The Press.
London, England, 1854-03-04 00:00:00

MARCH 4, 1854.

urged that the details proposed to be given appet •
tamed to the domain of private interests, and should
not be asked for by the house.
Mr. CRAUFL•RD persevered in his motion, where-
upon Mr. BROTHERTON interposed by moving the
adjournment of the house (at half-past twelve). On
a division, this motion was negatived, by 66 noes
against 25 ayes, and the discussion on the motion for
returns was resumed.

Mr. DisitAim! thought it unwise to oppose the motion,
and he could not understand on what ground it was refused.
The newspapers were the organs of pulslic opinion, and it
was only by ascertaining their circulation that they could
judge how far they influenced public opinion. Ile could
not recognise the analogy between newspapers and other
property. Newspapers were a peculiar description of
property to which the ordinary rules as to publicity did not
apply. But there was another reason why the return
should be produced. They had certain information on
the subject, but it was imperfect, and it was expedient that
that information, if it was before the public at all, should
be complete.
_ .

The CHANCET.LOII of the EXCHEQUEIt stated that the
objection the Government had to produce the information
required was a fair regard to private interests. He ad-
mitted that it was a matter of interest to know, so far as
the stamps would give it, what was the circulation of each
newspaper, but so it would be a matter of interest to know
what was the amount paid by each individual trade to the
income tax. (Oh.) [he house had already decided not
to produce this return, and it was now sought to reverse
that decision. The case appeared to be, that there were
certain traders in this particular trade who desired to have
this information made public, in order that it might exer-
cise au influence on public opinion for their benefit, and
to the prejudice of others who were less successful. He
could not admit that the house had no right to call for
this return, but what he contended for was, that it was
not necessary for the public interest ; and, acting upon the
principle which the house had hitherto followed in similar
cases, the house would, he believed, show forbearance, and
refuse to inflict upon parties engaged in private trade the
injury which such an exposure of their affairs was calcu-
lated to inflict.

Mr. M. GIBSON supported the motion ; and a divi-
sion was called, but stayed by the surrender of the
Government, Mr. GLADSTONE declining to encounter
a second vote on a question when the sense of the
house was manifestly against him.

The returns were 'then ordered.
TIIE MILITIA IN IRELAND.

The Earl of WICKLOW having innnired if it was the intention
of the Government to propose in the present session any mea-
sure for embodying the Irish militia?
The Earl of ABERDEEN said : In answer to my noble friend, 1
have to inform that a bill will be introduced this session in the
other house of Parliament, by which a power will ho taken to
modify the existing law respecting the militia in England, in
which, at present, I believe a power exists to extend the 80.000
men who have been raised to 120,000. It is intended to very
that, and extend to Ireland the power of raising and embodying
30,000 men find 10,000 men iu Scotland, but it is not intended to
embody the Mali militia this year.

IRISH PAUPERS.

In reply to a question from the Earl ut ponoughtuore,
The Earl of ABERDDEEN said the law whit respect to the re-
moval of Irish paupers was hi an unsatisfactory state. There
had been a good deal of correspondence upon the fpubJeet, and it
was possible that before dealing with it a committee would have
to be appointed.
A discussion took place on this subjeet, in the course of which
The Earl of ABERDEEN stated that it was intended to proceed
with the measure now before the oth3r house previously to em-
barking in this inquiry.