The Express.
London, England, 1853-04-15 00:00:00

THE EXPRESS, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 15, 1853.

11 know of nothing that can be done so calm-
rated to promote the interests of authors and literary men,
and to furnish the reward fir good intellect, as the repeal
of the duty oa paper. (Haar, hear.) Recollect, air, you
cannot get it by adding to the price of the sold publication.
If you want to command a large circulation, you must go
to the penny publication, like the " Penny Cyalopanlia."
You cannot say that, in eossequence of there being a duty
on paper, it shall be sold at Id. and a fraction, or
I}. There is no such course open to you. If you
increase the price to Ild. or 2d., as the Messrs. Cham-
bers attempted to do, then tho sale decreases, and
you do not get the circulation. You are limited to the penny ;
therefore you ought to remove those duties which prevent
the penny covering the cost of paper and the duty, so as to
leave a fair profit to the author and the publisher. (Hear,
hear.) But, having taxed this pipet, which is the field of
knowledge, the state is not satisfied. It says: " There are
two particular kinds of information which, if printed upon
paper, shall each, ander certain conditions, bear other taxes
duty of Is. 6.1. upon each announcement known by the
name of an advertisement, if it is printed on this paper ;
and another tax if a particular kind of knowledge called
news is printed upon this paper. (Hear, bear) It is
conceivable that, if parliament had in former times had no-
thing in view but to derive a revenue from paper, when
they had put a tax upon paper, they should immediately set
to work to impose other taxis to prevent people making use
of this paper a certain way, thus lessening the revenue
which they a rofesaed to have in view ? It is a barbarous
tax. (Cheers) Is there anything so essential to society as
that all should be a spede of communicating to each other
their mutual wants ? (Hear, hear.) Does it not lie at the
very root of all our progress—at the very root of all com-
mercial transactions ? (Cheers.) For every communication
that you prevent by this toll, is it not probable that you
prevent some commerc al transaction that might be benefi-
cial to those engaged in it, and also beneficial to the state ?
(Cheers.) But whet a monstrous thing it ia, that if, when
an Amazon steam-skip is lost, or when there is an Irish
famine, and when it is necessary by repeated advertisements
to public attention to those calamities, the exciseman
requires that there shall he la. 64. paid upon every one of
these annauncensents ; thus convertin; the advertisement
duty into a tax upon calamity, and causing the funds of
subscribers, who fancy that they are contributing to an
Irish famine, or the orphans and widows of men lost in
the Amason, to contrihute to your state necessities, and to
pay a porti in of their money into the Board of Inland Re.
venue ! (Hear.) It appears to me that this is a kind of
tax which we ought not to encourage in a commercial
country; for is it possible to conceive anything mere unwise
than to stand in the way of communications between men
that cause commercial transactions, and that operate fa-
vourably upon the customs and excise revenue. (Hear,
hear.) Talk of the inequality of the tax,—l know it has
keen frequently mentioned that a poor servant maid has to
pay as heavy a toll to the state for making it known that
she wants a place as a peer of parliament has to pay to the
state for making it known that he has an estate to dispose
of. (Hear, hear.) Everybody is aware of this gross ine-
quality ; but the strength of the argument, I contend, lies
against the tax altogether. (Hear, hear.) I say it is a tax
oaly worthy of a barbarous country. (Cheers.) It is a sort
of short-sighted attempt to get a little revenue at the ex-
pense of the most valuable interests of the country, and pro-
bably destroying, in other ways, a great deal more revenue
than it creates. (Hear, bear.) Can anything be more un-
just, also, than its application exclusively to the newspaper
press ? I know the act of parliament says that advertise-
ments shall be taxed when inserted in a book as
well as in a periodical. But the law is not en-
forced. Books insert a Ivertisements; and no duty
is in practice levied upon them. Look at the
tier and unfairness of this competition between the
book containing advertisements and the newspaper. Take
the catalogue of the Great Exhibition. In the shilling cata-
logue you will find no less than 53 pages of advertisements,
not one of which paid any advertisement duty. (Hear.
hear.) Can there be a more favourable mode of advertising
than in a catalogue to be cireulated amongst many thousanne
of people ? And, when the New Crystal Palace is opened,
I have no doubt that the catalogue of the various matters
therein contained will be accompanied perhaps by hundreds
of pages of advertisements, not one of the number paying
toll to the state; while the unfortunate, struggling pro-
prietor of a newspaper is not allowed to insert the slightest
announcement without being pounced upon by the Board of
Inland Revenue, and having this tax cleated from him.
(Hear, hear.) Why do not the board enforce the law ? Be•
cause they dare not. (Hear, hear.) Because they know
that, if they were to enforce the law as it is upon the sta-
tists bo it, there would be such strong remonstrances that
they would have to abandon the tax. For the sake, I should
say, of the independence of the newspaper, (or the sake of
those men who are struggling against great difficulties to
give valuable organs of intelligence to the country, relieve
them from this unequal contest. Long as this tax has
lasted, it is not too late to do them an act of justice;
thr.ugh many of them, I believe, are so far injured by the
unjust system to which they have been exposed, that pro-
bably it would be beyond the power of this house
to recover them from their position. (Hear, hear.)
But shall we, after, all, lose any ne * • and
if we ,10. what is it? 178,0001. per annum. We do not
generally show such delicacy in dealing with the public
money, and are not generally so timid at the sound of a
large sum that we should be fsightened, even if we did risk
revenue to the amount of 178,0001. (Hear, hear.) But
will not that be supplied ? Does not every advertisement
give rise to correspondence? (Hear, hear.) There are
in the United Kingdom in round numbers two millions of
advertisements is a year—perhaps somewhat more. In the
United States, with the same population, there are eleven
millions of advertisements. (Hear, hear.) There is no
advertisement duty there ; arid yet, under your free trade
system, you are called upon to compete with a country
which has that enormous advantage of communicating

freely, without let or hindrance, all its mutual wants. But
I ark, as there are eleven millions of advertisements in the
United States, and two millions here, is it not probable that
in t his eountry--similar in many respects to the people of the
United States u the people of this country are—that our
advertisements would very materially increase? (Hear,
hear.) If they do increase, does not the advertisement
give rise to letters of inquiry, to applications in consequence
of the announcement? (Hear, hear.) I have received a
letter to-day front Mr. Edward Baines, the proprietor of
the Leeds Sinewy, a highly respectable and highly influ-
elitist provincial journal. lie states that on en average eight
letters are received for each advertisement, but that in
some instances 200 letters have arrived for one advertisement.
Taking merely the avenue mentioned here—eight letters
for each advertisement—if the advertisements increase by
an amount of five millions the revenue will be replaced by
the postage charge upon letters. (Hear, hear.) The re-
venue will be upwardof 166,0001. for these additional
letters ; and thus, if we are to believe that what has hap-
pened in other cases will happen as to the increased number
of advertisements, we shall ant lose any revenue at all, but
we shall replace it to the full amount, with the great addi-
tional advantage of setting free this mode of communication
throughout the country. I will now address myself to the
last resolution—that in reference to the policy of restraining

the cheap periodical press from inserting news. I have a
justification for submitting this matter to the house. I was
chairman of a committee of this hone which inquired, in a
former parliament, into the working of the stamp duty on
newspapers; and that committee recommended in the re-
port that the attention of parliament should be drawn to
the a- tensile, of the stamp duty, to the state of the law, and
le the mischief of the policy of preventing cheap periodicals
rem containing news. It is rid that this is a question et
revenue. I contest altogether that view of the question.
hem the time when the press had influence in this country
...an go back to the earliest period—there has bees
legislation for the purpose of restraining it. You had
the censorship—you had the licensing system—both
K which were abolished in 1694. During that
period there was always • jealousy of what is called news.
(Hear, hear.) It was said that extreme political writings,
sad writings questioning the truths of religion, ought to be
prevented. Hut if we look into the proceedings of past
times, we shall find that there was something else which
they were always very much afraid of ; and that wee the
eircula.ion of news, and the narration to the country of the
current events of the day. Mr. Hallam says that the
ministers of that day were annoyed at the vivacity of the
press—(bur)—both in periodical and other writings, which
led to the stamp duty, intendedebiefly to diminish their onus
bee, and was nearly producing more pernicious restrictions,
such as renewing the licensing act, or making authors ac-
knowledge their names. They did not restore the licensing
act ; but, with the same intent, they adopted the stamp
duty, for the purpose of trying, as Mr. Hallam sap,
to lessen the number of papers. In 1712 a meow
came down from the crown, calling upon this house re re-
strain the press ; vsrious resolutions were proposed, and were
adjourned from time to time; and at last, as the histories
tells es, some member of the committee of ways and means
sug;ested the idea whether the object io view, namely, the
restraining of the press, might not he accomplished by a heavy
tax upon all newspapers and printed pamphlets. (Hear,
hear.) That is to be found in the journals of this house.
Such was the origin of the stamp. We trace it down to its
extension under one of my Lord Castlereagh's acts, knows
as " the Six Acts,"—the 60 Geo. 111., cap. 9. That
ant of George 111. was embvslied in the act of William,
which is now in operation. The new act reduced the stamp
duty ou papers from 4d. to 11. ; hut it did nothing more
all the old restrictions being left. On that occasion Lord
Lyndhurst, acting in co-operation with his party, said—
and • dietinguished member of that party saw in this
house will perhaps observo the words—' Reduce the
duty ! Why nit bring in • bill to repeal the
stamp duty on newsp ipers altogether ? " Lord Lans-
downe replied to that remarkable question, and said,
"under present circumstances I am not prepared to say
that the tax could with safety be removed to the unlimited
extent to which the noble and learned lord has expressed
himself favourable." Mind that the term "safety," as the
contest shows, was not applied in reference to the revenue,
hut in reference to the political policy of such a proc..eding.
Well, I &A, would it be safe now? (Cheers.) Are there now
any circumstances in existence which should preveut
the leaders of all parties uniting in carrying out
• literal and fair policy in this matter? (Hear,
hear.) I hope 1 do not appeal in vain to any
party ; and I declare on my c ntscience that I am not re•
garding this as a party question. What were the results of the
• toil upon the character of tie newspaper press ? Are
your papers deteriorated ? Mr. Walter, the proprietor of
the Times, and father of the present member fir
N ,ttinehatn, snips:wed the reductton, in a speech in
this house, but I du not think that the Timer
has sulf.di d by the risalry which it was prej eted
toe reduction would prey die. The result, in th.,t
• cert sitily shows the I liy of suppraing 11,11 t the
success or position of a newspaper can be dependent upon
taxes or revenue arrangements. (Hear, hear.) Well, for
that reason, I don't think existing iuterests should be
afraid of another reduction. The result of a reduction I
believe would be this: that clew newspapers would then go

i into fields where no newspapers go at present. (Hear,
'1
to ird se
I fear. bear.)
wouldTuhn keepptahpies ' st
point h this hichl public
mh confidence,a.most
have
t makealready
saontmdh the public
have
viocatt:c-itonnng:
ippon the peculiarities of the law relating to newspapers.
It is said by a great number of persons who oppose the
abolition of the stamp that an equivalent for the stamp is
the facility for transmitting the paper free through the
post If that is so, I will make a proposition that the ex-
! theisti el!g
bpapers
jib emul a: fiat
laic trhe epey
aater ed,l
yw itthhet hue
mset a
cmopp,y andth row.igtiht
the post; but that other papers be permitted to paldish
without the stamp, and therefore without the postal privi-
lege. (Hear, bear.) In that case the revenue would be
quite safe, whsle the public will get all they want—stamped
or unstamped papers. as they pie ise. (" Hear, hear," and
laughter.) Give the poor an option; give those who want
a cheap paper, and don't want a postal privilege, the
publications which they are craving tor. (Hear, bear.)
.You expect the laws to be obeyed ; let the people hive a
chance of knowing what the laws are. (Hear, hear.)
Working men won't read the Times, or the Herald, or the
Post; and why do you stand in the way of their having the
papers which are suited to them? (Hear, hear.) Sir
James Mackiutosh said of the reduced duty that it would
he a duty on mill puhlicatioas; and if you will examine
the act you will see that it is aimed at papers small in size
and low in price. See how easily they get over this
postal obstacle in the Ueiteil States; there a cer-
tain weight of any description of printed matter
goes through the post for a small stamp affixed
to that matter as to • letter. That is the right
principle ; let those who use the post pay for it. Do not
connect news, as news, with a stamp ; and if for no other
reason, because, as I will show you, such a system exposes
the revenue to extensive frauds, and is in all respects the
most clumsy system of getting at revenue wh,ch it is pos-
sible to conceive. Postal privileges, indeed ! NYhy, what
privileges do you give those penny publications ? We can
send the full-sized newspaper to the extent of 4 oz. by post
for the penny stamp; but the penny paper pays at a very
I much higher rate. We can send a morning paper
to Liverpool fir the penny, in the shape of a
' stamp; but it would cost us 4d. to send the Family llera:d
to Greenwich. (Hear, hear.) But let us see what that
involves, and how absurd such an arrangement turns out.
In the evidence given before the committee it was
shown that on one occasion 5,000 copies of •
' single publication, unstamped, was in the Post-
' office at one time; and then there was nothing
to be done with them but to throw them aside, for the per-
sons to whom they were addressed would not have paid the
leg d postage, and nobody could tell who had put them in
the post. An unstamped copy of Punch or the Rtlnnuruni
would go by pus', because there would be no time to exa-
mine it. It is, therefore, clear that your system is a very
clumsy one. If you must get revenue out of the
diffusion of knowledge, levy the revenue at the
post•office, and do not force us into this eter-
nil Migration of the question, " What is a newspaper ?"
D in't be afraid of the revenue; I believe your revenue
would remain as high es before from newspapers, if you
taxed them as printed matter, and taxed them only for
actual transmission through the post, at the same time en-
couraging all publications to reek the Post-ollice by charg-
ing low rates of postage. And there can be no Lubt whet-
ever, that such a chance would be of iucalculable advantage
to our labouring population. (Hear, hear.) Then, as to
the state of the law, I ask is it creditable to the legislature
to pass statutes which it cannot enforce ? (Hear, hear.)
You give your revenue officers a law with the perfect
knowledge that such a law cannot be carried out
in its integrity. Cmy out the letter of the statute and
there is not • publication you can conceive which would
not be liable to the stamp. (The right hon. gentlemen here
read the words of the act.) This inflicts a penalty of 201.
for each offence on every man who prints on unstamped
paper, within certain int,rvals, anything affecting church
and state. I ask the law officers of the crown and the law
officers under the late government whether they mean that
this is law which they would enforce ; and it they do not,
why such an act is not repealed ? The practice is to ignore
the strict law and not to enforce securities and recognisance',
lon any papers which do not contain news. The law was
directed ostensibly with a view to the prevention of libel-
' lous publications: but observe the effect. If I publish a
paper for the avowed purpose of libelling private character
—and the act includes private libels—or for the purpose of
questioning the truths of Christianity, or for the purpose of
bringing into discredit the sovereign of the realm—if I
addresses large number of people iu a small publication of
i that sort, I em allowed to do so, under the present
practice of the board, without entering into any
securities whatever; for securities would not be
asked unless I gave news, which I can easily
avoid, as the word is used. (Hear, hear.) The Musical
Times, and the Journal of the `ocitty of Arts, which give
news, as some people would consider it, but as the Board
of Inland Revenue does not consider it, are unstamped
publications : but in the case of the Journal of the Society
of Arts—Prince Albert being president of that society—
security has to be entered into to provide for possible blas-
phemous and seditious libels. (Hear, hear.) On the
other hand, there was a publication called Nana Sly,
brought out for the purpose, and far no other,
of libelling private characters; and in that ease, when a
clergyman at Bath, who had been libelled, was anxious to
bring an action, he found that no s 'curities for that publi-
cation had been entered into, and that there was no use,
neither redress nor damages to be g ,t, in proceeding against
men of straw. (Hear, hear.) Again, the Board of Inland
Revenue proceeded against one of our most eminent and
useful writers (Mr. Charles Dickens), for publishing with-
out a stamp a monthly periodical which contained- news.
Supposing the board had succeeded, what benefit would the
couutry have derived—what would the revenue have bene-
fited ? (Hear, hear.) If you had enforced the stamp, the
periodical would have been discontinued, its circulation
being dependent on its low price. (Hear, hear.) You per-
secute Mr. Dickens, it was said, in order to test the law, and
to put down the class of monthlies like the Household Nar-
rative. Pretty policy in days when we are talking of edu-
cating the people! (Cheers.) To prevent, by your stupid
law, Charles Dickens, with his mind and intellect, from
addressing the greatest possible number of his fellow-
countrymen, is, I say, a disgrace to the legislature.
Again reminding hon.lgentlemen that separate divisions will
be taken on each of these resolutions, I entreat them, if they
cannot go the whole way with me, at least to go with me
for a part of it. I ask them not to reject the whole three,
but to give to each that favourable consideration which their
importance entitles them to receive. (Cheers.)
A messenger here attended from the Lords, to request a
copy of the report and evidence in the case of the Cotheroe
election committee. The request was acceded to.
Mr. EWART seconded the motion. After the admirable
speech of his honourable friend—(sheen)—equally masterly
for its eloquence, and for the extreme clusencsa with which '
the subject was pursued into its farthest recesses, he felt
that he ought not to trespass on the attention of the house
for more than a few momenta. The two principal reasons'
why he should support the motion were that it was favour-
able
to the cause of knowledge, and that it was favourable
to the cause of order. (Hear, hear.) It was vain for them
to found schools or libraries, it was vain for them to take
other means of extending information among the people, if
they did not encourage the diffusion of the current literature
of the day. (Hear, hear.) These taxes were not taxes on
the accumulated stores of knowledge, but on what might
be termed the current coin of the literature of the day,
which ought to be allowed to circulate freely
among the masses. (" Hear, hear.") He was
anxious that the people should be allowed to edu-
cate themselves. It might be remembered that Gibbon, in
his own Life, observed that a man received two kinds of
education, one given him by others, the other acquired by
himself, and of the two the last was by far the most
valuable. (Hear, hear.) How could they better promote
self-education than 4 encouraging the free circulation of
local newspapers ? (Hear, hear.) The effect of the repeal
of the stamp duty and the advertisement duty would be to
create in England, what already existed in the
United States of America, those local papers which,
to use a phrase of Lord Bacon's " came boos* to
the business and bosoms of men." He knew some persons
imagined that the remission of these duties would give rise
to bud publications ; but they had unquestionable testi.
monyeo the effect that in Manchester and other large towns
good publications eventually triumphed over bad. So much
for the beeriest of these duties on the diffusion of know-
ledge. He had stated that another reason why he sup-
ported the motion was, that he believed it to be favourable
to the cause of order. If they looked to those European
countries which of late years had been least subject to
agitation, they would find them to be the countries in
which the press was most free. Austria, France, Prussia,
and other countries where the press was shackled,
had been shaken to their foundation ; whereas,
Sweden, Belgium, and England, had remained
firm and unshaken amid the shock of empires. Of
all countries the United States was one of the most free
from internal commotion, and he believed the cause of this
was the perfect liberty of political discussion. (Hew, hear.)
Ile hoped, therefore, that they would no longer sanction
the contemptible shackles which bound the press of this
country, but at once scatter them to the winds. It was a
most admirable distinction between ancient end modern
times that whereas in the former the people were appealed
to by their orators, is the latter they were appealed
to by the press; and he held that the leading
articles in newspapers were better guides than
speeches which addressed themselves only to impulse
and passion. (Hear, hear) The nation which consulted
a free press was far more secure than the nation which was
swayed by the appeals of craters. This being the great
distinction between ancient and modern times, he
maintained that the power of the press should be conceded
1 to the utmost extent, and that no impediment should be
retained to its free circulation. These shackles were ea
I excrescence and a deformity in our constitution. They
dated train only 140 years ago, being introduced in the
reign of Queen Anne, in consequence of the existence of a
war, and with an understanding that after the war had
terminated they should be repealed. lie rejoiced that
the cause had such an able advocate as his right hon.
friend, and he b ‘lieved that the government would soon be
I obliged to concede the repo ii of all these duties.
On the question being put that the advertisement duty
ought to be repealed,

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said—Sir, I
have lietened with very great interest both to the able and
coniprehen.ive speech of the right hon. gentleman who
moved these resolutions, and the intelligent and temperate
address of the lion. g. ntletnan who has just sat down. I
freely own th it in those speeches there was much that de-
serve. th attention of the house. They relate partly to
subjects of 1, hey, and partly to ',abject. of r,eouu,e
suit ,eta it wail be my dill, as far as I ant able, to disco-
tae front one another; and I shall ruileavour to show
the house, though I do not in the least degree desire to
guilty the d. seription which I have give', of the speech, s
just delivered, that it would not act wisely in adopting the
resolutions. Upon the question of policy, the taco to 1

hold of course gives me no special authority to speak ; bet
the comparatively limited questihn on which the right hon.
gentleman, the member for Manchester, has herowed
considerable intent' — nsmely, that which grew out of
the prosecution in the case of Bradbury and Evans, is one
to which I ought, perhaps, fu the first tristaisce, to advert.
Sir, with respect to that question, we ere asked to express as
opinion " That the law relative to taxes on newspapers,
and other regulations affecting public prints, is in an unsa.
tisfactory state, and demands the attention of parliament."
It is the intention of her Majesty's government to bring
in, and I trust that they will be able to introduce
within a very short period, a bill for the purpose of clear-
ing up the state of the law. (" No, ue."i %Vele sir, if
bon. members think thin the etc wing up of the state of the
law is not a desirable object in itself, I ern obliged to differ
from them. (Hear, hear.) I say, it is the intention of the
govereineut to bring in a hill our the purpose of clearing
up the state of the law with respect to newspapers, and fur
the purpose of preventiug any harsh or severe interpreta-
tion of that law by those who are called upon to admiuister
it, quite irrespective of the further question, which I fully
grant calls for serious consideration. It ap-
pears to me, however, that there is a clear iiistnic-
lion between these two objects. The question
of the repeal of the stamp duties is one involving • very
large sum of money; it is a material question of revenue;
the question which has ariseu with regard to the publica-
tions to be classed as newspapers is one with respect to
which individuals weuld have a fair right to COIIIO4III if
any material delay took place in calling the attention of
parliament to it. (Hear, hear, hear.) I must now
look mare closely at the questions which are involved
in the motion. The right honourable gentleman pro-
poses that by one resoludou we should tondo inn the adv.!,
tieement duty, that by • second we should condemn the
stamp duty, and that by a third we should condemn the
paper duty; and this is the part of the xueject upon which
it is my especial office to speak. Now, air, IL think the right
hon. gentleman himself would almost admit that it would
be a breach of duty on my part to encourage or advise
the house to pass these resolutions. I must re-
peat the warning which I have given the house
against condemning taxes that they aria not prepared in-
stantly to repeal. (Ilear, hear.) I least the huuse will
never lower the high character which it has meintained by
sliding into a practic -of raising expectations which it is net
prepared to fulfil. (Ile .r, hear.) lie who condemns Chan-
cellors of the Exchequer for not discriminat log between wee
end unwise modes tit raising revenue, does he d•serimina:e ?
(Hear) He has condemned the unwise modes of teasing
revenue—has he pointed out wise ones ?
Mr. lit. GIBSON wee understood to refer to hit sugges-
tion of a postage stamp on newspapers.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I beg
pardon, the right hon. gentleman did suggest that a stamp
duty might be levied on newspapers sent by post ; but if
million and a half of money is to he raised in that way,
em afraid the right hon. gentleman's friends will be iu a
worse position than the are at present. (Hear, hear.)
Now, sir, I do trust that the 'Lamle not prepared to fall into
the practice of condemning taxes until it is prepared either
to dispense with them or to provide a substitute for them.
(Hear, hear.) The right heu. gentleman eutered late some
calculations in relation to the advertisement duty, upon
which lam sorry to be compelled to dmhl.r front him. He
said you might assume that every additional advertisement
would cause eight letters to pass through the Post-office;
and calculating that there would be 5,000,000 extra adver-
tisements, he said that would create 4e,000,000 additional
letters, which would yield HANOI., so that, in fact, there
would be nu loss of revenue, lam sorry to differ from the
right hon. gentleman in his arithmetic. Unless lam much
decieved, however, out of every 31. received by the
Postoffice, 21. is absorbed in expenses. (Hear, hear.)
With respect to the paper duty, I fully admit that,
large as is the revenue derived from that source,
I should he delighted if it could he dispensed with. (Hear,
hear.) I think the right honorable gentleman was
a little too severe on the paper duty ; because
although it is • duty which there aro abundant
reasons to make us wish to get rid of, yet we must
recollect that it is nut one which presses mainly upon li:e-
rature, but one which falls most heavily upon the coarser
descriptions of paper. At the same time I vent that it is
a duty which it is desirable to repeal; and I shall be as
happy as the right hon. gentlemen himself can be when the
time arrives when we shall be able to find a substitute for
that duty or to dispense with it. Su also with regard
to the advertisement duty. I fully grant that at pre-
sent the charge imposed by the advertisement duty is a
very heavy and onerous one; but the right hon. gentle.
man will recollect that in matters of this kind we must be
content with what we can obtain. Let the right hon. gentle-
man cense:La: what mischievous consequences must result
from the practice of introducing into the House of Com-
mons a series of votes making assaults upon the taxes with-
out at the sometime taking • comprehensive view of the
relation between our revenue and expenditure. (Hear,
hear.) Is the house disposed to think that the hest
mode of managing the affairs of the country is lay succes-
sive votes proposed by individual members, and influenced
by all the chauces and accidents as to precedence which
affe.ct such motions, thus to fritter sway the revenue? If
the house be of that opinion I have no more to bey, but
that the best reduction they could propose would be the
reduction or rather the total abolition of the office which I
have now the honour to hold. (Laughter.) I see ne reason
why a gentleman should be paid a considerable salary and
decorated with a certain title for being steward of the public
revenue, and guardian of the public credit, and responsible
every year for the production of a balance sheet as to the
national receipt and expenditure, if the house be of opinion
that the best mode of arranging the revenue is to condemn
its separate items week by week by means of separate and
abstract votes. Since I have been in office, one sum
after another, the lowest being 120,0001., and the
highest rising to the dignity of two millions, has been pro-
posed as a fit subject for remission, until the whole reaches
the rather important aggregate of upwards of
seven millions. (Hear, hear.) As I said before,
this is a serious matter fm• the consideration
of the house. It is impossible for me to do mo.e on the pre-
sent occasion with regard to the fiscal question than I hays
already done. With regard to the question of policy, I
have stated in the most distinct terms dust the government
have no wish to retain, nor will they retain, any restraint
on the press for the sake of restraint ; that fur them it is a
purely fiscal question, and that the claims of the news-
papers for relief from taxation—if it can be shown, as it
possibly may be shown, that they pay more than the
service they receive— will receive a full and fair
consideration. What do 1 mean ? A just and fair
comparison wiU be made between their claims and those of
the other great interests of the country. (Hem, hear.) I
am sure the right hon. gentleman will not ask me to say
more, and that if he were in my T. ace he would not say
more himself. lam sure that if lit were finance minister,
he would not consent to adopt a pilicy of promise rather
than one of performance. (Hear, hear.) There is a time
once in every year in which the finance minister of this
country is brought to book. I say, hold him to that duty.
If his proposals be good, take them; if bad, reject
them: but do not anticipate him in the production
of his annual scheme of flounce. (He tr.) As to the details of
the question, the advertisement and stamp duties, I have
told the right hon. gentleman that apart from fiscal duties
I should be delighted to see them ff; but I hope, consider-
ing the number of financial and departmental questions
which now press upon me, be will not be disappointed if
I am not prepared to enter into his whole statement
in detail ; but I must frankly owa that I do not
clearly understand the system he means to propose with re-
ference to the newspaper stamp duty in lieu of the present.
I think he said, " Leave the established newspapers as they
are, but allow penny priata containing news to go free."
Mr. M. GIBSON wss understood to say that he wished
the option of stamping for circulation by post to be given.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Then I
understand that the right hon. gentleman would leave with
the printer the option of payment ?
Mr. M. GIBSON—What he had said was—let the esta-
blished papers have the stamp, as they considered they had
an equivalent in the transmission by post ; and then the
revenue would suffer no loss by allowing the publication of
local papers at a penny.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—But the
established papers are not a corporation under seal, and
therefore can give us no guarantee that they would be satis-
fied with such an arrangement. What I understand, then,
is that those may pay the stamp who choose, while those
who object to it shall be permitted to refuse. (A laugh.)
I understand him to say further that postage might
be substituted for stamps, and that may be •
subject for consideration; but, with respect to
the fiscal 'sunken, the press suffers only in common
with other important interests of the country, and solely
from considerations of revenue. That there may be neces-
sity for modification at some future peried I do not mean
to deny ; but Ido trust that the house will not persist in
this practice of condemning taxes until they have &seer-
, Mined whether the public service can do without their
proceeds. With regard to the second resolution, I object
again to the affirmation of au abstract principle, while I
agree with the right hon. gentlemag that we should not
restrain cheap periodicals from narrating current events
under any notion that they might not be made great engines
of public instruction. I agree further, that the taxes oa
newspapers fully !writ the consideration of parliament, but
at the same time, I hope the right hon. gentleman will
agree with me in thinking it very much better that those
who are entrusted with the management of public affairs,
should introduce their plans of fiscal and administrative re-
form, carefully prepared and fully digested, and should not
deal with promises which really' are of no value, and which,
as performance always lags behind promise, can only be
made instruments of popular delusion. Such_ pro-

misc., although well intended by those who Iluiake
them, ars a mischievous practice, highly injuri-
ous to the public interest, to the dignity and honour
of parliament, and teud to weaken the confidence of the
people in those who are entrusted with the charge of their
affairs. With these observations I beg to move the previous
question.
Mr. BRIGHT said that the speech of his right hon.
friend had not received anything like an answer from the
Chaucelloi of the Exchequer, and, indeed, from the motion
of that right hon. gentleman be (Mr. Bright) did not sup-
pose that he meant seriously to controvert the propo-
sitions which had been laid down by his (Mr.
Bright's) right honourab.e colleague. In fact the
speech in which the question had been introduced
was so comprehensive, so logical, anal so full of facts, which
although they seemed new must at once receive acceptance
from :how who heard them, that the conviction must come
hornet° entry one that nothing an nun shade fiscal arrange-
ments could po.sihly be so `2ll.iii as the imposts known as
the knowledge taxes. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of
the Exchequer had begun by admitting that the present
state of the law was unsatisfactory with regard 1, the stamp,
and that with regard to the case of Bradbury and Evans
government intended to introduce a spa Mal mea,ure
more chanty defining the law. The part of the house in

I

I

1

'lsiah be (Mr. Brieht) sat had been betrayed into an ex-
clamation of muasement at betting that the right hon. gra-
tlemen had g so further. Had the government got no
further in cansiderine the knowledge taxes than to propose
a fresh law solely fur the purpose of defining the power of
res.rictioa ? (Hear, hear.) Toward. the close of the right
bon gentlesnan's speech he bad almost coaxingly premed his
right hon. friend not to proceed with his motion, hinting
surnethM4 very like a hope that the government would
take the question into consideration, but, on the other
band, he prepaid a new bill denoting more clearly
toe restrictive power. Ile was sorry the right hon. gentle-
sin h id not iafornmed them the new Sitl was to sweep sway
the obnoxious law, but it appeared its only object was to
strengthen the hands of the Board of Inland Revenue.
(11ear, bear) The right hon. gentiem in had not given trio
uruAllest iota:nation that the penny stamp wee to be abo-
lobs st, but had attacked the arithmetiral calculations of his
right bon friend in a blundering manner. The right Lon.
gentleman had not denied the possibility of 40 millians
es • eonteque ace/ars millions of advertise aunts ; he had not
denied the prospect of a revenue of 166,000!., but
bad expressed • doubt that that sum would leave a profit to
the revense. The right hon. gentleman hod spoken of the
Isamuc of establishments, but had forgotten that when ca-
briolee establishments were already existence, every in-
crease is the .r hu-iness compatible with their means of dis-
charging a must he an increase in the clear profits of those
egublishormts. (Hear) He (Mr Bright) therefore can-'.
tended that his right hon. friend was fully justified in esti.
auto( that hilly two-thirds of the contemplated increase
11W/id br clear profit to the revenues of the Namolli:e.
Therefore the loss to the revenue would be quite insignifi-
cant, sad would be wholly obliterated if the Chancellor of
the Exchequer came to counter the vast facilities which
would be given to basiseu by the alteration' which his
right bon. frismil propueed. But then the right hon gentle-
min procleimed himself a minister of progress (Cheers )
Me might be so, but so rause every government be at the I
present mommt, and hon. members opposite had shown
thi melt,. as anxious for pregress as any one when they
found them. ivi e seated on treasury benches. (Hear, hear.)
Ile could nut admit with the right hon. gentleman, that the
fact of a portion of a tax having been taken off eighteen
par, ago, wool reason against further reenieeion now.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—I said it
was eo own
Mr Militia—The right hon. gentleman admits .4 that
it was no ream, but he had brought forward the tact to
show that a gnat steel had beea done, and that
there was no special reason fur considering this more
than say other question. Thu right hon. gentleman com-
plained of these motions, but he would ask the right hon.
gentleman if he hail ever heard of a tax twigs repealed
without the people having asked for it ? (Hear, hear.) He
should fee Meet th it the window tax was not repealed until
after successive motions. The right hon. gentleman's expe-
rience was much longer than his own, and he must remcm-
herthat with regard to the window tas, as unpopular and
bail a tax as ever was proposed, it underwent frequent '
discussions and divisions, and it was only when the
divisions beemie extremely close that the present President
of the Board of Control found it necessary to abolish 'the
to, sad, in doing so, used all the arguments which he had
himself endeavoured to controvert on previous motions.
(Laughter.) There were people even to this day who be-
lieved that the remission of these taxes would let loose • fl sod
of pestilent publications destructive of the public morals,
soil he hell in his hand a circular that referred to that
question. The opinion was very prevalent that thom were
way millions of cheap publications circulating of • must
pernicious character. He leered it could not be denied
that • great number of these publications were of • most
pernicious elierscter, but he should like to know what was
the best means of meeting them ? It was to pro Wee
for the working man, what he most surely pre-
fers, a more heal:lay description of healthy aliment.
But they denied them the one and allowed them the other
freely. They permitted these immoral and mischievous
penny publications, which excited the imagination, stimu-
lated the passions, and produced the most evil erects on
thou who read them, especially the younger class of readers,
while that class of literature which was calculated to coos-
bract those esil tendencies was restricted in its free movie
by the attune duty. Seeing that free &seaman was
the law of the constitution, and of the prevalent reli-
gion of the country, he could not think that any Chancellor
of the Eichequer would long insist on maintaining/ talon
which placed restrictions oa the meansof education. (Hear )
Mr. W. WILLIAMS remarked that the only argument
the Chancellor of the Exchequer had urged against the re-
moval of there duties was the los to the revenue • and the
right boa. gentleman calculated that loft at . whole
amount, but he s emed to forget that the loos from the re-
Elloiol/11 of taxation made during late years had only oven
onc.thied the amount taken off. And he (Mr. Williams)
ventured to say that, if the taxes in question were attained,
instead of the loss to the revenue tieing 1,400,000 J., it would
sot be move than mu-third. If the probate mad legacy
deity were flooded to landed property and bouts', the
Chaocellor of the Exchequer would obtain from that wares
something like 6,000,0001., and would then have ample
means to anions then and other taxes which interfered
with the mental or physical enjoyment of the people. In
conelatios, the hon. member mentioned the ease of a local
anstruped paper, which, desiring to putoish • report of •
parish meeting, obtained 300 stamps, but was told by the
StampoMee that if he published the paper with there port
be would be proceeded against for penalties —hd (Mr.
WilliaMs) wished to know whether that was the lad'?
Mr. B. SEYMOUR hoped the right boo. gentleman
(Mr. Wawa) would go to a division. The Chaneellot of
the Embalmer had failed altogether in his attempt to
answer the arguments of the right hon. gentlemar, though
the Chreellee of the Ezebequer s own arguments had been
eitistaakerily met by the hon gentleman the member for
Manchester (Mr. Bright). The question of the taxes on
twelve.* steed ea far higher ground than those of the
bop or the wine duties, for it affects I the education and
intellectual cravings of the great body of the poorer classes.
He UAW that the facility of posting newspapers 'free
through the Poet-office was an equivalent for the stamp
duty, wad urged the injustice of a system under
which the London newspapers were not allowed to
pass free through the past within the three mile effete,
while they were allowed to pass from one end of the king-
dom to the other, over and over ag tin, without charge.
Mr. £. PIIILLIMORE looked upon the question &safest-
* not only the nasals of the people, but the stability of
ear imitations.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO mid the question now before the
lean tas that the advertisement duty should be repealed.
He bad not heard one single argument adduced against the
patios assumed by his right bon. friend the member fur
Maaellemer, and he thought that the answer had been en-
tirely cestined to the indignant remontraneee of the-Chan-
oiler df the Exchequer that they otimild have dared to
brag forward a question affecting the enamors of But
amatry. (Hear, hear, hear.) The Attorney General
had not answered the quota* ma to him by
the he. member for Lambeth, and he supreme that he
did not boar the whole queers put to him. He -should
himself put a question to rim. The law, r it at present
steed, append to him to give a sort of roving edmenisaiess
to the [nand Revenue Board to go about picking out ler
Min publications which they might prosecute, and leaving
unprostested such publications SI met with their approval.
His right boo. friend bad alluded to the censorship that
expired abut sixty years ago, but his belief was, that Mr.
Tams; of the Inland Re office, was now the real
senses of the British press. He himself beard him
adore that is his opinion certain papers ought
▪ be parented, and that other papers ought mot
to M He (Mr. Timms) acknowledged that
to law all of them ought to be prosecuted ;'but
ill bed ha opinion as to the utility of some, and that others
eight Mee be tolerated. He did net know what ware the
',Wane of Mr. Timms, but certainly- it -was
withia bie power, if he were • radical, to prosecute an un-
damped oresnative newspaper ; and if he were a conser-
vative, be might, as he did in the borough be (Mr.'Rieardo)
bad the hearer to nut, pick out some radical paper I
llMPertias blm (Mr. Mo), and prosecute It. But Mr.
lama. imit ohm's attended with seater, and therefore
be bed abandred obegother the prosecution of these papers
la a regular ; but be assumed that the sellers of the
Parrs bad the law, and he summoned
them and be brought them up before • police
magistrate to be judged accordingly--ema the pub-
* he
tillb paper, but tbe sabotage* man
*he sold it. That, he said, was an utuatillisterf Mate of
the law; sad what be complained of was net only that the
law was eseatisfacwry, bat that it was unentbbeteUy ad-
siaistred by the I Revenue derolnesmg, uneatsfae-
tardy administered by the law eSuen of the moiro, and
easatiefactorily selministered so far se regarded tbe freedom
and libtay of the press; and he did say that at all events
they ought to have as explanation from the At*.rney-Gene-
til as to whether any steps were to be taken to put an end
in this state of things, and what was the meaning of the
✓osary the Chancellor of the Easheouer had so faintly
shadowed out in his speech. He trusted the Attorney-Cle-
land would not think it too much trouble to give an answer
b the question. It was one that affected • great many
Potpie, end people in a station of life that could not defend
themeless ; and it wee right that they should know when
Siff. offended the law.
ATTORNEY-OHNERAL acknowledged the right
lithe he., gentleman to put this question to him, but the
daintily of answering questions was, that they were often
at in se unintelligible form. The proposed alteration was
Musk' the law clear, to exempt such publications as the
afteellol4l Narrative, but on the other hand to take care
that those which were newspapers might not escape from
lbsdaties so long as parliament chose to impose them.
After a few words from Mr. WILKINSON, in reference to
the paper referred to by his colleague.
Lord J. RUSSELL se;d he thought the subject of this
motion might be met in • very small compass. His right
hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown
that members of the house had asked for a remission of
lazes to the amount of more than seven millions before he
scald have an opportunity of making his financial statement
to the house. It had been answered, that although the re-
-11104104 of seven millions had been asked for, yet the house
had not isnetioned any of those proposals. That wra quite
true, but what his right boa. friend asked woo, that the
house should pursue • similar course on the present oesasios,
and leave him on Monday next to state his views en the
Subtle revenue and expenditure., and what remissions should
he made. It seemed to him that that was so reasonable a
avast that the house ought to accede to the motion of the
previous question. On the other hand, he certainly could
ant wonder that his right hon. friend the member for Man-
Wester being strongly impressed with the injury done by
these taws to the country Mould bring the subject before
the house, and enforce those views in the very able manner
which he was capable of doing. At no time had be heard
boa state the ear more fully sad ably. (Hear, hest.)
The Loire last year had the tame questions under cor si.
i"sholl, and the three propositions were at that time
;diced before the House of Commons, and by. a consider-
able majority each of those propositions was rejected. They

seemed to him to be propositions which stood on very dif-
ferent ground.. lie did not think that the generic term of
" tales on knowledge " was a term that ought properly
by any latitude of colutrueti-in to be applied to them. With
ward to the tired tax (the advertisement duty) there was
certainly little to be said for the maintenance of such a
tax. It was no doubt a great interference with the busi-
ness of the country. It was • tax on persons who wished
toobtain situations or to dispose of property, and in era.
rious ways it woes tax on transactions. It might likewise
be said that it was not a tax of a very
large amount, that it was a tax interfering with tile
business of the country, and waseertainly • tax pieced en the
transactions that took place, because in the first place they
had • tat on paper, in the next place they had a ties on the
newspaper, and in the next place they bad a tax on the ad.
vertiwinente cooteined in the newspaper. With regard to
the second question, he owned he did not think it stood oa
the same &oboe. lion. gentlemen said it was intended as
• restraint upon the diffusion of information and know
ledge. Now on that ground, if it were intended as a me
straint he del not think it was consistent with the pelicyal
this country to impose such a restoring. (Hear, hear.) Mt
the duty were not wanted for revenue, they ought to let ins
formation be as free ly diffueed as p .sad ale, and let the people
themselves make up their opinions according to all the
lights they ceuld get. But he must own, while
he thought it was a duty fur revenue rather than
for restraint, he thought the argument, on the
other hand, was pushed • great deal too far, I
and the benefits to be expected from the abolition
of the tie had been very much exaggerated, because be
could not understand hew, considering that it they took eff
this tax of one penny, the abolition of that tax would
be favourable to everytning that was religion., to every-
thing that was moral, and to everythicg that was useful,
and yet at the seine time that they :About,' give no advan-
tage to what was irreligious and what was immoral. It ap-
peared to him that if one class email sell their commodities
cheaper so could the other, and it was unfortuneely the
case that there was a class in the community among whom
them public-seems to which the right bun. member for )1 111-
theater alluded as puteicutions that appealed to the imagina-
tion and excited the passions were mere circulated, and
more attreetive then • better class of publications. [Mr.
Bright—They exist now.] Yes, they exist now, but lie was
afraid that if trey took off the stamp de prould find that they
still existed, and that there wuull be persona who wished
to buy such publications. On the other hand, it was said
there would be a vast increase of useful publications. lie
confessed he did not see that there would be
this great advantage. He did nut thick that
ties supposition of Lord Brougham that papers
would be circulated by hawkers would be realised,
Besides, the reduction would, after all, be but small. The
duty had already heap reduced from 4d. to one penny ; and
that did not form a very considerable portion of the price at
a newspaper, either in the niltrepolis ur in the large townie
The price of tile London newspaper was 5.1., of which the
stamp only formed one fifth ; and that price was occasioned
by the great expense to which the proprietors went to pro-
cure the latest and most authentic intelligence. With re-
gard to the tax on payer, the lion. member for Manchester
had said that he was not sure, if be were allowed
the choice of abolishing either it or the tax on soap, which
pro seed about the same amount, which he eheuld select
for repeal. Really, after that avowal, he did not see how
the bon. gentleman could vote for the third resolution.
(Mar, bear.) It seemed impossible that bon. members
could vote in condemnation of a tax when they had not
made up their minds whether it should he abolished.
(Hear, hear.) Ile (the noble lied) you'd put it, then, to
the house whether, contact.. ring that his right hon. frond
the Chancellor of tr e Exchequer was to make his statement
on Monday. it was fair towards him to enter into resole-
lotions dealing with a considerable part of the taxation of
the e .untry within five days of the budget. (Hi ar, bear.)
Ile did ask the house, on the part of the government, ant
on the part of a person who held the office of Chancellor of
the Exchequer fur the first time, who had occupied that
position only for a few months, and who was to make his
first financial statement at the beginning of next week, not
to consent to the motion of the right hen. gentleman the
member for Manchester. (Cheers.)
Mr. DISRAELI could quite sympathise with the feel-
ings that had been expressed by her Majesty's government
upon a motion of this kind, having himself had to consider
&similar proposition with the name respoiedbility. The late
government bail had to consider the three taxes to which
the right hon. gentleman, in a speech of singular ability—
(cheer.)—had that evening directed attention, and they h id
had to do so previous to the promulgation of the budget.
He had consulted his colleagues, and particularly Lord
Derby, upon the subject, and it bad been his duty to inti-
mate to the house the decision to which they had come. It
we, certainly their opinion that the paper duty was obi. c-
tionable in iteelr • but they had to consider it only is the
present state of finance as • question of excise, which it ass
not prudent to remit. Nu other consideration had at as
nfiuenced their decision; and that was the conclusion
which he had had the honour to convey to the house; bon
he said at the MUe time, with regard to the other two taxes,
that they stood upon a very different footing. (Hear, bear.)
They were also of opinion that there was a great difference
als between the advertisement duty, and, taking every
thing In consideration, the stamp on newspapers. He told
the house that they acknowledged that the objection, espe-
Mlly against the advertisement duty, was of a very grave
character ; but he asked fur a postponement of
the decision of the government. Fortunate was the
Chancellor of the Exchequer who could induce a powerful
party to consent to the postponement of a government de-
claration ; and he (Mr. Disraeli) must frankly confess, that
for his own part he looked upon the acquiescence of the
house as a very great indulgence. But they must draw the
line somewhere, and they must nut be led to assert to the
principle that no person was to propose the remission of
taxation except the Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Cheers.)
That would be a very dangerous doctrine, and one that he
trusted all sides would be very unwilling to adhere to.
(Hear, be ir.) Acting upon the opinions of the late go-
Tenement and of Lord Derby, he was their organ of eommu
nit:stem with the house. They had considered the question,
and especially with regard to the advertisement duty ; and
it was the opinion of his colleagues that no time should he
lost in proposing the repeal of that duty to the House ut
Commons. (Heir) At • subsequent period circumstances
over which they had no control, increased the estimates.
It wee necessary to ask for • supplemi Deal estimate, and
that rendered it necessary to review their decision. (Lord
J. Russell—" Hear, hear.") If the noble lord supposed
that he was making a declaration in that hoese which
was not perfectly warranted, he could only say that he
should net have mentioned anything which had been stated
in council or in private conversation ; but it should he re-
membered that • deputation waited upon Lord Derby, and
what he said had bees publicly expressed by Lord Derby.
(Hear) He thought that he had shown that there was •
sincere determination on the part of the government to
repeal the advertisement duty; but it was the °lesion
of Lord Derby, that as they intended to consider the
whole question of the taxation of the country after a certain
plan of their own, it was, on the whole, better, alter the
accidental circumstance-to which he had alluded had oc-
curred, that the subject of the duty on advertisementsshould
be postporsed until they bad an opportunity of
considering according to the plan they had devised
other duties of an analogous diameter. He new came to
the puede& of what was the ability of the present go-
vernment to deal with the tax. The house would recollect
that the duty was little more than 170,0001., certainly less
than 180,0001. They knew from the published menus ac-
counts which had bees recently placed upon the table of the
house, that the amount of the attritive at command was
vary considerable—much more than that which he (Mr.
Disraeli) had prudently estimated, and he hoped that it
would not be considered a very flagrant indiscretion that he
had estimated the amount of the revenue at lees than it
sppeared to be. (Hear, hear.) He thought, therefore,
that they would be justified in dealing with the first moie-
ties of the right hon. gentleman ; but his opinion wee that
they were not justified in dealing with the three resolutions.
(Hear, bear.) He had totally omitted from eoasideratioa
all those political and moral considerations which had been
brought before the house ; but looking on the subject
merely from • financial point of view, he thought they
might safely deal with the first. In the first place he must
express his opinion that these] three duties were to be con-
Metered as fiscal duties, and in no other light; but they
ought to deal with them with considerable moderation
and discretion when they dealt with an amount which
could not be less than 1,400,0001. In the present instance
he prop sod only to consider the first resolution, which in-
volved • sum of leas than 180,0001. (Hear, hear.) Now,
what was the practical argument which was pat forward by
the noble lord the leader of the government on this sub
Jett ? Why, if any inference could be completely drawn
from it, it was that no proposition for the remission of taxa-
tion should be made before the budget. What chance a
proposition of such a kind would have after the budget he
would leave the house to decide. (Hear, hear.) If they
sanctioned the position taken by the noble lord, the
povernment would possess the monopoly of propos-
ing a remimion of taxation. But had such remis-
sions been usually proposed first by the minister,
or had they not been proposed by independent members on
both sides. end repeated until they were carried by the
forte of public opinion and the influence of public feeling ?
Look at the motions which were made after the peace.
Look at the motion for the repeal of the tax on leather ; that
was first made, not by the minister, but by the country
gentlemen, and it was only by repeated and sustaiaed argu-
ment that it was carried. (Hear.) He might apply the
same remark to some important modern reenissions—modem
which had been made in the times in which they lived, and
in houses in which they had sat; motions which had been
at first rejected by the minister, and after wards brought in
by him, after • conversion of a singular kind. (Cheers.)
The doctrine laid down that night was a most deem roan
one, and one that they must repudiate if they had any re
geed for the character of the house, or wished it to remain
anything more than an assembly fur registering the decrees
of the government. (Hear.) He recommended them to deal
with this question with great moderation and temper. Ile
did not recommend sny extravagant vote—he for one would •
sanction nothing of the kind. He was prepared to vote for
the repeal of the advertisement duty, because he was pre-
pared to do so when he was in a more responsible sites-
Hon ; and because he thought such a course would be most
prudent and politic, most beneficial to the country, and
most likely to advance them opinions which he prolessed.
(Hear, hear.) lie had an opinion that the press could not
be too free. It was considered that the press, generally,
was not favourable to the party to which he belonged.
Is wee not impossible that the fact might be so. It was
more than probable that a material and utilitarian
spirit, which appealed only to reason, might be
opposed to the principles he pr famed. '1 hose principles
,appealed not only to the reason but to the feelings;
anti therefore he believed that the more widely those prin.
ciples were extended the more influential would they be-
co me (Hear, hear.) But ho did not wish to enter upon
that general ihetne. Looking at the first resolution, and

seeing that he bad recommended the policy which he be-
, tiered to be beneficial, and which both in opposition and in
a more responsible situation he had advocated and upheld,
i he should recommend the house to support the right hon.
gentleman in his first resolution to-night for the repeal if
the duty upon advertisements. (Cheers.)
i Mr. S. HERBERT wou d not detain the house long, as
it was no doubt milieus to divide; but he hoped that it
would not divide under the impression and statement
which bad just been made by the right hon. gentleman who
had just sat down. (Hear, hear ) The right hon. gentleman
had ref. mei in a tons of some indignation to the depute-
. tion which had waited upon Lord Derby and himself, and
when they had expressed themselves in favour of repealing
the advertisement dusty. Nobody had denied this, but eb-
stract opinions were sometimes little he, dad its great
'Maeda' necessities. The right hon. gentleman, with his
abstract opinion, did not think it necessary when he pro-
pose.' his budget, to 'sprees any very strong opinion in fa-
sour of bringing in a measure (or its repeal. (Cheers.) I
That was the Midget of 18.53-4; but was that all which
took place ? No ; that budget was one that dived some
distance into futurity; but though he hail for the year'
IS5i 5 three or four millions at ha disposal, no margin was
left for the repeal. (Renewed cheer.) Ile (Mr. S. Her-
bert) did not wish to anticipate the statement of his right
hon. friend, but be hoped no oae would he so sanguine as
to think that they would have so large a surplus as that
*lnch the right hun. gentlem ma opposite had supposed. It
was the height of ingenuity—(laughter) to suppose that
betimes when he was in otfice and had a looser surplus
than was now to be dealt with, he hail
made no proposition for the repeal of the duty
to come forward and ask the government to repeal a large
amount of taxes in the manner the right hon. gentleman
had done. (hear, hear.) lie (Mr. S. Herter!) had only
made these utoiervations because lie w.ll anxious that the
house should not divide under the impression prioluced by
the false statement which had been m ode as to the financial
prospects of the country. The house had heard the expla-
nation of his right hon. friend, and he trusted that they
would have sufficient confidence in him and in the state-
ment he had ma ie to give him fair play, and allow bins
to bring en his Widget on 'Monday night unembarrassed by
a previous vote upon this subject. (Cheers.)
Mr. J. BALL (amid some confusion) mod the question
had originally been one between his right hon. friend and
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and lie intended to hare
voted with the former; but after the speech of the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) he would never consent to
'unto his right hi n. friend a bridge over which lie (Mr.
Disraeli) might return to power. (Cheers and contusion.)
He could not regard the votes of Mr. Disraeli and his friends
as honestly given, and he should therefore v ate against the
motion. (Ceeere.)
Mr. COBDEN said the hon. gentleman who sat before
him had very suddenly changed his opinion. lie would
now vote against the proposal which he was before ready to
support, and the reason appeared to be that he thought
there was now some chance of its being carried. (Loud
cheers) If the hon. gentleman was always to act upon this
principle, then he would only give his support to the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. M. Gibson) on the condition that he
would first give him a guarantee that he should be in a
minority. (Laughter.) His right hon. friend in wishing:
to see the taxes on knowledge repealial was in ear-
scat; and the question was, whether he was not to'.
accept the assistance which had been offered them'
by the right hon. gentleman opposite. (Hear, hear.)
Something had been said a ith regard to gentlemen imp.-
site being willing to do now what they were not willing to
do when they were in office. Ile was afraid that might be
said of all adminicrations. Uniiappily, it was too true that
when g, ntlemen on that (the ministerial) side of the house
crossed over to the left of the Speaker's chair, they became
more prolific in promises and professions than when they
were on that silo, arid the rule applied equally to the
gentlemen now opposite. But if anything was to be done
for the country by the carrying a substantive and practical
measure, he had learned since he hail been is the house,
outing the last 13 years, that there was only one way for
a person who wished to obtain that object, and that wag, to
avail himself of the assistance of any party. (Ilear, hear.)
It was so late that he knew he should not he listened vs if
he went into the main question; but he wished to uh•
serve ou the remarks made by the noble lord and several
other speakers with regard to the subject of the penny stamp
which he (Mr. Cobden) did not think was rightly under-
stood. The question was treated as if the redaction of the
penny stamp on newspapers would cause a vast increase of
penny publications. Now, the fact was, that at present the
number of penny publications published monthly and
weekly exceeded all the oth, id put together. What wi.s the
character of these publication. ? He did not entertain the
sins. opinion of them as some persons seemed to do. His
right hon. friend hail read some evidence to show that the
character of those publications was very had. Now, there
was evidence produced before the committee on taxes on
knowledge which went the other way. Peony publications
did not contain news, but were wholly imaginative in their
character, because they were shut out from giving accounts
el 'Do current affairs of the day, as he wished that they
should he able to do. He would real a portion of the evi-
dence of Mr. Heywood, of Manchester, one of the largest
sellers of penny publications, which would show the sort of
literature in which a certain :lasso! the people indulged. Mr.
Heywood gave a bet of the papers he sold, and he said :
" I sell 100 of the Black Monk,' 100 of the • Blighted
Heart,' 100 of the ' Bridal Ring,' and 550 Claude
Duval,' a great many boys read that, and grown up people
as well as boys buy it ; 100 of ' Ceptrin Hawk,' 400 of
Gentleman Jack,' 100 of Grace Rivers,' 50 of the
• lianginan's Daughter,' 250 of • Kathleen' (which is an
Irish story), 100 of ' Love and Mystery,' 100 of ' Mabel,'
250 of Mazepps, 3-50 of ' Paul Clifford,' 250 of ' Richard
Parker.' Lloyd hes made free with many of the
popular names of works that are from time to
time being issued by the novelists of the day,
3.50 of ' 1 lira Fingered Jack,' and 250 of ' Tom King ' "
Those were all novels, and gold at one penny a number.
That was the kind of literature you Were forcing on the
people, because those publications were not allowed to de-
tail matters of fact and the current events of the day. What
was the opinion of Mr. Heywood with regard to allowing
news to he inserted in these publications? lie was speak-
ing of the " Family Herald." which published 200,000
numbers weekly ; and he spoke of it in the highest terms,
saying that the tone of its morality was quite unex-
ceptionable, that he took it home, sod that it was read
by every member of his family. He was then asked :
Are you of opinion that a cheap newspaper—for instance,
one of those publications containing, in addition to its other
malls r, the current events of the day—would have an ex
teosive sale ? Yes ; I think, for instance, that if the
-editor of the Family Ilwaldwere to put in two or three
pages of news, along with the matter which
he gives weekly to his readers, that the sale
would be doubled or trebled very shortly. The
rale of that publication being 200,000 already, but as
general topics were excluded from it, it was obliged to have
recourse to tales and matter of that sort. He (Sir. Cobden)
had said that those publications were not so bad as they
were repainted, and he believed that there was nothing
offensive to decency or morality in those tides with the
strengenames which he had mentioned. They certainly
dealt in the terrible and wonderful, and were written in a
calculated to grittily the imaginative taste of the
young, but there was no tendency to obscenity or immo-
rality contained in them. Mr. Heywood's evidence was
conclusive on that subject, for he said again and again that
if they were of that nature they could not continue to
live. He was asked—Has your experience shown that the
bad publications put down the good, or that the good publi-
cations pet down the bad ? I think that the good publica-
tions put down the bad. The bad publications are at•
tempted, and they are carried on for a while under various
methods; and, aster getting deeply into debt,
they are obliged at last to go out, and per-
haps lowa up the publisher at the same time.
That was the evidearm of a perms who dealt very largely in
that class of publications; he was a member of the Man-
chester Town Council, and a very respectable man. He
(Mr. Cobden) knew that the conservative party dreaded
the establishment of cheap papers. Did they not think that,
as they must now go along with the people for weal or for
woe, and take the tone of their politics from them, would it
not be better to let them have better aliment than the
" Hangman's Daughter " Had they not better have news
and information on the topics of the day than tales relating
to times long gone by ? Instead of romantics of the time of
Louis XIV. would it net be better to let them know that
Prince Albert had been laying the foundation stone of a new
model cottage; and all the leading news of the day, instead
of the supposed occurrences of a century ago. They were
told that the people were low and rude in their manners,
and mach bad been lately said of the ruffianism of cabmen,
who congregated at the corners of streets and were insolent
to passengers and insulting to ladies. Would it not be better
to let them have their cheap papers? If any gentleman had
been, as he (Mr. Cobden) had been, in New York, he must
have seen among the first sights that met his eye the cab-
men (and they were all either Irishmen or black'', for no
American citizen would condescend to be a cabman), each
with his small paper in his band, and the same thing was to
be seen among the porton waiting to be hired. Would not
it be better to have something of the same kind here,
than to have the cabmen congregating at the corners
of the streets, and offending the passers by with
their ribaldry. The committee on taxes on'
knowledge examined an American gentlem m-•-one
of the commissioners for the Exhibition, who said that

in New York daily papers were delivered at the
houses of mechanics, such as shipbuilders, cooper., or far-
m. re, as regularly as at the houses of merchants and bankers
here. It must be a high condition of intellect among me.
clunk., that required this supply of papers, and they must,
alter reading them, go forth to th.ir labour with a great in-
cream of intelligence; and, putting the matter very low, he
(Mr. Cobden) said that we in this country could not afford
to allow the people to be less intelligent than that of Ame-
rica. See how great would be the advantage that would be
derived from making this reduction at a time when every- •
thing isquiet. What was the effect of the taking the fetters
off the press in France during the first and the last revolu-
tions ? The tone of the press at once resole, d into the ex-
treme of revolutionary writing. but if you were to remove
the obstructions on the press now, when the people were
' happy and contented, you would we that they would
de-cuss great questions of politics as temperately as the
higher classes. You would perhaps see things in those
cheap papers with which many of yon would disagree,
and perhaps he (Mr. Cobden) might see some of his strict
political notions disapproved ; he might p. rhapa see his
motions on the peace question rival very hardly with by the
combativeness of his countrymen ; but he would have no
, objection to allow that discussion, and if he found that his
principles would not bear discussion, he would abandon
them. Then, again, as regarded emigration, you iireireitted
I the people from knowing a groat deal about what they
were to do when they went abroad. Now, is America, in
! New York there were papers from which every man
could get all the information he required for one
penny. Then, again, this country, as compared