The Sun.
London, England, 1855-04-24 00:00:00

THE SUN*, LON DON, TUESDAY EVENING, APRIL 24, 1855.

quite agreed that the accounts should be so made up as to
show the gross amount required and the gross amount to
be expended.

SPIRITS.

Mr. WHITESIDE said that by the words of the resolu-
tion duty was fixed upon every gallon of spirits in the cus-
tody, stock, or possession of any dealer or distiller, and he
wished to know whether it was meant retrospectively to
fasten the new duty on stocks in the possession of dealers
who had paid the existing duty. 'Coffee and sugar in stock
were not treated in the same way, and he did not see why
spirits should be singled Out.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCIEQUER said it had
always been the practice to i❑clude stock in the possession
of dealers in all cases, either of imposition of new duties or
of reduction of old ones.
Mr. FAGAN protested against the injustice of imposing
duty on stock that had already paid it. It had not always
been the practice to include stock in the possession of
dealers, but he admitted that stock in the hands of the dis-
tiller—the producer—had been so included. If the hop.
member for Enni,killen would support him he would move
that the words "rectifier or dealer in spirits should be left
out."

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
was no doubt as to the praciice with respect to distillers.
As to dealers, he was not prepare& to say that the practice
had been uniform one way or the other ; but he understood
some gentlemen were cowing across from Ireland on the
subject ; be should see them, and, if the hon. member
would raise the question again, he would communicate to
him the result be had arrived at.
Mr. FAGAN said be was quite satisfied.
LABOUR IN THE COLONIES.

On the reading of the resolution relative to the duty on

.
Captain LAFFAN said that recently very considerable
additions had been made to the duties on sugarin the Bri-
tish possessions, and at the same time very considerable re-
nd sions were made to slave-grown sugar. The present
addition to the sugar duties was regarded in the colonies
generally as an injustice. The Mauritius, the colony with
which he was best acquainted, was dependent for its pros-
perity, and. indeed, for its existence, upon having a full
supply of free labour from India. It was at first extremely
difficult to persuade single men to come from India with
the view of realisirg a competence with which to return
to their own country. The agents of the Government in
India acting upon, or misinterpreting, instructions re-
ceived from home, made and enforced a regulation that
every Indian leaving India should be accompanied by a
woman, which was equivalent to stopping the supply of
labour and destroying sugar producing in the colonies. Re-
presantations were made on the subject to her. Majesty's
Government, who proceeded to consider the question, but
they were taking so long a time to arrive at a determina-
tion that while the matter was being settled the colonies
were being ruined. The Government wished, as every one
did, to create an approximation between the two sexes,
but he had no idea that they wished to put a stop to the
prospetity of the colony. He hoped, therefore, that the
next overland mail would communicate to the Government•
agents in India that they had misinterpreted the instruc-
tions sent them.

Mr. J. BALL said that successive Secretaries of State
had given their attention to the question alluded to by the
hon. member, and it had been clearly seen that effectual
measures must be taken in order to procure an approxi •
mate proportion between the two sexes in the colonies. In
the month of June last, therefore, a letter was written to
the governors of several of the more important colonies,
expressing an opinion that the time was come when it was
necessary to take effectual measures for increasing t 6
female proportion of the population of those colonies ; but
that letter contained not one word as to enforcing the re-
gulations which had been enforced, nor did any of the
further letters that were afterwards sent to India on the
same subject. It was now the intention of her Majesty's
Government to forward to India by the next mail precise
instructions as to what their intentions were, which would
remove all the misconceptions that had beer. made.
Mr. P. URQUHART, as a West India proprietor who
had suffered long in silence, trusted that he might be al-
lowed to protest in a few words against the injustice with
which the West India colonies had been treated. They
had been told that- in 1554 they would know the worst,
and they had made their arrangements in the hope
that no further prejudicial measures would be taken
against them. In the very first year afterwards extra
duties were imposed upon them duties which, in his
'pinion, would m•+ke the whole difference between
cultivating their estates with profit or ab indoning them
with loss. He had succeeded to a West India estate
of from 2,01)01. to 5,0001. a year ; since then he had been
1,5001. out of pocket. He thought that he had a right to
complain that the persons whom +he advocates of free trade
admitted bad been hardly dealt with in support of the:
principle during +he time of peace should be the first t,
suffer in time of war.

Mr. E. BALL said the hon. gentleinan who had just sat
down was one of the advocates of free trade, and was so
enamoured of that beautiful theory that be was willing to
sacrifice his interest of from 2,0001. to 5,0001. a year, for
which he now paid 1.5001. Now, not only had the country,
suffered such a loss, but it had also given the greatest sti-
mulus to the infamous traffic of the slave trade. He wished
to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the in-
crease of the duty would apply to the sugar grown in Cuba
or the Brazil,,, or to the whole produce? In the former
case he should consider the duty an excellent one.
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE did not rise to criticise the
budget, but only to express his deep regret that there
should be a necessity for proposing a duty on sugar, which
he believed would have *!% pernicious effect on the happiness
and comfort of the lower classes. He did Lot mean to
deny the existence of the necessity, for he had the greatest
confidence in the talents of the right hon. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer; hut he must express his re-
gret at a necessity which, in a moral point of view, would
have most unfavourable results.

Mr. WILSON said, with respect to the complaints of the
hon. member, who appeared as the advocate of Mauritius,
he complained rather of the absence of labour than of the
condition of the island. With respect to the sugar colo-
nies in general, perhaps there was no British interest
which exhibited a more marked example of rapid pio-
gress than the island of Mauritius. The very.compleint of
the want of labour was the best evidence of the prosperity
which that island enjoyed. It would be satisfactory to
the house to know thal in 1844, when Mauritius was in
the full enjoyment of a protection amounting almost to
an exclusion of foreign sugar, its produc,, was 27,050 tons
per annum. In 1848 it had risen to 44,00/ tons, and iu
1854, after the profits had become equalised, it had risen
from that amount to 82,000 tons. There was, therefore,
large increase under the influence of free trade and of a
competition which increased year by year. Ho, therefore,
did not wonder that they complained of the want of la-
bour in that. island. The Colonial-office would encourage
emigration from India in every way consistent with other
interests to supply that demand for labour. With regard
'to the whole of the sugar colonies the same was true, but
not to the same extent. Taking the British colonies as a
whole, he found that in 1844, when they enjoyed a pro-
tection amounting almost to an exclusion, the average
produce was 204,005 tons; which ha t increased, in the
face of increasing competition, to 290,000 tons during the
last year. This could not be an evidence of a decaying in
terest. If the house wished to see a proof of the prosperity
of free trade, it was the proposition of his right hon.
Mend, for the increased duty of the present year would
only add one shilling a hundredweight to the price to the
consumer, as compared with last year.
Mr. BLACKBUIL, had the misfortune to be a West
India proprietor, and be must complain of 'the alteration
of the duties, for although they had been promised they
should knaw the duty and must make their arrangements
accordingly, the duty had not been the same any two years.
A great share of the costs must fall on the producer, and
the loss would be at least 1/, a ton. Now, would any
gentleman say that •the West India colonies were in a posi
tion to lose this 180,0001., which would be the loss thus
inflicted on them ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer was
taking a surplus of 7,000,0001., which he did not know
how he was to spend. He (Mr. Blackburn) therefore
thought that it would be better to cut down the estimates
th_i levy these taxes on the poorer classes of this country.
Mr. HEY WORT El complained of the policy of indirect
taxation, because if the demand for manufactures was re
striated abroad the means of paying the taxes in this
country would be diminished. He agreed that the addi-
tion of one per cent. to the income tax, which would pro-
duce the amount, would be preferable to this proposition,
and he trusted that .the house would not sanction the ab-

surdity of resorting to a principle which had over and over
again been condt inned.
The report was then received.
THE NEWSPAPER STAMP BILL.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that
the house do go into committee on this bill.
Mr. COWAN said it would perhaps be most convenient
to the house if be should at this stage state the nature of
the proposition of which he had given notice. He was un-
willing to sacrifice any amount of revenue in times like
the present, when all the resources of the country ought to
be hush mded. He owned the difficulty of making the
change, but he had supported the seconc reading in hopes
that the revenue would not suffer, orat least not materially.
The house would not be surprised that he had looked over
the various acts whichlrom time to time had regulated
the newspaper stamps. There appeared an animus in all
these acts, that the more newspapers were restricted the
,better, and that with regard to dimensions they should by
restricted to the smallest posiib'e size. Previous to 1825
no newspaper could legally exceed 22 inches by 32, a size
considerably smaller than the present evening papers. At
that time the weight appeared to barely exceed 1 oz, whilst
the stamp duty was 4d., less 20 per cent. It appeared to
him that, in 1836, the Government of that time had no
idea what would be the result of the introduction of steam
printing machines and railways in bringing on the present
fix which they were in. There was no reason why the law
of 1836 should have been accompanied with such an endless
quantity of restrictions as to stamps, weight, and size. The
effect of that law was to throw on the Post-office an enor-
mous quantity of work which it could not have sustained
without the railways. He thought this was a fitting op-
portunity to consider whether the postage laws should not
be so altered as to make the carriage remunerative at
lower rates. The proposition of which he had given notice
provided for the conveyance through the Post-office not only
of newspapers but of all printed matter. The rates proposed
were one halfpenny for each transmission for every t o
ounces, a penny for four ounces, and so on, at such rates
as would remunerate. the Post-office. He thought the pro-
position of Government would press hardly on many per-
sons, especially the proprietors of country newspapers who
might wish to sell their papers at one penny, and who
would then have to pay 100 per cent. for transmission
through the post. He did not wish to press this proposi-
tion unduly, but he trusted that Government would give it
every favourable consideration.

Mr. BARROW hoped the Government would also take
into their consideration the propriety of reducing the stamp
upon newspapers to a halfpenny.
The house then went into committee.
Clause t was agreed to without discussion.
On cause 2.

Mr. COLLIER said he should propose that instead of a
stamp of a penny, which was imposed by this clause, the
stamp should be a halfpenny, anti that a halfpenny stamp
should be imposed for each transmission through the post.
He did not put this proposition forward entirely upon
financial grounds ; he proposed it upon higher grounds
than thosa, viz , educational grounds. It was of the
highest possible importance that newspapers of the best
class should be circulated as freely as possible. Taxes for
the transmission of knowledge
,were taxes on knowledge,
and, therefore, he expected to receive the support of those
hou. gentlemen wha had been so long agitating for the re-
peal of all taxes on knowledge. There was another reason
for this proposal. At present the London newspapers
were on a footing with provincial papers. They circulated
throughout the country upon the same terms as the proviu-
papers ; but, if the bill passed as it now stood, a low
provincial papers would spring up, which, •to some
eccxliaatslesnotfi wonld be nothing less than. piratical publications,
against the London press. They ell knew the great expense
at which the London daily papers were conducted—the
important and early, ntellizence which they gave, and the
high literary character of their leading articles. - Novi it
appored to him to kvof tki. to most =moan that they

should encourage the circulation of such papers ; but, ac-
cording to Rowland Hill if a penny sta.wp were. imposed
upon the transmission of newspapers,.not more than half
the present number would be circulated throughout the
country. Suppose, however, that a less duty were imposed,
viz., a halfpenny, it was just possible that the circulation
would by no means be diminished to the same extent ;
on the contrary, he folind, according te the best calcula-
tions, that a great increase in the number of, papers circu-
lated would be the result, but, viewing the question in a
financial point of view' he very much doubted whether the
rosteoffice would be able to compete with the railway com-
panies if the stamp were retained at a penny. He was told,
indeed, that at present seven impressions of a daily paper
were conveyed to Derby for a penny, while sheets of the
Leeds Mercury, containing some 70 or 80 pages, were con-
veyed 32 miles froth Leeds for a penny. Now, if a penny
duty ware imposed on the transmission by post, he appre-
hended the railways would defeat the Post-o.lice, whereas
if the duty were only a halfpenny, the railways would
have no temptation fer defrauding the revenue. He should,
therefore, propose to alter the clause with the view of
providing that for a halfpenny stamp each newspaper
should be entitled to the privilege of one transmission by
po 4., and to one other transmission for every additional
SG ',nip.
Mr. COWAN concurred most cerdielly in the proposed
alteration, and he should be glad if the Government would
take it into their serious consideration.
Lord STANLEY said there were two questions involved
in the amendment. One was the question of whether the
charge for sending a newspaper through the post should
be a penny or a halfpenny; the other was whether the
postal charge, whatever it might be, should send a news-
paper through the post once or seveeil times. Now, as to
the latter question of the retrans:nis4on, he apprehended
that it could not be sustained upon abstract principles, and
if they were dealine with the question de novo, or for the
first time, he should have to hesitation in pronouncing
against the right of retransmission. But they had to deal with
interests which bad grown up under the existing law; and
if they were to do away with the right at once and imme-
diately, without any previous notice, it would be inflicting
great injustice upon existing interests. (Hear, hear.) As
to the question of whether the postal charge should be a
penny or a halfpenny, that was more a matter for the con-
sideration of the postal department of the Executive Go-
vernment than the house. All that the house could
do was to lay down the principle that the Government
ought not to attempt to make profit for the revenue
out of the carriage of newspapers, but on the other hand
newspaper proprietors had no right to ask that Govern-
ment should carry their productions at less than cost price.
It ought to be so equally arranged, if it' were possible
to do so, that neither the revenue should gain on the one
band nor the newspapers on the other, and, acting upon
th it pricciple, he was told that a halfpenny would not be
sufficient to cover the actual cost of transmission. One
word upon the question of competition, which had been
urged as a reason in favour of the proposal. It should not
be forgotten that the change to be made by this bill would
produce an enormous increase in the numberof newspapers,
and that increase would throw a great additional burden
upon the labours of the Post-office. Indeed the mere an-
iicipation of the change bad already caused considerable
inconvenience to many local posts, and he did not know
whether it ought to be an object with the Legislature to
prevent newspapers being carried by private hands. Pos-
sibly the reduction of the stamp might have the effect of
increasing the revenue ; but, on the other hand, they Would
have to set against that gain the fact that the transmission
of letters would be delayed by this adding to the labours
of the Post-office. (Hear.) However, this was a question
for the Executive to decide; but as he did not think the
halfpenny would be remunerative,' he should support the
penny as it now stands. (Hear.) For the present he was
also prepared to continue the privilege of retransmission ;
but at the same time he could net conceal from himself
that sooner or later it would have to be done away with.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER begged leave
to call attention to the origin of the bill now afore the
house. The bill originated in the difficulty which had arisen
in enforcing the compulsory stamp. It was found that
the law was ambiguous, and a resolution was passed by
the house last year condemnatory of the compulsory stamp,
without in any way, however, noticing or recognising a re-
luction in the stamp. Accordingly a bill wac introduced
by his predecessor in office to remove the compulsion of the
stamp, without in any way affecting, the price; the bill
now-on the table and under the consideration of the com-
mittee was founded upon identically the same principle;
it was limited to the removal of the difficulty which had
arisen in the enforcement of the stamp upon all newspapers.
oisnedinttoromduackiengnothotehbill was
to The
correctbj r alte-
ration in the law, and newspapers of a certain size would
eet of
thatthe evil G
; ovtehrenym proposed
mail have the privilege of transmission and retransmission
through the post for a penny stamp. The great objection
taken to the measure on the second reading was simply
that it would endanger a large aineant of revenue at a time
when the expendititre of the country exceeded its income ;
it was shown, however, that the loss, though it was consi-
derable, would be proiided in the financial schemes of the
year, and in the statement which he had the honour to

make on Friday an estimate was made, allowing for the
leficiency in cunsequence of this change in the law. Since
the second reatling, however, a further question had been
raised as to the reduotion of the penny stamp to a _half-
penny ; and it had been contended that this reduction

would not certainly lead to a diminution, but it would
maintain the revenue if it did not even increase it. Atthe

Aatne time, those who made that calculation founded it on

nos uncertain data, and Government were not pre-
pared to run the risk which the proposed change would
involve. But the hon.gentleman who proposed this amend-
ment had involved himself in the difficulty which imme-
,tiately arose upon the change. He proposed to retain the
impressed stamp, and to introduce a postage stamp; but
if they retained the impressed stamp it would be difficult
to prevent retransmission, without imposing upon the'
l'oAt-office the trouble and labour of_ da..clui,-,tho stamp,
while, on the other hand,-ir had recourse only to a
postage stamp, some limit would have to be placed upan
the weight it,shou!d carry. The bill now under discu3ston
made no reference to weight ; it merely liMited the stamp
to a newspaper of the size now allowed by law, and since
the bill was introduced with a specific object, ho was not
prepared tofu adoptrierl a
c imnai
nmuouni
odnm
ienn amendment
he which ,nv
uo
e .ul. I most likely
proiu,o a t

Mr. M. MILNES insisted that the retransmission of the
London daily newspapers, containing as they did so much
matter of educational importance, should be encouraged by
all means. There was a law in the United States placing
differential duty upon the postage of a
newspapers within
certain limits, and the effect of that law had been to pre-

vent the transmission over the United States of newspapers
londucted with great ability and at great expense, and
to extend the production of smaller and less carefully-
conductel newspapers. The intellectual character of the
London daily press could hardly be overrated ; it was;
in fact, the production of the intellectual power of the
and it was of the utmost importance to the country
that nothing should be done to impede or restrict its
circulation. He believed the practical difficulties of this
case had been much overstated, for he did not see why
newspaper could not ha made a passing toll. He did not
believe retransmission - would take place,
except where
Where was sufficient interest to produce a large demand ;
the inferior publication would not be retransmitted—the
superior one would.

Mr. GLADSTONE agreed with the noble lord the mem-

;sr for Lynn that the question of retransmission must be
[salt with within certain limits and upon grounds which

were already established. The privilege of retransmission
had reference to the fixed habits of the-community, and to
part with it suddenly would be an inconvenience; but the
hon. gentleman who had just sat down was so much ena-
moured with retransmission that he strongly insisted upon
its merits. He proposed to give the London newspaper,
in some shape or other, an extraordinary right, which
smacked very much of their old friend Protection—(a
. .

laugh)—but he, for one, thought the superior article ought
to stand upon its own merits. (Hear.) But if the hon.
ontleman was so much in favour of retransmission, he

ought upon that very ground not to vote for the amend-
ment, but to support the bill as it stood, because the amend-
ment viitually proposed to abolish the privilege of retrans-
mission, while the bill of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
proposed to retain it. (Fleur.) With respect to the ques-
tion of price, he agreed with the noble lord
_the member

for Lynn that it ought to rest entirely with the Executive
to determiue it; but, said the hon. member who last
addressed them, "You have for educational purposes
consented to a diminution of the tax, and it'is no very
great matter if yon consent to a further diminution."
But that was not the question before the house. True, it
t
'r
erh
thisagreed s alleounree ef handsreventuhea?
buto theprofit
question
sh ould expectedwbaesnotw he.
a lighter or a heavier tax upon the
those who did not read newspapers for the sake of that por-
pers,
Lion of the community pa but whether they should tax
who did. If they did what the
rtfoaters theyaamendment
anmi
ssi
proposed,onoshouldf lneyw '
it would be practically subsidising
the transmission of newspapers at the expense of the State,
principle; but in his opinion it was
might not claim such a privilege just as
well as newspapers ; but the real question to be determined
tOlitaiellhy was
un unnecessary.. bad
sar in
literature at large y..11e knew no reason in the world why
uddertake the transmission of newspapers without was, what was the lowest charge at which the State could
i
incur-
ring loss. Of course, between large towns newspapers
could be transmitted in parcels by railway cheaper than by
were
their at
own
convenience; to
they arrange-
ments
could
; post, but it was not fair to treat this as a question of com-
petition between the Pose-office and private companies.
t' r
reject or transmit, just as they pleased but it was quite
different with the Post-office, because it had no alternative
ivat e
as
but to carry for everybody at a fixed scale of charge. The
consequence would be then, if the amendment were
adopted,
have to
z prryerferm newspapers in bulk,
the worst and
while
.most unprofitable part of the transmission service. Now,
could the Post-office undertake for a halfpenny to perform
the most difficult and the most unprofitable portion of the
the thatp() s
tt h eeffice railways
would whoauvl
transport, such as carrying newspapers to the greatest dis-
tance or into remote and unfrequented quarters? That
was a question very 'Duch for the Government themselves
to determine, but his conviction was that the service could
not be performed for ii. halfpenny. It was easy to say that
the loss would be small between a halfpenny and the cost
of transport, which might be three farthings ; but the loss
became no small matter when they came to multiply the
farthing by ninety millions, or by the still larger figures
which an iticrerved number of newspapers must •
necessarily
occasion. He had been told that the ch
arge by the early
trains to Liverpool and Manchester was so high that it
would not pay to send down the advertising sheet of the
Times, and that it was actually retained in London when
the newspaper sheet was sent down, and forwarded by the
Post-office train at ten o'clock. He believed the charge i provincial towns for the morning delivery was a
penny.n
It was difficult to get at precise data on the subject
would be now
safe to
adopt the' proposition of the hon. and learned tl
It would be highly undesirable to take a step whichgenernan.
they
coul I not retrace, for if they once adopted the
they would never be able to correct the error.prolrtositi vr
be better far the Government to look into the
matter,7°ll Cil
to ascertain 'whether they could carry printed
matter an
at a
lower rate than a penny. If they could d 0 so, well and
good : but he considered it would be unfair t
. run the risk
of burdening the State with a heavy
charge for a purpose
which was not legitimate. ' (Hear.) ,
Mr. BARROW believed
that in America newspapers
wore conveyed 3,000 miles for one cent, and ho took it for
granted that the Government of that country would not
carry on a business of that kind at a loss. Hobelieved
•
charge made for carrying newspapers at the
present
per ton. The Chancellor of the Exchequerpresent was 31.
per ton. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seeme dwa
to i
s a-
-3 il.
gine that some difficulty would arise in the second
mtrans-
mission of stamped newspapers. Now the objection of the
right bon. gentleman might be obviated by writing thedireo-
tion upon the stamp. The impression having been. obli--
aerated' in the first instance, the affiiiiig of a oud stamp
would be a very easy process, and that second stamp might
be again obliterated if a third transmission -should be ne
cessary.

lir. M. GIBSON said ishe .proposition 'of. the bon. and
41411Vd mamba fou Plyrouth mit* p0r..P214 le`

than this—to carry a periodical publication of any, size and
weight, whet her an ounce or a pound, for a halfpenny.
Mr. BARROW remarked that a limit was provided as
to size.
Mr. M. GIBSON observed that the hon. and learned
member had omitted all consideration of the limit in his
amendment.
Mr. COLLIER said that would be a matter for future
consideration.
Mr. M. GIBSON said the hon. and learned member
proposed to carry a periodical publication for a halfpenny,
but a pamphlet would have to pay letter weight for trans-
mission by post. Now suppose he should find himself
slandered in a periodical publication, that publication
might be transmitted throughout the country for a half-
penny ; but his reply in an occasional publication would
be charged 3d. or 41. Before consenting to a proposition
for the transmission of periodical publications he should
like to know whether occasional publications Of the same
weight were to be transmitted at the same rate of postage.
(Hear, hear) Pamphlets bad been recently published in
defence of the characters of Lord Raglan and Sir John
Burgoyne. The attacks made upon those gallant officers
were circulated without any charge beyond that of the ori-
ginal newspaper stamp of a peony, whilst the answers to
those attacks would be subject to the letter weight postage.
That being the case,_ he (lid not think Lord Raglan likely
to rise superior to what the noble lord the member for the
city of London had characterised as the slanders of the
ribald press. (Hear, hear.) He objected to the pro-
position of the honourable and learned member for
Plymouth, because it would confer a privilege on a par-
ticular class of publications, and he was confident it would
not bo asked for by some of the parties promoting it, if
they thonglit it would be extended to all. Under these
circumstances, and knowing that the postage charge could
be reduced by a Treasury order, he ditl not feel it neces-
sary to support the amendment. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. PHILIPPS thought it would be most desirable to
ascertain the fair net revenue of the Post-office before
making any hazardous ex?eriments in the way of reduc-
tion. (Hear, hear.)
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
was agreed to, with some verbal amendments.
Clause 3, providing that periodical publications entitled
to free transmission by post shall be printed under certain
conditions anti limitations was also agreed to.
On clause 4, providing that periodical publications may
be registered at the Inland Revenue-office in the same
manner as newspapers are now required to be,
Mr. WHITESIDE said that, according to the provisions
of the hill, newspapers having a stamp must be registered
and give security, but it was optional to the parties to re-
gister or not, just as they might think fit. He could not
understand the precise object in view. He wished to know
why stamped newspapers were to be subjected to registra-
tion under the 6th and 7th William IV., when unstamped
newspapers were not liable to such registration ? Now, he
could not conceive any reasonable ground why a journal
having a stamp should be compelled to register, when a
penny paper might go on libelling everybody, leaving the
injured parties to find out the libeller in the best way they
could. He thought it would be much better to compel all
parties to register alike.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was per-
fectly competentto the committee to make the alteration sug-
gested by the hon. and learned gentleman, but if they did so
the registration must be enforced by penalties. Now the bill
was so drawn as to avoid all impositions of that kind. The
operation of the clauses would depend upon that receipt of
stamps. The reason why the bill had been drawn in this
manner was, that every periodical, publication, and news-
paper enjoying a circulation to any extent would for its
own purposes and the convenience of its customers apply a
stamp to a• portion of its circulation, and would thus bring
itself within the operation of the clauses. He believed the
bill, as it now stood, would practically, without the enact-
ment of penalties, enforce a system of registration and se
curities which was the greatest safeguard against libels on
private character. The Government, however, did not
wish to propose any compulsory clauses. (Hear.)
Mr. WHITESIDE said that, supposing his suggestion
should be agreed to, he was prepared to propose a clause
compelling unstamped papers to register under a penalty
of 201.

Mr. G. BUTT said that one protection afforded by regis-
tration was, that when a party was libelled he might go at
once to the piper office and ascertain the names of the pro.
prietors against whom to bring his action. Another pro-
tection was the security for damages in cases of libel. The
right hon. gentleman seemed to imagine that newspapers
of a respectable character would avail themselves of the
postal regulation, and, therefore, come within the opera-
tion of th law requiring registration and complete security.
But if the proprietors of a newspaper of a different charac-
ter should find it worth their while to publish a cheap
paper in a large town, they might avoid the postal regula-
flop and leave the purchasers of the newspaper to use the
penny stamp, and the very protection which it was the
object of the legislature to give would be taken away.

The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER said the act
to which the hon. and learned gentleman referred applied
only to newspapers. It did not extend to all Periodicals.
Mr. BUTT remarked that he had confined his attention
to newspapers.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
,bill applied to all periodical publications printed at pe-
riods of less than thirty-one days. If the hon. gentleman
wished to make it compulsory on all periodicals to go
through the process of registration and securities he would
extend those regulations to many publications which were
not comprised within the &jut of the original act, and
which were sent off in monthly parcels. He did not ima-
gine that such publications would avail themselves of the
postage. It would be hard to bring them under the ope-
ration of. a law which was never intended for them. By
limiting the registration and securities to those publica-
tions which voluntarily availed themselves of the postal
privilege, the hill would apply to all newspapers with a
circulation of any importance, and exempt those to which
the original registration was not intended to apply.
Mr. BUTT sail that at present all newspapers must be
registered and give security to answer for libels; but the
effect or tbo present bill would be to enable. partioa to pub-
lish newspapers without availing themselves of the postal
regulations, and then they would not be under the neces-
sity of registering and•finding security.
Lord STANLEY thought no hardship would be in-
flicted upon any one if the registration should be made
compulsory, and facilities would be given to injured par-
tins in obtaining re,lress. (Liear.)

. ,
Mr. WHI'L'E ;IDE proposed the amendment, the object
of which was to make the clause compulsory.
..Mr. M. GIBSON of to the amendment, and con-
tended that it would be impossible to enforce a general re-
gistration throughout the country without some new ma-
chinery of a vexatious and troublesome character. The re-
gistration clause of the present act was entirely neglected,
and if an attempt were ma le 'o enforce the provision of the
clause which required newspapers to t register, be Board of
Inland Revenue would have very little time to attend to
anything else. He thought means ought to be afforded
of having the authorship of every article, and bringing it
home to some responsible party ; and that means now
existed, for the printer was compelled to attach his name
n
to every newspaper, and to keep a record f h employers,
and produce it when required to do so by the order of any
judge.
Mr. WFIITESIDE said there would be no difficulty in
carrying out the system of registration. Parties in the
country would not be under the necessity of coming up to
London, for there were commissioners in various parts of
the country, by whom the registration might be made. It
was a mistake to supp-tse that the present bill would give
parties a sufficient protection.
Mr. WARNER conceived that there was something
very rotten in the present system of registration, and that
it required some amendment. He thought parties might
be easily compelled to register by providing that all un-
registered papers should be stopped at the Post-office.
Mr. GLADSTONE said that he should oppose both the
proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and that of
the hon. and learned gentleman opposite. The proposi-
tion of the hon. and learned gentleman was consistent and
bad regard to uniformity and regularity of principle, but
what security would it give which was not at present pro-
vided by the requirement that the name of the printer
should he upon every publication? It lives true that (lid not
give the name of the writer, but neither (lid the registration.
The adoption of this proposition would impose upon per-
sons to whom it applied unnecessary trouble and vexation,
and he should therefore say " No' to it. He must also say
" No" to the clause, because it appeared to him to put the
law upon a footing which was irrational and inconsistent.
The law as it stood, and which his right hon, friend the
Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to abandon, was
intelligible ; but the effect of the proposed change, as ex-
plained by his right hon, friend himself, would be to
secure the registration of respectable periodicals, but to
allow such as were not respectable to escape. That was to
say, it would catch those which there was no necessity for
catching, and would not catch those which ought to be
caught. The objection to the present law was that under
it persons who published what were not really newspapers
made false declarations in order to obtain postal privileges,
and this his right hon. friend proposed to adopt. The
proposition included in one sense too little and in another
too much, and he should therefore vote against it.
Mr. DISRAELI thought that the amendment of his
hon. and learned friend (Mr. Whiteside) was both rational
and consistent. The press in this country enjoyed great
liberty and great power, and he thought the house had a
right to exact from it a corresponding responsibility. The
system of registration proposed by his lion, and learned
friend to be general in its application was acbompanied by
no vexatious considerations. All he proposed was, that
society should be made aware who was responsible for the
opinions expressed on public questions, or the criticisms
offered on public conduct. The right hon. gentleman
(Mr. Gladstone) had said that society had the means of re-
dress, which no one questioned it ought to possess, by the
law as it at present stood. But what redress would there
be in a case in which the name of some man of straw or of
some imaginary person had been affixed to a placard or
pamphlet, which might, nevertheless, at a critical period
of public affairs, have exercised a very important influence
upon their course. As the law now stow, you had regis-
tered the name of the proprietor of the journal ; it was
not the name of a man of straw, but of a person of so
much consequence, and of such corporeal station, as to
ensure the obtaining of the redress to which all society
said that a person who had been injured was entitled.
Therefore he maintained that the reply of the right
honourable gentleman was not a sufficient answer to the
proposition' of his honourable and learned friend. The
honourable and learned gentleman had shown that there
would be no great difficulties in enforcing the principle of
the proposition, nor would its enforcement occasion much
inconvenience to those to whom it applied, and he, there-
fore, hoped that the committee would agree to this amend-
ment.
Mr. H. DRUMMOND said that the liberty of the press
in this country was the liberty of a certain number of per-
sons to slander anonymously and whenever they pleased,
and against whom you had no redress. (Hear.) It was
the lih•rty of anonymous libellers, and the slavery of the
rest of the community. The only way to meet this evill
was to prohibit any person writing anything, no matter
whether whether periodical or otherwise, without affixing toi hname. (Hear.) No honest man was ashamed of thee
_,in
sen-
timents he expressed. (Hear.) There was more. l
this country than in any other about a love of fair play,
and of a good stand-up fight; but what stan(dliarnepfi.)ghtTwneays
there with all those anonymous libellers ,
lived, and they know it very wall, inevil-doers, but were
a e fear of moral assas-
sination. They longed to punish
th
afraid to say so ; and the onlyto prevent
any one pu .
b(ishingithything without way to do it.was
such a prohibi-
tion in enforcing . .
ithout putting his name to
n of the
it. They found no difficulty
o that they could
tion in France,as to suppose and he had not so poor an opium
th• country. As it was, legal advisers of
fthenfoTiTga
it.
in
is
1
..w 'note findlived meansun d, r oa iget:T of moral struggle, and it must be
put an end
The CHANCELLOR
that there ware
the new definition
opinion which
GELLOR or th® EXCHEQUER admitted
difficulties in adapting the existing-law to
of periodical publications. After the
he had heard expressed, he would, with the
permission of the committee,
postpone the clauses relating
to registration and sureties, and endeavour to alter them
so that they slioalcl ripply to all newspapers, but to news-
men alimes That Tvald ntonfitato the vs of the ward

"newspaper," which it had been sought to avoid, but of
course a legal construction could be put upon the word.
Mr. MILNER GIBSON hoped that in this year 1855 it
would not be thought necessary for the safety of Our insti-
tutions or of private character to put a previous 'restraint
upon the expression of opinion upon paper. If it were,
however, there was no need for any new enactment, but only
to enforce the existing law under which not only every
newspaper but every periodical and every pamphlet was
liable to securities. He held in his hand the act passed by
Lord Castlereagh, and called one of the six acts, which
enacted that no person should after thirty days from the
date of its passing " print or publish for sale any news-
paper or any pamphlet "—let members of the house who
wrote pamphlets but never gave securities mark that—
" or other paper containing any public news, intelligence,
or occurrences, or any remarks or observations thereon, or
upon any matter in Church or State which shall not ex-
ceed two sheets (that was 714 square inches), or which
shall be published for sale at a less price than sixpence,
until he or she shall have entered intorecognisances before
a baron of the Exchequer in England, and found two suf-
ficient securities that they will be answerable for any pe-
nalties that may be incurred for any blasphemous or sedi-
tious libel," which responsibility had by au act passed in
the reign of William IV. been extended to private libel.
If they thought securities necessary, why did they not en=
force this 60th Goo. 111., c. 9? There was no occasion to
re-enact any part of that act, as they were now asked to
do. It had not been repealed. It was still law, and there-
fore he appealed to theright hon. gentleman not to ask the
house to re-enact this act, which was still in force ; but,
if he believed these securities were necessary, to do his
duty as a minister of She Crown and enforce this 60th Geo.
111. c. 9, and, above all, to take care that the members of
the Government did not themselves violate it. There
never was a more flagrant violation of the law than Lord
J. Russell's letter to the Bishop of Durham. (Hear, hear,
and a laugh.) There was a pamphlet commenting upon
matters in Church and State, sold in groat numbers and
for a very small price, in regard to which his lordship had
entered into no securities, which rendered the publisher
liable under the 60th Geo. 111., c. 9, to " forfeit for every
such offence the sum of 2C1." How large estrus did the noble
lord at this moment owe to the Queen ? a debt which hehad
'incurred by violating a law which it was his duty to en-
force, and which the Cabinet of which he was a member
was now calling upon the house to re-enact. There was not
the slightest necessity for such re-enactment. What was
wanted was that Ministers should do their duty and enforce
the law, and not come to that house with a claptrap to ask
it to agree to clauses which they had not the remotest in-
tention of enforcing, and which they only proposed that
they might say to the world, "At any rate we have re-
tained something; we have got securities, and there will
be no blasphemy or sedition." The. extraordinary thing
was that the Government of a few weeks ago—he did not
know whether the present Government was the same one,
but it looked very like it—agreed to abolish these securi-
ties. The present First Minister of the Crown was a mem-
ber of that Cabinet, and must, there're, he presumed,
have given his assent to the proposition for their abolition.
He must say a word upon the absurdity of making the
giving of securities contingent upon going through the
post. The act of Geo. 111., enacting securities, was ra-
tional, but this plan was a ridiculous mode of carrying out
an absurd policy. (Hear.) Let them abolish these secu-
rities, because they were not consistent with the principles
of a free press. Let them trust to the power of the COM..
mon law to put down the libeller. There were penalties
that could be enforced, and every man had a right, whe-
ther he was wealthy or poor, to express his opinion upon
paper, How, could a poor man express his opinion upon
public affairs if he must enter into a bond for 4001. or
make a declaration that he was worth 400/.. after all his
debts were paid, and, in addition to that, must obtain two
wealthy securities ! He hoped and trusted that, professing
a desire for a just measure towards all classes of the com-
munity, and to uphold the knowledge and freedom of the
press, they would not carry out such a class measure, or
say that none but the wealthy and upper classes of this
country should be at liberty to publish periodical publics
tions, newspapers, or pamphlets.

Mr. F. SCOTT believed that the press would best consult
its own liberty and dignity if it would encourage a registi a-
tion of the names of the persons who were really responsible
for what was published in the jouinals. Notning was more
objectionable than that a person should be brought forward
as liable for a publication who really should not be made
liable for it, and if the clause was postponed, he trusted
the right hon. gentleman would make it effectual towards
bringing forward the persons really responsible.
Sir F. THESIGER understood the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to say he considered there was an important
matter requiring consideration with regard to the clause,
and that it was desirable that it should be postponed, to
afford his right hon. friend an opportunity of considering
whether he could frame the clause in such a way as would
meet the approbation of the house. It was desirable they
should see the clause the Government would present for
their consideration, and he thought the discussion that
had taken place was very unnecessary. He trusted the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would pass on to the other
clauses of the bill.

The clause was postponed, and the amendment was with-
drawn.
Clauses 5,6, 7, 8 were also postponed.
Clauses 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13, with some verbal amend-
ments' were agreed to.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY begged to ask the right hon.
gentleman whether he had calculated what the revenue
would be if this bill should become h..w ? The present re-
venue was calculated at about 470,0001, but it was deli. '
rable to know what the revenue would be after the deduc-
tion of expenses.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
all estimates with regard to the produce of the newspaper
stamp, when instead 61 being compulsory it was volun-
tary, were necessarily conjectural and uncertain, but, ac-
cording to the estimate that had been made, the produce
would be 200, 001.

Mr. DISRiELI—There was notice given by the Govern-
ment of a clause on a most important subject, namely, the
copyright or ....v.ps.pers, hut we have had no statement
from the Chancellor of the Exchequer on this point. Twins
to whether they intend to proceed with the proposition.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXUIIEQUER—I have the
clause with me, and if it bo the wish-of the committee I
am now prepared to move it. I thought,: however, that as
some of the clauses have been postponed, it might not now
be convenient to propose a new clause.
Air. BARROW remarked that poe-or was proposed to
• be given by this clause for the recovery of penalties in a
(
summary manner, involving ono of the most difficult ques-
tions that ever came before a court of justice. He thought
the practice of printing a clause in this Manner to be de-
livered to members after they came into the house, v.i,Jl-
- an opportunity being afforded to thu public at large of
seeing it, was inconvenient, and he trusted the Chancellor
of the Exchequer would not tarnish his fair fame by adopt-
ing a practice that was unfair to the public-at-largo.' -
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
quite true the clause did contain a penalty, but that pe-
nalty was not to be recovered by the Attorney-General,
but by the proprietor of a newspaper for the piracy of any
matter contained in his newspaper, and that was a matter
for the committee hereafter to consider. -He considered
that the practice adopted by him was of constant occur-
rence in the house, and that there was nothing unusual,
unprecedented, or exceptional in it. He had given notice
of the clause three or four days ago • hon. members had au
opportunity to consider it, and it had also received circu-
lation -amongst the public.
, .._ . _._ ____.

Mr. BARROW replied that he did not receive the clause
with his votes, and he did not know any member who had
so received it.

Mr. BRIGHT wished to know from the right hon.
gentleman when he intended to go into committee again
on this bill? There were some hundred persons in a state
of agony with regard to the bill. (A. laugh.) The pro-
prietors of newspapers did not know where they would be
next week, and there were other newspapers struggling
into life. Great expenses were incurred, and a most im-
portant branch of industry would be paralysed until this
bill should be disposed of. (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER -1" will fix
it for Monday next.
Mr. BRIGHT—Why not Friday?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not reply, and it
was accordingly understood that the bill was fixed for
Monday.
The Chairman was ordered to report progress and get.
leave to sit again ; and the house resumed.
BANK R,UPTCY (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. CAIRNS moved for and obtained leave to intro-
duce a bill to amend and consolidate the laws relating to
bankruptcy in Ireland.
ABSCONDING DEBTORS (IRELAND) BILL.
Mr. CAIRNS obtained leave to bring in a bill to facili-
tate the more speedy arrest of absconding debtors in
Ireland.

THE SEBASTOPOL COMMITTEE.
Mr. ROEBUCK said that his name appeared on the
paper appended to a notice that the hon. member for the
county of Limerick (Mr. De Vere) be added to the army
before Sebastopol committee. On consultation, however,
with the committee the result was, that they wished him
to state to the house, as a conclusion to which they had
unanimously come, that in their opinion it would be better
if no further addition were made to the committee. (Oh,
oh, and laughter on the Opposition benches.) He really
could not see what there was in that announcement to elieit
the laughter of hon. gentlemen opposite. (Oh, oh.) He
could take upon himself to state that the members of the
committee had been extremely sedulous in their attention
to business, having only on one occasion failed to make a
committee. As yet there had been no difference of opinion
amongst them, and they regarded the discussions which
had taken place in that house as tending to injure them in
their judicial capacity before the country. They thought
that they could best conduct the inquiry without any fur-
ther addition to their numbers, while, at the same time,
they would advantage the public service by putting an end
to discussions that interfered with the discharge of their
duties. He could only add, that he had mentioned the
decision of the committee to the noble lord at the head of
the Government, and he had acceied to their views; it
was, therefore, not his intention to propose ony one to fill
the vacant place on the committee. (Oh, oh, and
laughter.)

Mr. BENTINCK was not surprised, after the discussion
of a former evening, that the hon. and learned gentleman
had thought proper to withdraw his motion. With all
respect, however, for the opinion of the committee, as just
enunciated by the hon. gentleman, he must say he regretted
ew i
exceedingly that it was not in his power to coißci _,
_t_h
it. (Loud cries of Bear, hear, from the toolxtrm
benches.) In making that remark, ha begged,
toof itmhpeucogumnmeiitthteere.collztit
with the concurrence
he
hee intendedo
o nduet
occasion contended—and contended Int
h t house —that
vhelvy.nnooroinndaiviftolunanlelyr
wore being discussed before
considering the subjects which
of opinion of at least a large
ble that at least one
the committee, it was indispeensa. _ ,
f (I with th
minority in t a
e nal, al rofession
ht crosscloselyand ffi
-examine
—(hear, hear)
who might
of the witnesses necessarily pro-
member of it should be connec .
oiently a great number
any of whom, trying
would be bent on trying 30
duced before the committee--many to
save their own reputation,
conceal the truth. Now, he woulddefy even the acuteness
of the hon. and learned gentleman himself to extract the
truth from an unwilling witness of that description. lie
could only express his surprise that the independent
ad-
vocate of investigation into abuses and maladministration
of affairs at the seat of war should have thought it neces-
sary to refer upon all occasions of doubt for :ice to the
however,i repudiated the
with the
noble lord at the head of the Government.
the Opposition benches.) He,
pi ion of the committee
principle laid down by the hon.
for he contended that the noroin nt• learned
ought to rest entirely gentleman ;
ought not to be dependent upon arras se of Commons, and
the Speaker's chair. (Hea arrangements made behind
corner work was most nn seer, I ear.) All such hole-and-
like that before the committee,n Y'
in reference to a subject
a large portion of the co • . (Hear, hear.) Hitherto,
to the transport service-mmittee's inquiries had reference
terially strength da consideration that very ma-
shoild be appointeden his demand that a naval officer
to serve •
Usti though the on it. . (Hear, hear.)- And;
justified in 'honourable gentleman might feel
name of the hen. member withdrawing
from further consideration the
n. member for the county of Limerick,
49, could sot *ow
0 0 doteg th, oat la Alamo to