The Press.
London, England, 1854-05-20 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

member dwelt at much length upon the anomalies
now existing in the system, of which he cited nu-
merous instances. The principle on which the
stamp on periodicals was rendered compulsory or
dispensed with ; the necessity for finding securities ;
the dates, periods, and conditions of publication ; and
the liability to penalties from infringements of the
law in each or any of these particulars, were all
left in a most confused and unintelligible state.
This uncertainty occasioned much embarrassment to
the publishers, and was not seldom employed as a
means of persecution and annoyance by the authori-
ties of the Inland Revenue (Alice. The result was
that men of character and capital were deterred from
embarking in this class of literature, and the cheap
press fell chiefly into the hands of persons destitute
alike of station, character, and respect for the insti-
tutions of the country.
The motion was seconded by Mr. RINNAIRD.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL confessed that the law
was in a most complicated and anomalous state, re •
quiring amendment, as also that it was unequally
though not, as he contended, arbitrarily enforced :
" He urged, however, that many of the anomalies in the
statutes were softened away by the mode in which they
were administered, and emphatically denied the assertion
that they had ever been used for the purposes of persecu-
tion. Much of the existing complication had arisen from
the concessions accorded to class periodicals and journals
devoted to merely literary or artistic topics, which had
multiplied exceedingly in number, and presented great
diversity of character, and thus led to that difficulty in
defining the significance of the term ' newspaper,' whereof
Mr. Gibson complained. Giving several examples of this
difficulty, and defending the conduct of the executive
officers in relation to some inculpated proceedings, the
Attorney-General expressed his readiness to review the laws
relating to the periodical press, and effect whatever amelio-
rations might be found possible in them. Observing that
some inconvenience might follow the passing of the reso-
lution before the house, he concluded by moving the pre-
vious question."
Mr. EWART believed that newspapers were most
effectual agents in the self-education of the people,
and recommended the abolition of all restrictive laws
upon their production.
Mr. HOME hoped that no prosecution would be per-
sisted in against publishers under statutes whose in•
terpretation was avowedly so uncertain, or whose
effect if stringently enforced must prove so injurious.

The Sorsaron GENERAL explained and vindicated
the principle upon which the laws regarding the
press had been administered by the functionaries
and tribunals of the State.

Sir J. V. SHELLEY quoted some further examples of
complexity and anomaly in the existing law.
Mr. CROSSLEY wished to have the newspaper press
relieved from every burden, and suggested that any
revenue which might be sacrificed should be reim-
bursed to the Treasury by a penny stamp on bankers'
cheques.
Mr. BRIGHT refused to be satisfied by smooth
words from the law officers of the Crown, whose pro-
mises never touched the real evil of the case :

" Government did not maintain the newspaper stamp
and other restrictions on the press merely for the sake of
revenue. The tenacity with which those burdens were de-
fended arose from a wish to impede the circulation of one
single class of intelligence, that, namely, relating to politi-
cal subjects. He inquired how far they meant to carry
that prejudice ; and if, for example, the circulation of
news by the electric telegraph was to be made liable to
the stamp duty ? As a matter of finance, he computed
that a penny postage on journals would produce nearly, if
not quite, as large a revenue as the present stamps. The
hon. member proceeded to elucidate the effect of the
stamp duty by displaying copies of different journals pub-
lished in London, Melbourne, and New York, and con-
tending that, while in point of size, talent, and information
they showed no great disparity, their prices respectively
varied in the proportion of 5d., 1 id., and Id. The tax in
many instances formed an impost of one hundred per cent.
on the value of the article, weighing more heavily in the
precise proportion than the commodity was produced at a
cheaper cost, and operated as a complete bar to the circu-
lation of newspapers among those labouring classes whom
it was most important to educate and enlighten. At pre-
sent newspapers were only accessible to the working man
at the public-house."
Lord PALMERSTON remarked that as to the general
scope of the resolution there seemed to be no differ.
ence of opinion. Every one appeared to admit that
the law required revision ; but there were allegations
embodied in the resolution that implied charges of
partiality and persecution against the Government
functionaries which had been rebutted, and were,
indeed, disclaimed by Mr. M. Gibson. He suggested
that the resolution should he modified and might
then be allowed to pass. The topics urged by Mr.
Bright related to a wider branch of the question, and
could not be fairly discussed in the absence of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. The noble lord at
the same time expressed his full concurrence in the
opinion that the means of affording information to
all classes of the people should be rendered as wide
as possible.

Mr. GIBSON, in reply, declined to change the tenor
of his motion.

46

)1
Lord PALinserrow then requested and obtained
from the right hon. member an admission that his
resolution was not intended to convey censure upon
the 11011111 of Inland Revenue. With this concess►on
the Home Secretary consented to waive all opposi-
tion without calling for a division, which from the
state of the house at the time would probably have
gone against the Government. The amendment of
" the previous question" having been withdrawn, the
resolution passed without any expressed dissent from
either side.
CAPITULAR AND EPISCOPAL ESTATES

BILL.
This bill stood for second reading on Wednesday,
when the motion to that cffiTt having been made was
met by Lord A. VANE and Mr. BUTT with an amend-
ment for adjourning the 'debate. The measure was
too important, they urged, to be discussed in the ab-
sence of all the Ministers.
Mr. U. BERKELEY explained that the Home Secre-
tary was detained away by a pressure of public
business, but would speedily be in the house. The
debate accordingly proceeded, Lord Palmerston and
Lord John Russell presently making their appear-
ance.
Mr. DRUMMOND maintained that the bill would di-
vert the whole of our cathedral establishments from
their original destination. The existence of a cathe-
dral was an essential point in the Episcopal Church.
The best mode of correcting admitted evils would be
to develop, as far as practicable, the episcopal and
clerical element in the Church establishment. He
expressed his disapproval of that party in the Church
which disputed the claim of the bishops and clergy to
the enjoyment of their just privileges.
Mr. SPOONER considered those the truest friends of
the Church who discouraged innovations tending in
the direction of Romanism.
Mr. WALPOLE advised the withdrawal of the bill,
believing that a question so large and difficult should
he dealt with by the Government, if it was to be
taken up at all. The bill affected a most important
question, and further information was most desirable.
Lord J. RUSSELL recognised the force of the argil..
molts for delay, and recommended the noble lord who
had charge of the bill (Marquis of Blandford) to con-
sent to its postponement. The subject, he admitted,
was too important to be allowed to drop, and the
Government would feel obliged, with full information
before them, to introduce such measures as were
consistent with the improvement of the revenues of
the Church, and at the same time with principles
which would afford to it increased stability. He
was prepared to record his vote for the principle of
the bill, but not for going into committee until
various alterations had been introduced.
After some further discussion, shared in by a great
number of members, the Marquis of BLANDFORD re-
plied at some length. He defended his measure, re-
butted some of the objections urged against it, and
contended that it was desirable for the house to affirm
the principle of the measure.
A division was at length taken on the question of
adjournment, which was negatived by a majority of
123 to 82-01. The discussion on the merits of the
measure was then briefly renewed, but Lord BLAND-
FORD agreed, if the bill were read a second time, not
to press it further this session, and, the bill having
been so read, the 21st of June was named for its com-
mittal pro
_forted.
THE CONVENT INQUIRY COMMITTEE.
The resumption of the debate on the nomination
of the committee on conventual and monastic insti-
tutions, which has stood adjourned (ruin the 3rd inst.,
was moved on Thursday in the Commons. Two
names, out of fifteen, had been placed on the list of
members selected to serve on this committee ; and
the discussion, when interrupted, bad turned upon
an amendment, proposed by Mr. Digby Seymour,
that the further nomination of members should be
suspended for six months.
Mr. NEWDFGATE remarked upon the innumerable
contrivances for delay which the opponents of inquiry
had interposed, and on the acrimony of the discussions
they had occasioned. He recommended the promoter
of the inquiry (Mr. T. Chambers) to withdraw his
motion, and change his tactics by bringing in a bill
on the subject. There was no hope of carrying the
present motion in the face of the opposition which a
dominant minority had organised, and while every
name proposed for the committee gale occasion to a
fresh dispute and another " Irish row."
Mr. BRIGHT observed that acrimony, had been
exhibited on both sides of the question. He recom-
mended the house to let the subject drop altogether,
believing that all discussions on points of sectarian
controversy were to be deprecated on every account.
Mr. Cowen hoped that the proposed inquiry
would not be surrendered to the obstinacy of a
minority.
Mr. J. BALL denounced the proposition itself, and
the speeches of its supporters, as deeply insulting to
the Roman Catholics of Ireland.
Mr. T. CRAMBF.RB announced his intention of with-
drawing his motion for a committee. Although his

~,~
,r