The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-25 00:00:00

%~'c~~~

r PRICE SD.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

1100-SE OF LORDS—{YESTERDAY.)
NEWSPAPER. STAMP DITTIES BILL.
-Viscount CANNING moved the second reading of Mils
bill. He said, that although the subject to which this bill
related had of late years been frequently discussed in the
other house, it was a long time sines it had been brought
before their lordships, owing, perhaps,
chiefly to the cir-
cumstancethat it was connected with the public revenue ;
but the state of the law was now such that it was not only
desirable, but absolutely necessary that some change
should take place. The early history of the stamp on
newspapers might be very shortly told. The first mention
of a stamp duty was found in the reign of Queen
Anne, at
the time when newspapers, having ceased to be mere chro-
niclers of events, assumed the character of commentators
and critics on what was passing around, and also that of
partisans
of the various factions in the state. The freedom
with which they exercised these functions seemed to have
been ill taken, not only by the ministers of the day,
but also by Parliament. On one occasion a mes.
swe came down from the Crown to Parliament, call-
ing its attention to what was described as a nnikance, and
asking for an adequate remedy; and the result was the
passing of e law imposing a stamp duty. A stamp duty of
a halfpenny was the remedy which suggested itself to the
Legislature. No change took place in the duty until the
year 1776. In that year, under the administration of Lord
North, the duty was raised 50 per cent. In introducing the
measure to the house, Lord North was reported to have
(
sai id that " it was a matter of dispute whether newspapers
sl more harm than good; he pronounced no judgment on
that question ; but one thing was certain that they largely
disseminated calumnies ; that they abused the persons and
These
misrepresented the measures of Ministers ; that they were
bought and read with great avidity, but that it was quite
clear that the cause of this avidity was not a mere desire
for knowledge.
were
administration the
place under the
North to recommend the House of Commons to increase
the duty. OR two occasions a further increase took
reoafsomnsr.whp.iictht.led
That Lord
Minister took _ pretty
of the
matter as Lord North ;
declaringmtich the same view
of
_ora•
mons that in his opinion nto the House _ en .
dered an article of luxury,
azspapers could only be r aj-
making people pay dearly foe_that he felt no hesitation itt
took place in 1815, when the)iut them. The last increase
there was this indication of tht Wta. raised to 4d. - and
'Vint ill *bids
crease was made, that shortly rafter,
administration, by one of the acts Lord,ofendinder the same
commonly called the Acts," the . Castlereagh,
necessity of giving
securities was imposed on the proprietors of -
He had taken the liberty, of cal)ing their to
of tion to these features in the:coarly history of the satae p.
duty, because he apprehended that any objection whichm
might be made to the measure would be based, partly at
least, on the fact that the Government were asking their
lordships to consent to an abandonment of revenue. It
was impossible to deny this fact ; but he denied that the
question ought to be considered entirely or even mainly
as one of revenue. He thought he had shown that
hitherto it had not been so considered ; and he contended
that if any good cause could be shown for making
this change their lordships ought not to be deterred from
making it because the question of revenue was to a certain
extent involved in the measure. If the question of the news-
paper stamp were not dealt with chiefly as one of revenue
la the early stages, by which the stamp advanced from a
halfpenny to fourpence----the maximum which it had at-
tained--still less had it been dealt with in that light at a
subsequent period. The next change was made in 1836,
when the noble lord near him (Lord Monteagle) was Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer in Lord Melbourne's Government,
and he believed he did not misrepresent the noble lord's
motives or arguments on that occasion when he said that
the penny, which was then substituted for fourpence, was
retained avowedly not as a source of revenue, but as an
equivalent for the postal service performed for newspaper
proprietors by the state. As long as the duty was 4d. it
was defended, not as a source of revenue, but as a measure
of literary police ; but since the period to which he had just
referred it had been defended merely as a postal charge.
The imposition of the penny duty had of late years involved
great anomalies and inconveniences, arising partly from
the unexpected and various growth of newspaper publica-
tions since the time when the duty was first imposed, and
partly from the complicated and very imperfect definition
of a newspaper. In the first act that was-passed, the act
of 1712, the definition given of a newspaper was, "A paper
containinc, public news, intelligence or occurrences in Great
Britain, to be dispersed and made public." This definition
pervaded all the acts from that of Queen Anne to that of
1836. But it was not the only one. In 1819, at the time
when the act of Lord Castlereagh to which he had already
referred was passed, the definition was enlarged, and was
made to include not only publications containing news,
intelligence, or occurrences, but also publications con-
taining " comments or observations thereupon, or upon
any matter in church or state." At the same time the
operation of the act was limited to publications of that
description which were printed at intervals of less than
twenty-six days, and there was a limitation of size.
Five or six years later, the definition was made to
include newspapers consisting wholly or chiefly of adver-
tisements. Thus their lordships perceived there were three
definitions, and the result was that under the present system
it had been found almost impossible to comply with all the
requirements of the law.
Lord MONTEAGLE said that having had to deal with
the subject which the noble lord had brought under the
consideration of the house, he wished to state the objec-
tions he entertained to the present measure. His first and
strongest objection to the measure was a financial one. The
sacrifice of revenue which the noble lord asked the house
to assent to was unnecessary, uncalled for, impolitic, in
some respects unjust, and, above all things, inopportune.
(Hear.) He did not ask for the continuance of the tax from
any apprehension that its repeal would produce political
or moral mischief to the country. So far from any of the
evil consequences which some persons apprehended from
cheapening the press being realiseq, it was a fact that, from
the year 1835, when the stamp was reduced from 4.1. to Id.,
up to the present time, thOre was a progressive improve.
ment in the tone and temper of periodical publication..
But ho thought their lordships ought to hesitate before
assenting to this measure, because they were not in a pbsi-
tion to sacrifice revenue. It was not when they were en-
ga4cd in an expensive war, and were obliged to go into
the market as borrowers, that they shoald he called on to
give up a portion of the permanent revenue of the country.
The bill was then read a second time.
ADJOURNMENT FOR THE HOLIDAYS.
Earl GR ANVILLE gave notice that to-morrow he
should move that the house at its rising adjourn till Mon-
day we-k.
The other bills upon the table were forwarded a stage,
and their lordships adjourned at half-past seven.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY.
FOREIGN POLICY.—THE CONFERENCES.
Mr. DISRA.ELI rose to move the resolution he had
placed on the paper, and spoke as follows :—Sir, I rise for
the purpose of stating to the house the reasons which have
induced me to trouble it with the resolution which is now
in your band, and the objects I have in view in moving
Ithat resolution. I have fur some time been watching, as I
suppose all have watched, with intent and deep anxiety,
the conduct of the Government of this country in respect
to the great question of peace or war, and especially and
in the most significant manner the conduct of that Govern.
ment during the prosOcution of the conferences at Vienna,
and I have imbibed an opinion with respect to the inten-
tions of Government which has filled me with great regret
and distrust as to the consequences of their conduct.
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I have thought that there
was, ou the part of the Government, language so ambi-
guous, and language so uncertain, that I have been
led to reflect on what must be the cause of circum-
stances which, undoubtedly, whether erroneously or
the reverse, have filled the public mind with very great
disgust and discontent—(hear, hear)—and which certainly
demanded the attentive consideration of all men, who felt
that they had incurred responsibility by accepting a seat
in this house. (Hoar, hear.) It was impossible for me,
althouthis opinion, to ask that the senti-
mentsgohfetnhteerhtng
house should be declared on these circum-
stances so long as negotiations were taking place. Every-
body knows, that if I had attempted to do so, the obvious
avower to me would be, that her Majesty's Government
were engaged at the moment in negotiations and confi-
dential communications with the repreeentati rex of foreign
powers, and that it would be injurious to the interests of
the country if Parliament were to interfere with*
their
labours such
e
an
house objection
; and who
d can
noti m ag haveimagine
bibere ea held validmoment th
by these
l (Hear.) But at last the protocols
of
negotiations were produoed, after rome in9tur7; ,and,
_,_afete,..r
an unusual lapse of time, they were laid on Vieni7l.l:
of the house, and I imagined that the Prime
opportunity
con-
duct, would of course have taken the earliest
the labours of
•
to have asked the opinion of Parliament on o
also have
would
following the precedents that should have guided his
the representative of his Government, and
taken the opportunity of clearly
had intended to do
of Commons what the Government
ofpeace or war—of
himself in embarrassing as.
with respect to this
course, without committing
explicitly telling the
tails—of manfully, precisely,
and ex'- t meant
has the Government Parliament and the country
w e subject in future. (Hear.)
laying before the House
the Prime Minister to take that
I more than once solicittt
to the last I hoped the Prime
to do with reference
course ; and I confess that
that he should be performing his duty
sion, and have felt t
his sovereign and the country by doing
more faithfully to
that the Prime Minister must have known
so. I had hoped
mind was in that state which made it ne-
cessary would have again thought over his first conclu-
sion,
to lead and enlighten public
that the public:,
'acts of surpassing magnitude, and that the
I have been the to ask, in the •
noble lord would
°ouste-
d customary manner, the opinion of Parliament
tutional an
on the course and character of those negotiations, and the
matey which he would pledge us to pursue. (Hear, hear.)
Well, sir, I was disappointed, and I think I may vent
opinioncessary foonr
atnhb j d
to say that the country was disappointed also. (Loud cries
of "Bear, hear.") I think may venture to say that it
would have been satisfactory in the present perplexed and
sullen disposition of the nation, if, at the on of the
negotiations which had been carried on—on our part
with unusual pomp and ostentation and had, therefore,
raised a remarkable amount of interest, if the First Minis-
ter had come forward and taken the opportunity of fairly
putting the views of the Administration before Parliament,
and had added such an expression of opinion as would
have sustained the courage and the spirit of the people.
(Cheers.) But, nothing of the kind was done ; but still I
frankly confess, I hesitated as to whether I should take the
step I wished to take, and shrank from what I felt was
my duty, froth—I admit a cowardlffear, a fear wheel hoT_
admit was too influential, that if a man in the exercise
to
al
his duty in this house took a step Which might l
opento the accu-
tegrtheaes question
m
censure of the Government, he world
accu-
sation of an unworthy motive. undtebbreeethnecoindfleucelinneAl
declined—l am ashamed to say, more
to do that which, holding the
indul-
gence of my friends, I felt wouldegentleman,
the member for
poßtiohnalved do
beenby the
m yduty.
(Hear, hear.) Bat a right her n
an occasion which could not
Queen, thought that this
Ditajesty on the subject. The right
a great city, and a membeasno.fgthe Privy Council of the
Manchester,her Majesty
instead of the First Minister
hon. member for
sed
an address to her Majesty on the
bfoerpannesaldurnesnsottoiced, and placed upon the table a motion
or war. I hope that if the noble
of the Crown, Pro
up his courage to propose an ed.
great
to his royal mistress it !mind not ILIA'S Igen cos
dress
redatooquiduesthirve-osfopPriwacee.d