom wholly out of the question, can seek or desire to communicate with bne another." Now, who, he asked, were the opponents of the act, the 60th Geo. 111., c. 9 ? They were Sir James Mackintosh, Mr. Brougham, Mr. Tierney, Viscount Althorp, Lord J. Russell, and Sir James Graham—(hear) —whose names were to be found in the minority against that bill on the ground, as stated by Sir James Mackintosh, that it was an attempt to put a restraint upon the liberty of the English press. The distinguished leaders of the Whig party in that day were the men, small in numbers, who fought the good fight of freedom in behalf of the press against Cas tlereagh and the ministers of that clay; and he called upon them to refer to their former eloquent and enthusiastic speeches, expressed sometimes with a feeling and in terms that he would scarcely venture to imitate, to act in con sistency with those great principles ; and, to come now in other and better times, when we had a contented and happy population, when there was no signs of disorder, and when they were contemplating the extension of the politi cal franchise—ho called upon them to let the precursor of that political franchise be a free and unrestricted press, giving to the masses that knowledge and intelligence by which alone they could be enabled to exercise their politi cal franchise with advantage to their country. ( H ear.) But he would pursue the question to a later date. The GOth of George 111., c. 9, was imported into the Act of William which reduced the duty on newspapers. Upon that occasion Lord Lyndhurst said, acting in co-oporation with the members of his own party, " Bring in another bill—bring in a bill to repeal the whole of the statnp duty on newspapers." That was the reception which Lord Lyndhurst gave to the bill for reducing the stamps on newspapers. The answer of Lord Lansdowne upon that occasion was this— " The noble and learned lord, in concurrence with parties with whom he would not offend the noble and learned lord by saying he usually acted, declared himself anxious to take off the whole of the duty levied on new s papers; but , under presant circumstances, he was not p re p ared to say that the tax could, with safety, be remitted to that unqualified extent to which the noble and learned lord expressed himself favour able." Was there en on Loth parties should no b t ei r n eli g unite apenlue askedpromul gated e vain uq up to o ns t hisig question. n n . conscience, that Tie h t o ern us l e ‘ w ` saasfeitty'sa'sweansoawlie(cHl (Hear.) o r re rea son why the leaders of both the altered circumstances to remove that duty ? He trust edhesidest li (olf not o did v iewn house.o t thisi appeal ia se a declared,pi nrty (Hear, hear.) gated ; and in these days he did not see that any party in All parties had an interest in their views the State could fear the consequences. On the contrary, they ought to hail with exultation any means that might be devised for extending useful knowledge —aye, and poli tical information, among th e great body of the people. The house would remember thatwhen Lord Melbourne reduced the s stamp duty he was charged with having " courted the Radicals. ' (A l) But these were times when to be a Radical could be no reproach. We had got a Radical in the Administration, we had a Radical in the Cabinet; and more than that, we had a Radical acting with those who once were Conservative Minn (Cheers.) Tho days, then, for any reproach upon Radicalism were past. Old party watchwords had lost their force. Each day th ese old conflicts were becoming more and more matters of tra dition, and every party now that aspired to power must found its claims upon the utility of of its' policy and its sincere desire to benefit all classes of the people. It might be supposed by some that the reduction of the duty accom plished all that was required. and that a penny upon a newspaper was but a small tax after all. But re member that the penny tax was upon the " news." Penny publications there might be ; but insert news and the paper became liable to the tax ; the price must be ad vanced to 2d., which might prove a fatal circumstance, and securities must be found. Upon this part of the ques tion Lord Brougham, in a letter recently written, said— .' Now, the stamp is by far the most hurtful of these bad taxes in one essential particular. The instruction of the working classes in the country districts, where it is most wanted, has been almost entirely prevented by it. When the Useful Knowledge Society made, for years, efforts of every kind to diffuse sound information among the peasantry in the villages, cottages, and farm-houses, we were always met and defeated by this stain!). Our only chance of making those poor people read was by wrapping up good information of a lasting value in news —especially news respecting farming matters and things in their own neighbourhood. But the penny stamp made this impossible. The paper of twelve octavo pages, of which four would have been newspaper and the other eight of a more general description and more permanent value, Listructive or entertaining, or both, could easily have been sold for a penny, after the necessary allow ance to the hawker or other retail dealer. The history of the Penny Magagine shows this. But tho vast circulation, at one time 220,000, enabled us to sell so costly a work very cheap. lam now referring to what would be more cheaply produced, and have a much more limited circulation; but it could only be done where there is no stamp. That makes it quite impossible; and all our plans so far failed that we could not diffuse the knowledge where it was most wanted. Our books were read, and they did great service, and still do, be sides having brought down the price of all books. But, like mechanics' institutions, we have not yet got low enough in society ; and that we owe to the stamp, because we found that mere cheapness did not make the most ignorant classes readers; another stimulus was wanted —news. Of course, my remarks apply also to people in the towns; but they have both more helps and, from their social habits, more excite ment than the people in the country. The lowering of the stamp from 4d. to Id. I really can hardly regard as a benefit at all, if it was a sacrifice of revenue, for it only relieved two classes who required no relief—it put considerable sums into the pockets of newspaper proprietors, and saved you and me a few pounds a-year, to whom this was but of little import ance. It did not enable us to help general education at Now what, he asked, had been the consequence of the re duction of the stamp duty ? Had our press been deterio rated by it? Mr. Walter, the father of the present member for Nottingham, had made a speech in that house upon the subject, in which there was a vast deal of valuable matter, but he said he feared the reduction of the stamp duty to so low a rate as a penny. Well, but had not the Times progressed under the reduction ? Had the Times been ruined by the increased rivalry that it was then predicted would arise? Nothing of the kind? The Times, with re ference to the rest of the press, bore a much larger propor tion of circulation than it did in those days, and afforded an illustration of what folly it was to attribute the success of a newspaper to the operation of any particular 'tax or duty. It was not protection that had improved the Times. What had raised it to its present high position was the great capital, the great skill, and the great enterprise which had been employed in the conduct of that great organ. Thus it was that it had attained the confidence of the public and its present large and extended circulation. (Hear.) It was not the protection afforded by the high rate of the stamp duties of former times that had done it, nor did he believe that the removal of that stamp duty would have any other effect than to allow cheap papers to circulate in fields into which at this moment no newspapers entered, without in the slightest degree injuring the portion of those newspapers which had already established their hold upon the public confidence. It was supposed that the stamp left upon newspapers was an equivalent forthe postal privileges which they enjoyed; but remember that the tax was not upon the publication, but upon a certain indefinable thing called " news and intelligence." But if the stamp upon news were said to be an equivalent for the post, he would make this proposition :—Let the existing established news papers remain as they were, and, if they would stamp every copy of their impression, let them retain the postal privi leges which they now possessed with the power of repeated transmission through the post. If it were true that the stamp was an advantage, they would retain the equivalent afforded by the Post-office, and if they did there would be no loss whatever to the revenue. The penny publications would not be prevented communicating news, and if they wanted to use the post they must pay for it. They would be content to take it upon those terms. They said, "Ar range your established press as you please ; but do not oppose insuperable obstacles to the insertion of news in a penny publication." Of what did that news consist ? Proceedings in the courts of justice, in the police courts, in the houses of Parliament, or in the sanitary world, showing men what was necessary to be done in order to preserve their health and promote their physical comforts. (Hear.) It was impossible that laws could be obeyed if the Legisla ture took steps to prevent their being known. If this in formation were not permitted to be circulated in penny publications, it was impossible it could reach those classes whom it was most desirable that it should reach. Work ing labourers did not read the Times, or the Morning Herald, or the Morning Post ; but because those news papers did not suit that class, that was no reason why the Legislature should step in and prevent them having their news at all. He gave the established press, therefore, the benefit of their position. They would in no way be affected if they adopted the option which was offered to them ; but if they refused that option, what was there more simple than for this country to take the course which was adopted in the United States, and permit printed matter up to a certain weight to go through the Post-office under a certain stamp? Lot those who used the Post-office pay for it, but let them not connect the Post-office with the printing of news, because there was not the slightest connection between the two things. The Times went free by post up to 4oz. ; but the penny publication unstamped was permitted to go by post if it paid according to its weight, and was precisely upon the same footing as a letter. At present, if a Times newspaper under 4oz. in weight were sent to Liverpool, it went free; but if he sent a Family Herald, which weighed 20z., it was charged 41. It was said, " You can stamp it." That was true ; but that involved the stamping of 200,030 copies, and the entering into securities to the extent of 1,6001., which the publishers of a small publication might not bo able to accomplish. Under the treaty with the United States a penny publication might be sent to that country, and might go to the remotest part of it, 3,000 miles away from Now York, for ld. ; but if it wore posted. in London to go to Greenwich it would be charged 4d. And this was what was called the postal privilege for the diffusion of knowledge ! (Hear, hear.) He contended that it was no privilege at all. It was true that, by a Treasury minute, it was declared that if a person registered a publication and called it a newspaper, and so on, it might have all these postal privileges, just as if it were a newspaper. This was a very improper Treasury minute to come from persons professing to be guardians of the public revenue, for the fact was that it exposed the revenue to extensive frauds. He would give the house an instance of how it operated. A Mr. Savory printed a trade circular which contained a number of drawings of candlesticks, snuffer trays, candelabra, &c„ with the view of circulating them through the country as advertisements; and, in order to get the benefit of the post, what did he do ? He wont to the Board of Inland Revenue, and made a declaration that his circular was a newspaper, which it was not—(hear, hear)—and, having made that declaration, he swore he was worth 4001. over and above the sum necessary to pay his debts. He then found two securities to the extent of 4001. each, binding themselves to be forthcoming to pay any penalties he might incur if in his circular of snuffer-trays or candelabra he should be guilty of publishing any " blas phemous or seditious libel." (Laughter.) And, having done all this, Mr. Savory was entitled to some stamped paper, and to have his stamped circulars carried free by post ; but, unfortunately, as the stamp was inside, and not outside, the Post-office authorities never knew whether any particular paper had got a stamp or not, because they had not time to open them. If they did, they would de lay the other mails ; consequently, if a man wont to the Board of Inland Revenue and stated that something was a newspaper—though it was not—and entered into all the required recogniso.nces and sureties, he would put himself in a position to defraud the revenue—he (Mr. Gibson) did not say that ho would do so intentionally—but at all events he would be entitled to send his publications through the post without paying any postage at all, be cause he did not need to take much stamped paper ; ho might print as many as he chose on unstamped paper, and the one would go just as freely as the other, it being im possible to examine the different printed papers to see whether they were stamped or not. (Hear, hear.) He did not mean to say that these frauds were extensive. He believed that there was so much honest feeling among Englishmen generally, that they would not willingly de fraud any branch of the public revenue. (Laughter.) But this he would say, that it became those who set themselves up as the guardians of the public revenue, and who pro fessed such extreme care that the position of the national creditor should not be affected that they would never agree to the smallest reduction proposed by an independent member,—it behoved them, ho said, to devise some less clumsy means for the protection of the revenue. (Haar, hear.) It was shown before the committee that all the copies of a particular publication were on one occasion ex amined at the Post-office, and that no fewer than 5,0a0 copies were found without a stamp. But there was no re dress for this ; because, having no news, the publication was not, in point of law, liable to the stamp, and nothing could be done but to throw them all aside without for warding them, because the parties to whom they were addressed would of course refuse to receive them when they found postage charged upon them, and nobody could tell who had put them into the post. Punch was allowed to be printed without a stamp, as well as with ono, and there was nothing to prevent an unstamped copy of Punch being sent by the post free of charge, for there was nobody to examine it, and it would go just the same as a stamped copy. This mixing up of st am p e d an d unstamped copies of publications, therefore, was a most clumsy expedient, and ought not to be allowed to continue. (Hear, hear.) Ho would recommend a plainer system, viz., that which was suggested by Mr. Walter, when the question was dis cussed in that house some years ago. Mr. Walter said : " If you want to levy a postage on newspapers, do it at the Post-office, and then you will not be involved in all the difficulties and litigations to which you are now subject in order to ascertain what is a newspaper, and what publica tions are liable to the stamp and what are not." He (Mr. Gibson) called upon the house to vote for his re solution, not pledging them at all to any particular plan of postal regulation, but merely with the view of pointing out the necessity of some changes in the present system. He believed if they wore to abolish the present stamp duty and impose a small postage charge upon all printed papers that went through the Post-office they would more than replace the revenue that would thereby be sacrificed, because many of the numberless penny publications that were sent at present by railway and otherwise, in large packages, would then be sent by the post, and thereby add to the revenue. It would be a great convenience to all parties in the country, and he was sure would be highly appreciated by the labouring population. But what was the state of the law ? Was it creditable to the house to have a statute which they could not enforce ? (Hear.) He maintained that there was a perfect knowledge on the part of the authorities that they could not enforce the law in its integrity. If they carried out the strict meaning of the words of that act, there was hardly any publication that was not liable to the duty. What were the words of the act with respect to securities, for instance?— " And be it further enacted, that from and after 30 days after the passing of this act, no person shall print or publish for sale any nawspaper, pamphlet, or other paper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or remarks, or ob• servations thereon, or upon any matters of Church or State, where the same shall not exceed two sheets, and be published for less than Gd., until he shall have appeared before a Baron of the Exchequer, or one of his Majesty's justices of the peace, and enter into recognisances, himself in 4001., and two other persons in 4001. each, binding themselves to pay such fines and penalties as may be imposed upon conviction for printing any blasphemous or seditious libel." The penalty for a breach of the law was 201. Now, was it possible to enforce such a law ? and did they enforce it? He would ask the law officers both of the present and late Government whether it was meant to enforce such a law ? and, if not, why not ? If it could not be enforced, let them repeal it. (Hear.) But don't let them go on in the present absurd way, calling upon 'Mr. Savory to enter into securities not to publish any blasphemous or seditious libels in his trade circular, and not enforcing the securities against works of an obvious political character. The existing practice of the authorities was not to enforce the recoguisances unless in the case of papers containing news, or where, as in the case of Mr. Savory, a person declared that his publication was a newspaper, the consequence of which was, that a person might publish a paper for the avowed purpose of libelling private character, of question. ing the truths of Christianity, or bringing discredit upon the Sovereign or the throne, without being asked to enter into any iemrities whatever—for, as had been said, no one was ever a •ked to do so unless he gave news which, it was easy to avoid doing, according to the interpretation put upon the word by the authorities, or unless he declared that his publication was a newspaper, which he need not do unlo s he found it convenient for that purpo, Novelle, of the Musical Times, might se ll that publication Without a stamp. He (Mr. Gibson) was a member of the Society of Arts, of which Prince Albert was president, and that society was allowed to publish an uns "news," did which, though it gave wh a t people called did not give what the Board of Inland Revenue considered to be nem." The society abstained from commenting on any " matters of church cr State ; and yet, in order to secure the postal privilege for their stamped copies, they were required to enter into securities that they would be responsible for any penalties that might be incurred for blasphemous or seditious libels. Was it not trifling to go on in this way when they found some of the most offensive publications, such as Sam, Sly, brought out for the express purpose, and no other, of libellinc , private character? A clergyman who was libelled in that disgraceful publication having heard that there were laws which made persons responsible for the publication of libels, resolved to bring an action against the libeller; but he found that, because the publi cation did not contain what the Board of Inland Revenue chose to call " news," the proprietors had never been re quired to enter into any securities, and that it was of very little use to bri ng an ac ti on on th e case, b ecause the pub lishers were men of straw. (Hear.) His (Mr. Gibson's) resolution merely asked the house to declare that the law Wtl3 in an unsatisfactory state, and demanded the attention of Parliament. The act s o f the Government proved that the law required the attention of Parliament. They com menced a prosecution for penalties in the Court of Exche quer against the publishers of one of the most eminent and useful public writers of the day—he alluded to Mr. C. Dickens—(hear, hear)—on the groun d th a t M r. Di c k ens had inserted news in a monthly periodical. Now, suppos ing that the Government had succeeded in their efforts to put down Mr. Dicken's monthly periodical, what benefit would the country have derived from the result? (Hear.) Would the revenue have been benefitted ? No, because if the Government had succeeded in their action, the publi cation must have been discontinued, as it would have been impossible to sell it at an increased price. The prosecu tion, it was said, was commenced to test the law, and to put down that class of monthlies. A pretty policy in these days, when they talked of educating the people, to attempt to prevent a man with a mind and intellect like Mr. Dickens, from addressing the greatest possible number of his fellow-countrymen by stupid laws, which were a dis li grace to the Legislature ! (Hear.) He used advisedly the word "disgrace," because if they put down Mr. Dickens's publication they would not confer a particle of benefit on the country. They would neither benefit the revenue nor would they consult the interest of any established paper ; because no one could believe that such a publication would ever come into competition with The Times, or that one copy less of the Times would be sold if Mr. Dickens were let alone. (Hear.) If any doubt had existed whether that publication came within the Stamp Act, the Government, instead of prosecuting the publishers and putting them to the expense of defending themselves in a court of justice, ought to have brought in a bill at once, if they ever in tended to do so, to exempt it from the law. But, instead of doing that, they went to the Court of Exchequer and tried to enforce the penalties. The judges, however, over ruled them. And did the Government stop there ? They said that the judges had given bad law—that Mr. Timm, of the Board of Inland Revenue, knew the law better than the judges, and that an attempt ought to be made to set aside the decision in favour of Mr. Dickens. The publishers were therefore once more put upon their de fence. After incurring further expense, in came Lord Derby's Government. The law officers of that Government considered that the persecution—for it was a persecution— had gone far enough, and they tried to bring in a bill to stop further litigation, to exempt the publication from the stamp duty, and attempt to define what was a newspaper. That bill, however, had since disappeared ; he did not know what had become of it. It was true that he had ob jected to its being introduced in violation of the forms of the house ; but it would have been very easy to re-intro duce it, if necessary; but not ono step had since been taken in the matter, and, for aught he knew, another prosecution might be commenced to-morrow against the publication of a monthly paper containing news. The Board of Inland Revenue had fancied that they had put down a great many of these publications. There was one, entitled Burniston's Northern Luminary, respecting which the pub lisher received the following letter : " Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house, London, March 12, 1849. " Burniston's Northern, Luminary. " Sir,—This publication having been brought under my notice, I have to inform you that it is a newspaper, and that, by publishing it as such, you are incurring heavy penalties. I beg, therefore, to suggest the p ro p r i e t y o f your i mmed i ately registering it as a newspaper or discontinuing to publish it. If you adopt the former course, you must give the necessary instructions for the documents at the Stamp-office at York, without delay.—l am, ice., " J. Tune, Solicitor of Inland Revenue. " Mr. J. Burni s t on , printer, &c., Kuaresborough." A note was added, stating that the paper had been discon tinued, Mr. Timm having imagined that he had frightened it out of existence; but he (Mr. Gibson) could show the house that Mr. Tinun was mistaken, and that the Northern Luminary had set only for a short period, and had risen again since the decision of the Court of Exchequer, and was now being published, notwithstanding Mr. Timm's letter, with perfect freedom. But Mr. Timm sometimes told them that frequency of publication had nothing at all to do with constituting a newspaper, and that if a person printed a Queen's speech once, or even an account of an execution, he would expose himself to a notice from Somerset-house. The following letter was sent by Mr. Timm to the printers of a paper entitled " Execution of Sarah Ann Thomas ": " Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house, Loudon, April 26, 1849. " Gentlemen,—A printed paper, entitled " Execution of Sarah Ann Thomas," printed and published by you, has been brought to the notice of this board. I have, therefore to inti mate to you that, by publishing such paper, which is a news paper, on unstamped paper, and without, in other respects, complying with the requisites of the law, you have incurred serious penalties. The commissioners are ready, however, to attend to any explanation you may think proper to give as to the irregularity, and any statement you may send to me upon the subject shall be submitted to them.—l am, &e., " J. 'Lim, " Solicitor of Inland Revenue. " Messrs. Mathews, printers, 44, Broad-street, Bristol." The following was the reply of the Messrs. Mathews : " 44, Broad-quay, Bristol, April 25, 1849. " Sir,—ln reply to yours of yesterday, we beg to say that we must plead entire ignorance of the existence of any law which we have infringed in issuinc , the tract referred to. We have nothing in " Hansard's Instruction to Printers" which at all deals with the question. We have also inquired at the Stamp-office to-day, and can get no information on the subject. We most certainly would not knowingly lay ourselves open to the penalties of infringement. You would, therefore, greatly oblige by stating where the information can be obtained. We have for many years (in common with our brethren of the Profession) printed reports and tracts on passing subjects, and cannot therefore perceive wherein we have offended.—Wo are, &c., MATTLIEWS, BROTIIERS. " J. Timm, Esq." Mr. Timm replied as follows : " Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house, London, April 26, 1849. " Gentlemen,—l have received your letter of the 25th instant, in .explanation of the publishing by you of the tract, as you term it, entitled Execution of S. A. Thomas,' and, in reply, beg to furnish you with the necessary information for your future guidance. A newspaper is defined to bo any paper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences, printed in any part of the United Kingdom, to be dispersed and made public.' The paper in question, with the excep tion, perhaps, of that which relates to the history of the criminal, is, from beginning to end, within this description of matter. This board is not disposed, I apprehend, to treat the present case as a wilful infringement of the law, and the notice thus taken will probably be deemed sufficient.—l am, &c., "J. Toast, " Solicitor of Inland Revenue. "Messrs. Mathews, printers, 44, Broad-quay, Bristol.' So that the board did not attempt to enforce the penalties which they had threatened. But what wore people to think of such notices? The penalties were very serious, and it behoved the Government to be able to tell distinctly what a newspaper was, and what it was not, in order that people might know precisely how to act. It was sometimes said that if a publication confined itself to one class of sub jects it was not a newspaper. Mr. Keogh, for instance stated to the committ ee th a t th e Legal Observer might ' . with propriety, give any informati on re l a ti ve t o P apal agression, provided it merely gave what lawyers thought of it, because that kind of news would be interesting to a class—viz., lawyers. Mr. Keogh also stated that a report of a meeting of lawyers on Papal aggression in the Legal Observer would not be news ; but that, if it contained a report of a meeting of clergymen, he had not the slightest doubt that penalties would be incurred. (Laughter.) This was_ a refinement which he hoped his hon. and learned frienl the Attorney-General would make clear to the house. (Hear. hear.) There was, therefore, avhat was called the one subject principle. If persons stuck to one subject they wore safe ; but not if they meddled with miscellaneous sub jects. Ho begged to remind tie house, however, that there was not such a word as "miscellaneous" intho act. (Hear.) But even '` one subject" was not always allowed to escape ; for what was the account of the execution of Sarah Ann Thomas but "one subject ?" (Hear.) And it ap peared that a publication entitled the Bedford Charity .Record, which related to one subject, had also been threat with penalties. He thought, therefore, ho bad succeeded in making out an indisputable case with respect to the un satisfactory state of the law, and to show that it was the duty of the Government to delay no longer in settling the matter; for it was infamous, to say the least of it, to have the Board of Inland Revenue frightening small useful pub lications out of existence without anybody being able to say whether they were legal or not. These were the leading features of the nase he had to submit to the house. He Would now place his resolutions in the hands of the Speaker, in the confident hope that the house would give them its favourable consideration. He assured hon. gentle men on both sides that he brought forward the resolutions without any party feeling, and without hostility to any set of politicians in the country, but simply from an earnest desire for the promotion of education and the diffusion of knowledge, and from a wish to put an end to an anomalous state of press laws, which ha was sure no one could witness without regret. o must remind hon. gentlemen that sepa rate divisions would be taken upon each resolution, and that, therefore, those who could not support the 4 1 / 4 might vote fur ono or more of them. Ho only ase the house would not reject all three resolutions, but would give them that favourable consideration to which he thought their importance entitled them. (Loud and con tinued cheers.) [A. messenger fr om the House of Lords appeared at the table to request that their lordships might be furnished with a copy of the evidence taken before the Clitheroe elec tion committee, and it was ordered that a copy of the evi dence be communicated to their lordships.] Mr. EWART said that, in seconding the motion of his right hon. friend, it would not be necessary that he should trespass for more than a few minutss upon the attention of the house, for his right hon. Mend had completely ex hausted the subject in his most admirable speech. (Hear, hear.) He thought the result of the debate must be the final, if not the speedy, repeal of the advertisement du -12)' ty He s and eventually of the stamp d u ty on newspapers. H ported the motion of his r i g ht h on. friend mainly because lise . he believed that the abolition of these duties would_ be fa vourable to the cause of knowledge and _()rdel dered that it would b e va i n to found sehools,..tollesetablnissih libraries, or to take other means for extending information to the people, if they did not ene° u ledge of the cur ren t li terature of th e I d t 13l a o ng th e t i il h e a s t axe s know were not taxes upon the accumulated stores n o d f knowledge, but upon what might be called the lating medium o f i nstruction. mi .current coin an d circu s was the very kind of knowledge which it should be the anxious duty of a Legis lature to circulate thorouoill , y among the masses of the people. lie was desirous that the people should be invited, if possible, to educate themselves. (Hear. hear.) It might be remembered th a t Gibbon said that men received two given them by others, and another given them by th emselves. Now, he would k, how they could better ext en d th is species of self-education than, by encouraging the free circulation of local newspapers? He believed the effect of the repeal of the stamp and adver tisement duties would be to give such an impulse to the circulation of newspapers as was witnessed in the United States. He was aware some persons imagined that the consequences of the abolition of these duties would be the prevalence of bad publicationS, but unquestionable testi mony had been adduced before the committee on the stamp duties on newspapers that, in large towns lik e Manchester, the good.publications eventually triumphed over th e b a d . 11 also supported the motion of his right hon. friend be cause he believed it was favourable to the cause of order. They would find that those countries which, during the recent revolution that had taken place iu Europe, had re mained most unshaken, were those in which the press was most free. Austria, France, Prussia, and the countries where the press was most shackled, had been shaken to their foundations and almost ovcrtarned in the political earthquake which had agitated Europe ; while, on the other hand, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, and England had remained firm and unshaken. The United States pre sented a most remarkable example of a firmly-seated Go vernment, less agitated by the shocks of internal commo tion than any other country in the world, and ho main tained that this was to be traced, to a great extent at least, to the freedom which the press enjoyed. One of the most admirable distinctions which existed between ancient and modem times was, in his opinion, that whereas in ancient times the people were appealed to by their orators, they were now appealed to by the press, and while formerly they were appealed to by interest and passion, they were now appealed to by calm deliberation and argumentative reasoning. He held that the leading articles of newspapers were far better guides than the speeches of ancient orators, and he contended that they ought to avail themselves of this power to the utmost extent of which it was susceptible, and not to retain any longer impediments to its unre stricted use. These shackles were an excrescence and a deformity on our constitution ; their origin dated some 140 years back; they were introduced in the reign of Queen Anne for a bad reason, many of them on account of the continuance of a war ; and, as ho believed, there was rn express understanding with regard to the paper duty that it should cease when the war was concluded. He thought it was the duty of the Legislature to sweep away these ex crescences on our constitution. Ho was rejoiced to find that this great cause had so able an advocate as his right hon. friend. He believed it would gain ground from day to day, and from session to session, and that the Govern ment would eventually be obliged to concede the principle for which his right honourable friend was contending. (Hear, hear.) _ The SPEAKER th en pu t th e question on the first reso lution "That the adverti semen t dut ought to be re pealed." y T h? CHANCELLOR of th e EXCHEQUER sa id, h e had listened with very great interest both to the able and comprehensive speech of the right hon. gentleman who moved thes e resolutions, and also to the very tempe rate and intellige n t statement of the hon. member for Dumfries. He freely owned that in those speeches there was much matter that deserved the attention of the house, but they related.partly to subjects of policy and partly to subjects of revenue, and those subjects it would be his duty, as far as he was able to disentangle from one another. Although he did not, in the least degree, wish to qualify his description of the speeches which had been made on this subject, he would endeavour to show the house that it would not be wise to adopt the resolutions which had been proposed. With regard to questions of policy, those were, to ol' cohourldsgae, v m e a t ehimr s nuponspecial which authority th e office ts he had the p eak.The com paratively limited question on which the right hon. gentleman had bestowed considerable notice—namely, that a w n h d ich E gr va e n w s— oi w it as of on th e e tporowsmecicihtiohne (the Chancellor case of B Exchequer) ought, perhaps, in the first instance, to advert. He fully acceded, with respect to that question, to the Bradbury f bi t ir h y e opinion expressed in one of the resolutions before the house —" That the law relative to taxes on newspapers, and other regulations affecting public prints, is in an unsatisfactory state, and demands the attention of Parliament." (Hear, hear.) It was the intention of the Government to propose —and he hoped they would be able to do so within a very short period —a bill for the purpose of clearing up the state of the law. (S ome cr i es o f "Oh," f ro m the Minis terial side.) Well, if c l ear i ng up th e s t a t e o f the law on this subject was not considered desirable by some hon. gentlemen, he was sorry to differ from those who enter tained that opinion ; but it was the intention of the Government to bring in a bill for the purpose of clear ing up the state of the law with respect to newspapers, and of preventing any harsh or severe interpretation of that law, quite irrespectively of the further ques tion, which, he fully granted, still remained for consi deration. ,It appeared to him that there was a clear dis tinction between these two subjects. The question of the stamp duty upon newspapers, which involved a large sum of money, was a material question of revenue. The ques tion that had arisen with respect to the liability of certain publications to be classed as newspapers was one with re gard to which persons would have a fair right to complain if any considerable or unnecessary delay took place in call ing the attention of Parliament to the subject. Now, with reference to the general principle upon which these resolu tions rested, the 2d resolution declared—" That the policy of restraining the cheap periodical press from narrating current events, by rendering it liable to stamp duties and other restrictions, if any public news, intelligence, or oc currences, or any remarks or observations thereon,' be con tained therein, is inexpedient." They had been told that it was not as a matter of revenue that these restrictions were imposed, but that it was the, policy of those who placed the acts upon tha statute-book to restrain the circulation of intelligence of the kind referred to. He would not enter into the historical question as to whether that bad been the policy of a former Government or not, but he thought that so many membersof her Majesty'spresent Government had given their voices in favour of the free circulation of intel , ligence, that the house must feel assured that the policy of a former period was not likely to be the policy of the pre sent Government. He cordially concurred in the opinion expressed by his hon friend (Mr. Ewart), that perfectly free discussion was not only not to be regarded as an evil or to be subjected to repressive legislation, but was a system which, if it were fairly and manfully encouraged, was likely to contribute to the stability of the institutions of the country—(hear, hear)—and ho was quite certain that nothing would either be said or done on the part of the Government to lead to a contrary result. He mu s t now request the house to look at the question involved in the motion of his right hon. friend, who proposed, by his first resolution, that they should condemn the advertisement duties, by the second the stamp duties, and, by the third, the paper duties. This was the part of the subject upon which it was his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) more especial office to speak, and it would be a breach of duty on his part if he were to encourage or to advise the house to pass these resolutions. He had protested before— and he must now repeat the protest—against condemning taxes which the house was not prepared on the instant to repeal. (Hear hear.) He trusted the house would never lower its character by sliding into a practice which, un doubtedly, had many recommendations—recommendations, he meant, addressed to feeling and convenience—of dealing in expressions and promises which might produce a popu lar impression, but which created and raised expectations that Parliament was not prepared to fulfil. The hon. member for Dumfries had himself given an illustration of the vanity and futility of understandings with respect to the repeal of taxes ; for, in referring to the origin of the newspaper stamp duties and of the paper duties, he had said they were imposed with a clear understanding that they should be repealed at an early period. Now, did not this show the worthlessness of such understandings as to the repeal of the taxes? (Hear.) Did it not show the deceptive and delusive character of mere expressions of opinion about taxes, as distinct from the practical measures which it was the duty of that house to take ? With respect to the taxes under discussion, the right honourable gentleman who brought forward the motion had said that there was a great and culpable indifference on the part of y was Chancellors to b e raised.o f the Chancelloi a of the E xc h equer as to the mode in which the gentleman revenue of the accusedc e country t Eixlch eeright o l r a great want of discrimination between the different modes of raising the revenue. If that, then, was tho habitual and established fault of Chancellors of the Exchequer, surely the right hon. gentleman was prepared to show that he proceeded upon a different principle, and discriminated between the wise and unwise modes of raising the revenue of the country. The right hon, gentleman now invited the house to come to a vote by which they were to con demn nearly a million and a half of that revenue. The right hon. gentleman said the house nee 1 not adopt all his resolutions, hut, as they were proposed all together, ho (the Chancellor o f th e E xc h equer ) th oug ht h e was justified iu concluding that the right hon. gentleman wished the house to adopt them all. Well, did the right honourable gentleman, who condemned Chancellors of the Exchequer for not discriminating between wise and unwise modes of raising public money, make such discrimination himself? The right hon. gentleman had condemned the unwise modes of raising the revenue; Eel he pointed out a wise mode? (Hear, hear.) [Mr. Gibson tioned postage.] Yes, certainly the right honourable gentleman had pointed out that a charge might be laid upon newspapers sent by rest, but was that to produce a million and a half of money ? It would do no such thing. The right hon. gentleman, then, had not pointed out any substitute for the revenue he proposed to condemn, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) trusted the house was not disposed to fall into the practice of condemning taxes until it was either prepared to dispense with them or to provide substitutes for them. With regard to the ad vertisement duty, ho was sorry that ho differed from his right hon. friend upon a qusstion of arithmetic. Th e r i ght hon. gentleman had said they might assume that for each additional advertisement eight additional letters would through tho Post-office, and he computed that passadditional advertisementse if 5,000,000 doning the duty, an additional 40,000,000 of letters pass through the post, which would yield would 166,000/. The rie•ht ho a revenue of n. gentleman told them that the advertisement duty only yielded 170,000/. or 180,0001., and that thereforeabout the same amount, would at most be very trifr the loss of revenue of the Exchequer) wanted ing. Now, he (the Chancellor to know whether 166,000/. de rived from the Postage of l tt for 160,0001, derived, f e ers would r(a'ly be a substitute Unless he (the Chancelfoormofa ti c a l e uty on advertisements ? mistaken th e accounts of the Post -office reve nue , f or ever y 31, retur ne d i n that department about 21. was absorbed in the expense of collection—(hear, hear)—and the re f ore th e substitut e proposed by the t hon. gentleman, instead of yielding 166,0001., would only produce about 55,000/. The right b.on• gentleman proposed that the house should con sent to abandon a revenue amcwiting to 1,400,0001. a-year. If ho proposed to abandon it, ho (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) should say, we had not the means of doing it ; as it was not proposed to abandon it, but only to condemn it,he would venture most respectfully, br t most earnestly, to express a hope that the house would not consent to a vote of that kind, but join with him in the vote which he should propose, called "the previous question." (Hear, hear.) For he did not wish to imply a hostility to tho object which the right hon. gentleman had in view. (Hear.) With respect to the paper duty, he would fully grant, that large as was the revenue derived from that source, he should be delighted to see the day when wo could dispense with it. (He: r.) The right hen. gentleman must recol lect that, though certainly it was a duty which there were abundant reasons to make us wish to get rid of, it was no a duty laid merely upon the paper used for literary pro ductions, but a duty pressing upon the coarser description , of paper used for inferior purposes • but no doubt the ttii!cr. or duty had the effect of a most objectionable tax upon nd hn for it ature and upon mental effort and productions, and there fore he should be as happy as the right 9 gentleman when the day came that wo could find a substitute the same way with or dispense with it. (Hear, hear.) In respect to t advertisement duty, he would fully grant that at present the charge imposed by it was a very heavy the t h gentleman on. and onerous charge—(hear) — but would recollect that after all we must be oantent in these y_: