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

should encourage the aircuilfe a tion of such papers ; but, ac
cording to Rowland Hill, penny stamp were imposed
upon the transmission of newspapers, not more than half
the present number would be circulated throughout tee
however, that a less duty were imposed,
country. Suppose'. • •
halfpenny, it was just possible that the circulation
viz.,
would by no means be diminished to the same extent ;
0 the contrary, he found, according to the best calcula-
tinons 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
Post-office world 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 co
veyed 32 miles from Leeds for a penny. Now, if a Pen
duty were imposed on the transmission by post, he
eappre-
hended the railways would defeat the Post-oilice, w
if the duty were only a halfpenny, the railwayswould
have no temptation for defrauding the revenue.
with Fl should,
the
view
of
e
therefore, propose to alter the clause
providing that for a halfpenny stamp
each
should be entitled to the privilege of one newspaper
post, and to one other transmission for every additional
stamp.
Mr. COWAN concurred most went posed
cordi j llvinern
alteration, and he should be glad if te eathoul
take it into their serious consiaeration.
Lord STANLEY said theres
the question of whether the
newspaper
charge for sending awere two questions involved
in the amendment. One
wa
through the post should
be a penny or a halfpenny the other was whether the
postal charge, whatever it Light be, should send a news-
paper through the post once or several times. Nuw, as to
the latter question of the retransmission, he apprehended
that it could not be sustained upon abstract principles, and
if they were dealing with the question de novo, or for the
first time, he should have to hesitation in pronouncing
a 'nstthe right of retransmission. But they had to deal with
interestsga which had 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
peony 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 band
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
hand nor the newspapers on the other, and, acting upon
that principle, 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 nnmberof newspapers,
and that increase would throw a great additional burden
upon the labours of the Post-office. Indeed the mere an-
ticipation of the change had 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; bat 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 not conceal from himself
that sooner or later it would have to be done away with.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCH EQUER begged leave
to call attention to the origin of the bill now before 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-
duction in the stamp. Accordingly a bill wan 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.
The object of the Government in introducing the bill was
to correct that evil ; they proposed to make no other alte-
ration in the law, and newspapers of a certain size would
still 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 aroeunt of revenue at a time
when the expenditure of the country exceeded its income ;
it was shown, however, that the loss, though it was consi-
derable, would be provided 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
deficiency in cunsequence of this change in the law. Since
the second reading, however, a further question had been
raised as to the reduction 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. ,At the
same time, those who made that calculation founded it on
most 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-
diately 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 diffieult
to `prevent retransmission, without imposing upon the
Post-office the trouble and labour of defacing the stamp,
while, on the other hand, if they had recourse only to a
postage stamp, some limit would have to be placed upon
the weight it should carry. The bill now wider discussion
made no reference to weight ; it merely limited the sautp
to a newspaper of the size now allowed by law, and since
the bill was introduced with a specific object, he was not
prepared to adopt an amendment which woul i most likeey
produce a further diminution in the revenue.
Mr. M. MILNES insisted that the retransmission of the
London daily newspapers, containing as they did so 'inch
matter of educational importance, should be encouraged by
all means. There was a law in the United States placin.g
a differential duty upon the postage of newspapers within
certain limits, and the effect of that law had been to pre-
vent the transmission over the United States of newspapers
conducted with great ability and at great expense, and
to extend the production of smaller and less carefully-
conducted newspapers. The intellectual character of the
London daily press could hardly be overrated ; it Wai,
in fact, the production of the intellectual power of the
age, 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
a newspaper could not be made a passing toll. He did not
believe retransmission would take place, except where
there was sufficient interest to produce a large demand ;
the inferior publication would not be retransmitted—the
superior ono would.
Mr. GLADSTONE agreed with the noble lord the mem.
ber for Lynn that the question of retransmission must be
dealt w:th 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 eii
meured with retransmission that he strongly insisted upon
its merits. He proposed to give the London newspaper,
in some shape or other, an extraordinary right, whieli
smacked very much of their old friend Protection—(a
laugh)—bat he, for one, thought the superior article ought
to stand upon its own merits. (Hear.) But if the bon.
gentleman 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 virtually proposed to abolish the'
privilege of
retrans-
mission, while the bill of the Chancellor of ie Exchequer
proposed to retain it. (Hear.) With respect to thee'
g
tion of price, he agreed with the noble lord the member.
for Lynn that it ought to rest entirely with the Executive
to determine 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 you. consent to a further diminution."
But that was not the question before the house. True, it
was agreed on all hands that no profit should be expected
from this source of revenue, but the question was not whe-
ther they should lay a lighter or a heavier tax upon the
retransmission of newspapers, but whether they
of should tax
those who did not read newspapers for the sake that por-
tion of the community who did.lfthey.lids what the
amendment proposed, it would be practically
the transmission of newspapers it the expenseofuthel' i.
ait9g
which was bad in prHinecikpoleow; bnnotroiansonhiisn ii the opinion
wor l wwl IL;
totally unnecessary.
literature at large might not cleim such a privilege just ays
well as newspapers ; but the real question to be determined
was, what was the lowest charge at which the State collie,
undertake the transmission of newspapers without incur-
ring loss. Of course, between large towns newspapers
could be transmitted in parcels by railway cheaper than by
post,
t but it was not fair to treat this as a question of coin-
petition between the Post-office and private companies.
Private companies were at liberty to make such arrange-
ments as best- suited their own convenience ;they could
reject or transmit, just as they pleased , but it was quite
different with the Post-office, because it had no alternative
bat to carry for everybody at a fixed scale of charge. The
consequence would be then, if the amendment were
adopted, that the railways would carry newspapers in bulk,
while the Post-office would have to perform the worst and
„, meet,9profitable part of the transmission service. Now,
--tie,;;,„,et'atP2s malt
undertake for a h lfpenny to perform
t' se
and the moat unprofitable portion of the
t
tea" or atteh as carrying newspapers to the greatest dis-
waa a seleatkertzgasote and unfrequented quarters ? That
to deseemia. alora much for the Government themselves
not be
.iieri(7 "`" ),is conviction was that the service could
the loss wo,alar4tl ;ore halfpenny. It was easy to say that
of trattrpart, Zama' between a halfpenny and the cost
became no smallVe,lMailt be three f riings • but the has
farthing by nineti'seer, when they came to 'multiply the
woctiacsbioZ inncre
ut:ct "i_v;4l.beveue.erour_bey- the still larger figures
trains to Liver, told thz.p.pers must necessarily
luneuestelie charge by the early would not pay to send
Times, and that it was clove •tba nisi
so high that it
anacatually eetjnetdasing sheet of the
the newspaper sheet w
Post-office train at ten o'cleonctkdOw' and for London when
aidedkit
provincial towns for them • . lie believe
It was difficult to get at preeisiens delivery
we charge in
under discussion, but he did not tlaeleset the 8a611b7 PeenenZe,
adopt the proposition of the hon. au al ea,„- would aieeceaaara
It would be highly undesirable to ta'ke geutleirnean-
could not retrace, for if they once adopted the the;
they would never be able to correct the error
be better for the Government to look into the -ns matter, .°l`,l
to ascertain whether they could carry printed matter -"-
lower rate than a penny. If they could do so, well and
good : but he considered it would be unfair to nee the 'l,'inad
of burdening the State with a heavy charge for a purl:,
which was not legitimate. (Hear.)
Mr. BARROW believed that in America newspapers
were conveyed 3,000 miles for one cent, and he took it for
granted that the Government of that country would not
carryon a business of that kind at a loss. He believed the
charge made. for earryi„ newspapers at present was 3'l.
per tea, The Chen the Exchequer seemed to ima-
gine that soma ties• ce or of
Minion-of dint4344..eulty would arise in the second trans-
right hon. geatieneatspapers. Now the objection of. the
tion upoe the eatimalatatit be obviated by writing thedirs c-
tended itt taw ateiTu''seerhe impression having been obli-
would be a very. the affixing of a second stamp
be again:, olemeeagea fit-neeeeeand that second stamp might.
‘.lliti#l:4 transmission should bit ne--
"
iihrignr;44fmreamibir f:piallyri2"4"ti--r—s..i""- on of the' hon. and
vf" "ither wore nor les s