The Press.
London, England, 1855-05-05 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

Chancellor of the Exchequer withdrew his registra-
tion clause, leaving the law in all respects as it now
stands. This, be said, would still leave the incon-
venience of determining what was or was not a
newspaper; but that inconvenience would be much
lessened when the stamp was no longer compulsory.
A clause was then added to the bill limiting free
transmission by post to fifteen days after publica-
tion.

The copyright clause, moved by the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, brought a discu►sion. The mover
had said that it was not intended to abandon the
liberty which had been so long used by the evening
and country journals of taking the parliamentary
debates and other reports from the morning papers,
but to prevent a journal from being established,
animo furandi, with th 3 intention of living entirely
upon pirated articles and intelligence. The morning
newspapers, be thought., might be safely trusted that
they would not take any vexatious advantage of the
clause.

Mr. WHITESIDE, however, opposed it, as imprac-
ticable, and, it' practicable, as limiting the blessings
of printing and the electric telegraph. The editors
of the Press, the Examiner, and the Spectator, all
men of great talent, might at any time be taken up
before a magistrate to answer the charge of stealing
ideas from the Times. The stipendiary magistrates
were most unfit persons to be trusted with such a
jurisdiction. Mr. GIBSON, on the same side, did not
see why the great newspapers, whose news had been
80 long unprotected, should now require protection,
about which, in fact, they did not seem to care much.
If the clause was intended against the army of
pirates that was to come, let them wait and see
whether it came or not. Lord LOVAINE advocated
the limiting the operation of the clause to signed
articles. Lord STANLEY pointed oat how impossible
it, would be to solve the problem of distinction be
tween statements and comments; and Mr. RICARDO
urged several practical G mlties connected with the
transmission of commercial intelligence. Mr. BRIGHT
said that if a paper hying on piracy could have been
established, it might have been under the old law,
under which that greatest of pirates the Globe was
published. The American press required no copy-
right protection. Intelligence published at Man-
enester and elsewhere, said to be pirated, was often
obtained from original sources. Mr. J. O. PRIMA-
MORE adverted to the difficulty of carrying out the
clause, and Mr. BENTINcic was not disposed to trust
to the forbearance of the great papers.

Meanwhile only two speakers had appeared in
favour of th• clause. Mr. PHINN believed that with
out it cheap papers would be created, living on the
morning papers, and reducing our press to the level
of the American ; and thought, notwithstanding, that
the clause was npen to many objections, and would
have preferred the establishment of a regular news-
paper code. Mr. Fox thought likewise that the
character of the press would be lowered, and the
large sums spent on articles and intelligence
diminished. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
ligeontageci at the reception of his clause, with-
drew it.

Air. DISRAELI continued the discussion, placing it
on more general grounds. He did not believe that
any peat newspaper would suffer from this kind of
competition. It had been urged that newspaper-
writers should sign their names ; but who was to see
that they gave a true signature. Anonymous writing
was the rule in this country, and he instanced several
of our greatest works which had in the first instance
been published anonymously. It was their great
duty to facilitate intelligence, which was not to be
done by imposing a copyright.
This matter disposed of, Mr. M. MILNES moved a
clause giving the penny transmission by the post to
all papers whose superficial inches of printed matter
did not exceed 3,500. The object of the clause was
to give the double copy of the Times the same rate
of transmission as smaller papers, and the debate in

consequence turned almost entirely upon the Times.
Mr. Milnes urged that the chance of success should
not be diminished to those papers which had distri-
buted over the country an amount of intellectual
matter unknown in any other nation. Mr. COWAN
urged the enormous weight which the newspapers
had already attained; the annual weight of the double
Times would be 48,000 tons, and that of the London
press was actually 150 tons weekly, having been about
five tons in 1808. Great duties were thus thrown
upon the Post-office, which would be increased with
the increase of newspapers. Lord STANLEY looked
on the matter as one of contract—it was exchange
for a service performed. We were already sending
twelve times the weight of newspapers over that of
letteri, and six times over—giving the newspapers
seventy-two times the advantage over the letters. Ha
thought this a sufficient allowance to the newspaper
interest.

➢lr. Low objected to the argument as not a prac-
tical one—they must either treat letters and news-
papers on the same principle, or give up ill comps
rison whatever. He hi ped that in a few years other
alwaPaPars would be able to neoch the sane extent

417

as the Timm), when it would be to the advantage of
all that this clause should be adopted. He could
not see why a particular stage of advancement in a
newspaper should be taken to levy a fine on it. The
Times bad already reached the point at which its
circulation, taken alone, ceased to be remunerative,
and it therefore sought to contract it. It was not
worth while, for the sake of a halfpenny, to add to
embarrassment, and throw impediments in the way of
circulation.

Mr. M. GLUON said that the Times had already
profited to the extent of 20,0001. year y by the rem►s-
sion of the supplement, stamp, for which it had given
no return of outlay, and which would more than
cover any loss by the halfpenny postage. He would
willingly undertake to pay that extra halfpenny, if
the Times would give him what they gained by the
advertisements in their supplemental sheet.
Mr. E. BAIA, thought that the best paper should
not, because it was the best, be subject to restriction.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he
could understand the principle of charging all news-
papers a penny postage, but the proposed clause es-
tablished a limit for which he could see no particular
reason. He then argued the question oil purely
Post-office grounds, and the expenses incurred by the
additional weight the mails would have to carry.
After Mr. DETJMMOND had urged the policy of keep-
ing up the good writing which appeared in the Times,
and Mr. MILNES had replied, the committee divided,
and the clause was rejected by 260 to $6.