The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-27 00:00:00

is proportionate to the services that their troops have
been called upon to perform. (Hear, hear.)
Tao vote was then agreed to, and the house resumed.

NEWSPAPER STAMP BILL.
Petitions iu favour of the abolition of the newspaper
stamp were prosouted by Mr. Cowan, from Edinburgh ;
by Sir J. Shelley, from Westminster and other parts of
the metropolis ; and by Mr. Hudson, from the printers
and newsvendors of Sunderland.

Mr. MILNER GIBSON presented a petition from the
proprietors of the Illustrated London Yews, praying that
the Newspaper Stamp Bill be passed immediately; and
another from the principal publishers in London, includ-
ing the Longmans, Murray, Hurst and Blackett, Chap-
man and Hall, and Bentley, praying that printed matter
might be passed through the post at the rate of id. per
four ounces.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
second reading of the bill.

! Mr. DEEDES, in rising to move the amendment of
which he had given notice, that the second reading of the
bill be postponed till after the Chancellor of the Exche-
! quer had made his financial statement, said that when
the rigid hon. gentleman introduced to a committee of
1 the whole house those resolutions upon which he based
this bill, he had not the good fortune to be present, and
1 bad not, therefore, the advantage of hearing the argu-
I meets used by the right hen. gentleman upon that occa-
sion; but on referring to the usual channels of informa-
-1 tion to ascertain what had passed he was forcibly struck
by the very slight encouragement which the right hon.
gentleman obtained from those who followed him in the
debate. It appeared to him as if every one who spoke
had some stone to cast at the right honourable gentle-
man, and was exceedingly noxious to point out to him thee
his proposed measure was not wanted by the country gene-
rally. If the right hon. gentleman had taken the advice
tendered to him upon that occasion, and had abstained
from interfering in the way of legislation in this matter,
instead of following the course which his predecessor had
laid down for him he would have escaped the difficult and
delicate task which he had imposed upon himself; both
that house and the country generally would have con-
sidered him perfectly justified in adopting that course, and
he would have lived to survive any attacks which might
have been made upon him from Manchester or elsewhere.
The observations which the right hon. gentleman was re-
ported to have made at the conclusion of the debate fur-
nished a complete answer to the necessity or advisability
of bringing forward the measure which he had now sub-
mitted to the consideration of the house. He based the
necessity of dealing with the question upon certain resolu-
tions passed unanimously during the last session, at the
instance of the right hon. gentleman the member for Man-
chester. But what did he say with regard to the financial
part of the question ? His remarks upon that point were
an answer to any necessity he might have felt for introduc-
ing the measure at the present moment. He said—"lf we
had at this time a surplus revenue, and if the expenditure
of the country did not greatly exceed its revenue, the
newspaper stamp would have a fair claim to enter into
any repeal or readjustment of taxes, and those who ob-
ject to it might claim that its repeal should have pre-
cedence in any financial scheme. This, however, is not
the financial state of the country, and, if the house should
decide in favour of this measure, it would be my duty to •
call upon them to provide for the deficiency of the revenue
by some other mode of taxation." (Hear, hear.) The
right hon. gentleman went on to say :—" It is my duty to
inform the house that the estimate of persons of authority
as to the loss of revenue must not be taken to be less than
200,0001. Such a loss of revenue is no doubt inconvenient
at the present moment. On the other hand, the house
will bear in mind that, to refuse to repeal the stamp would
be to recede from the unanimous resolution which it agreed
to last session, and will render necessary the passing of
some measure declaratory of the law." Now, nobody
would argue that any resolution of that house should
lightly be passed over; but every one must admit that
there was a fitting time for dealing with important public
questions, and the great objection to this bill was that it
had been introduced at an improper and inopportune time.
(Hear, hear.) Perhaps the terms of his amendment would
indicate that his objection to the measure was entirely
confined to the financial part of the question ; but he was
strongly impressed with the conviction that the bill was
open to far more serious objection in other respects. He
considered clause 1 to be the very pith and marrow of the
bill. The subsequent provisions referred to matters of
detail, but clausal provided that there should be no fur-
ther compulsory stamp duty for any newspaper, that there
should be no further compulsory registration, and that there
should be no further declarations. All these were matters
which had been enacted for the purpose of preventing un-
lair attacks being made in newspapers upon private charac-
ter, of raising as much as possible the character of the pub-
lications in question, and of offering a remedy if abuses
should exist ; but now they were no longer thought to be
necessary. Me confessed that he looked with considerable
dread to a relaxation of the law which would enable any
person so minded to pander to (he vices and prejudices of
those whom he might call ignorant and uneducated, and
therefore not able to discriminate between right and wrong.
He had seen, within the last day or two papers and writings
of the description to which he alluded, and he should be
very sorry to see them multiplied in this country. (Hear.)
Again, he objected entirely upon principle to taxing infor-
mation by the inch ; and because any one paper should
have taken more trouble and gone to more expense to get
information which was palatable to its readers and to the
public, he saw no reason why it should be called upon to
pay a heavier tax than a paper which catered less for the
public amusement or instruction. Was the present sys-
tem so faulty as to require amendment ? If so, was it
immediate amendment that was necessary, or was the
amendment proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer
likely to meet the evil. He was quite ready to admit that
there were in the present system faults which required
amendment, and that there were anomalies to which it
would be desirable to put an end ; but he denied that they
existed to such an extent as to render it necessary for the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to devise at present a plan for
the express purpose of removing them. At some future
time they might well be considered ; but he did not think
that the present measure was calculated to remedy those
evils in a manner that would be fair and just to existing
interests. He was otie of those who had frequently thought
that the press of this country sometimes overstepped the
and it.sd ulAdtt unfair attacks upon pri-
vate character ; he Celieve,l, too, upon a recent oceasionth tt
letters and statements had been sent from the seat of war
which were highly coloured and extr,rerated ; but still he
was convinced that, on the whole, this country was greatly
indebted to the press for the exertions it had inacle to pro-
vi le the public with information from the Crimea; and
he thought they would have reason to regret if the pre.is
should not in future have the power of following their vo-
cation in that respect. In dealing with this que.tioa he
could nut riltogetaer disregard the general subject of edu-
cation. There were it the present moineilt oh the table of
the house two bills relating to that subject. He under-
stood they were to he referred for consideration to a select
committee, and if, as lie suspected, the tendency of this
bill woul,l bo to give rise to publications of a licentious
and immoral nature, he should like to have the opinion of
that committee before he ventured to consent to the pass-
ing of such a measure. There was another point which he
considered of groat importance—the question of copyright.
Here he had the valuable opinion of the late Chancellor of
the Exchequer to stand him in aid. The right hon. gen-
tleman said upon that subject :—" There is another
point which is not a matter of indifference to me—
namely, the question of copyright for the protection
of literary property in newspapers. I don't wonder,
so far as we know anything of the plan of my right
hon. friend from his explanation to-night, that he has not
included in his bill any clauses upon this subject. I think,
indeed, it is a matter with reference to which it would he
very difficult to devise a plan. At the same time I am
under the impression that the proprietors of newspapers,
in many cases, entertain groat anxiety that the provisions
of the law with respect to the protection of literary pro-
perty should undergo special consideration, and should, if
practicable, receive some extension with a view to the pro-
tection of literary property in newspapers. Undoubtedly,
so far as the article that is most strictly called "news" is
concerned—for instance, the communication of facts,
which may generally be comprised within a very brief
space, and the language, the outward shape and form of
which cate be varied almost at will—l de not how you are
to introduce any further provisions than the law at pre-
sent contains ; but I have understood from some persons
who ought to be well informed on the subject that the
great anxiety of those who think this question worth con-
sideration in the press as it stands, is not so much directed
to the protection of their 'news' strictly so called, which,
in point of fact, it would be very difficult to protect, as to
the protection of what may more fairly be called their lite-
rary compositions, for example, the leading articles in their
newspapers, and especially as regards the London press,
the communications of their foreign correspondents. Now,
I for one am very anxious that, either in the plan of my
right hon, friend, or in some other effective form, this
question should be brought to a settlement." If the right
honourable gentleman were in his place he would ap-
peal to him to say whether the question of copyright was
dealt with in the bill before the house. There was no
protection whatever to newspaper proprietors in that mea-
sure. The words with which the late Chancellor of the
Exchequer concluded this part of his speech were so strong
that he could not resist quoting them. They were :—" I
do not venture to prejudge this question, but I would ven-
ture to express a hope that, in endeavouring to carry out
the principle of the freedom of the press, my right hon.
friend will not be indisposed to take into his favourable
consideration any reasonable proposition which may be
made to him for the improvement of the law of copyright,
in order that we may not run any risk of breaking down
that system under which the highest talent in the country
is largely applied and advantageously devoted to supplying
the public with intelligence, and to the discussion of that
intelligence. I must confess that I should regard the de-
destruction of that system as a public misfortune—a mis-
fortune which I am the less .disposed to incur, because I
do not look upon it as a natural or necessary consequence
of the important measure of emancipation which is now
contemplated by her Majesty's Government." In looking
over the present bill he was compelled to conclude that the
misfortune which the late Chancellor of the Exchequer de-
precated was likely to occur. A great improvement had
taken place in the general tone adopted by the press ; and
for that reason, among others, he thought it ought to be
protected. He remembered when day after day, and week
after week, prosecntions were instituted by the Attor-
ney-General, on the part of the Crown against publica-
tionseu that were a disgrace to the country; and he
revived.
be exceedingly sorry to see those publications
He believed that the country at large was
the law as it now stood, and thereforet
submittedhe
eces the existing
unless under very favourable circumstances, satisfied with
that,
might be asked
.distusrbend. Entertaining
why
arrangements ought not ttohebebill,
he
these general objections to
not move the rejection of the measure altogether.
Ig disil answer to that was, that he did not wish to embarrass
the Government at the present moment, when one of its
most distinguished members was engaged at Vienna in
conferences of vital importance to the world. He came
now to the more immediate subject of his amendment—
the financial view of the question. Hero he must
say that he was at a loss to imagine on wheA ground
his proposition could be opposed. He had already asked
the opinion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself as
to the present condition of the finances of the country, and
the impossibility of abolishing the newspaper stamp witl -
out calling upon the people to make up the deficiency by
some other mode of taxation. The right hon. baronet the
member for Portsmouth, who had also filled the office of
Chancellor of the Exchequer, estimated the probable loss to
the revenue at a quarter of a million, and remarked, "The
Chancellor of the Exchequer has fairly told you that if you
pass this measure he must of necessity propose some other
taxation to compensate for the sum it is proposed should be
lost. Well, then, let us know what is the taxation which
the right hon, gentleman will propose in lieu." Surely that
was a fair and reasonable proposition. These were not
times in which large sums of money should be thrown
away without the house being told how the deficiency was
to be made up. The right hon. baronet then proceeded to
Speak of the details of the measure, and he said :—" I will
not now enter further into dotaile of the plan which the

Chancellor of the Exchequer has explained so clearly and
candidly to the house, but if he proposes, after bringing in
his bill, to pass it before his financial statement, I am
afraid that he will find me prepared, even if I should find
myself in a minority of one, to vote for the postponement
of the measure." He therefore claimed the right hon. ba-
ronet as No. 2in favour of his amendment. Following the
course of the debate he found several other hon. members
speaking in the same strain, and although he could not say
that from the speeches of the hon. member for Manchester
he derived much hope of upport, still he was thankful for
the little he could get. When the right hon. gentleman the
member for Manchester said, " I quite agree with the right
hon. gentleman that we must be careful in times like these
in not abandoning sources of revenue, he strengthened to
some extent the case against the bill, or at all events pointed
out the danger of interfering with therevenue at the present
time. His hon. colleague in the representation of Manchester
almost seemed to have anticipated something like an appli-
cation for postponement. He did not consider the present
measure so good as that of the late Chancellor of the Exche-
quer ; denied that the question was one of revenue ; urged
the Chancellor of the Exchequer to pass his bill as soon as
possible, and deprecated delay. The hon. member was enable
man ; his speeches were admirable ; but he could not agree
with him upon the present occasion. In conclusion, he
might be allowed to say that he did not think the bill had
been sufficiently long before the house to allow all its details
to be understood. For that and the other reasons he had
stated he begged to move as an amendment that the second
reading of the bill be postponed till after the Chancellor of
no Exchequer had made his financial statement. (Hear.)
Sir E. B. LYTTON differed from his hon. friend and
from other hon. friends on this subject with great concern.
He was glad, however, to see that his hon. friend had not
narrowed the debate so as to reduce to a question of
pounds, shillings, and pence as important a principle as
any that the House of Commons could entertain. (Hear.)
He (Sir E. B. Lytton) was one of the first to introduce the
principle to that house in a motion for the repeal of the
taxes on knowledge ; and when his hon. and learned friend
said that the question was not long enough before Parlia-
ment, he begged to inform his hon. friend that it was
brought forward by him (Sir E. B. Lytton) twenty years
ago. He was then a young man, but the opinions he enter-
tained on the question at that period he entertained at the
present moment, and had seen no reason whatever to alter
them since. A great advance had, undoubtedly, been
made in the general intelligence of the country since that
time, and the dangers which then threatened had, it was
admitted, decreased. But why ? It was because during
the last twenty years cheap publications had abounded,
and because the public had had the wisdom to choose
the best of these publications and reject the worst.
He (Sir E. B. Lytton) had heard the arguments now
employed by his hon. and learned friend, in respect to
newspapers, not unfrequently urged on former occasions
against all cheap publications whatsoever, as if to adapt
the book market to the poor man's pocket was to corrupt
the public taste. But what was the fact? Why there
was such a profusion of good books published that the bad
books totally disappeared. (Hear.) At the present moment
the books to be found in the hands of the artisan were
either elementary scientific works, or works of entertain-
ment of a superior character. And now, when the danger
had disappeared, he would ask, had they a right to listen
to what newspaper proprietors would have them put faith
in, that any publication cheaper than their own was an
appeal to the passions of the public. Was it the cheapness
of the newspaper that was to corrupt the artisan, or the
vileness of the artisan that was to corrupt the newspaper ?
All those suppositions, however, were refuted by the evi-
dence of facts. Thousands of cheap publications had
brought to the cottage of the labourer, not the degrading
literature that was anticipated, but the most elevating de-
scription of knowledge. He (Sir E. Bulwer-Lytton) there-
fore entreated the house not to separate this important prin-
ciple from its consideration of the bill. He agreed that the
details required attention, and he thought it was not only
absolute justice, but sound policy, to give an effective and
simple copyright law to newspapers, something similar
to Sir J. Emerson-Tenneut's act for the protection of
designs and manufactures, which he believed would not
be difficult. As far as regarded the weight and size of
newspapers he thought the paper of the largest circulation
should be taken—the one in which the public felt the deep-
est interest. He was given to understand that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer meant to return to the principle of
weight. It did seem to him, however, that this would be
unfair, as it would separate a paper from its supplement.
Far from having any grudge against the existing news-
papers, he (Sir E. Bulwer-Lytton) agreed that the press
was an honour to this country, for ability in its composi-
tion, for the integrity of the men in whom its duties were
vested, and, always making an allowance for anonymous
power, for its freedom from calumny. (Hear, hear.) And
if he were called upon for a monument of our civilisation
he should point, not to our docks, nor to our public build.
logs but to a file of our newspapers. He could find nothing
to cling to except an Attorney-General who had not the
courage to prosecute, and a jury who would refuse to con-
vict. His hon. friend spoke in commendation of the tone
of the existing press ; but he would remind his hon. friend
that it was not the newspapers that formed the tone of the
public mind, but the public who gave the tone to news-
papers. And if the press was an honcur to the country', it
must be recollected that it was because it reflected the
masculine honesty, the vigorous good sense, and the civil-
ised humanity of the popular mind. They had been told
that this proposed change would have a tendency to degrade
the press to the level of the American press. They had
been told that the American press was in the hands of
penniless, illiterate adventurers, and that to this was to
be attributed its alleged low tone. Whereas the real fact
was, the American press abounded with the highest intel-
lectual characters of the country. There was scarcely a n
author of eminence, or a statesman of fame, or a man of
liberal opinions and sufficient merit, who was not a con-
tributor to the American press. They found the whole of
the literary talent and character engaged on the American
press, and therefore, if the press was inferior, it must be
owing to the less civilised character of the country (we
understood). It showed that the good or bad character of
the press did not depend on fiscal arrangements, but on the
standard of civilisation of a nation. lie would now come
to the main principle of the bill, and ho would venture to
place that in din principle on a higher and broader ground
than that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That right
hon. gentleman seemed to regard the bill rather with the
toleration of a step-father than with the glowing love of a
parent. He took the pi inciple to be this, that in a free
country they ought not to I.y a tax on the expression of
public opinion, or tax the diffusion of information on pub-
lie affairs--that information, according to the constitution
being the common interest and concern of every subject of
the state. Still less, they ought not, by means of a tax, to
create ariiticially by capit 11 a virtual monopoly of the right
to publish information on questions in which the whole
tribic had an equal and a common interest. That was the
principle of the bill and was the question before the house;
and they could not get rid of the fact that no man, what-
ever might be his talents, whatever his honesty anti know-
ledge, however sound his opinions, could publish his
opinions on the events and affairs of? the day iu a daily
journal without an enormous capital, or in a weekly
journal without several thousand pounds ; and that this
narrowed the liberty of publishing quite as much as if the
state sold for a sum of money the right to a monopoly of
the market for public information. (Cheers.) One result
was, to narrow the represeeation of public opinion. There
was either a large section of public opinion not represented
or repres sated inadequately. - He very much doubted
whether there were ten though ful men on either side of
tho house who, on great and important questions, could
find a single paper with which they could cordially agree
in opinion. Now, if they took the great Conservative
party, it would be found in the counties that the party
had a large majority, and in the towns they had a large
and influential minority. With respect to its comparative
strength, not its numbers, but its wealth and intelligence
must be regarded. Let the house consider how large a
share it had of the cultivated classes, the learned profess
sions, the clergy, and the gentry. Well, if they turned to,
the metropolitan press, would they tell him that the Con-
servative papers' circulation was in proportion to the num-
bers and weight of the party, or adequately represented its
intellectual eminence and wealth ? (we understood.) There
were two ways of representing public opinion—one
through Parliament, the other through the press. His
hon. friend below him (Mr. Deedes) would tell him that
the Conservative party was the largest integral body in
Parliament, and yet in the press there was no sub-division
of opinion so sparingly represented. If they looked to
the press generally and the number of copies circulated by
the various journals, they would be startled at the dis-
parity which existed between the influence in the
country of the Conservative party and their represen-
tatives in the press. (Hear, hear.) If the stamp duty
were removed, and if able men among the party pos-
sessed the power to defend their cause, could any
one doubt that all that talent, and knowledge, and
intellect could do would find its channel of representa-
tion ? No doubt that paper was the best which had the
largest command of capital, but then it was not always the
best newspaper that presented the best opinions. Some
took one course, some another • one paper was supported
on account of tho variety of its news, another because of
its political opinions. Twenty years ago he had convinced
himself that with respect to the Liberal press, there were
many safe and sound thinkers who would hold it to be
their duty to come to resist and counteract any revolu-
tionary or socialist doctrines ; and on the Conservative
side were they so indifferent as to be unable to defend, or
indifferent to the increase of their opinions ? He was per-
suaded if the duty was taken off, that many able writers—
gentlemen and scholars on their side—would come forward
to remove prejudices, and to enlighten the public mind as
to Conservative opinions and views, about whichthey_werf
just now very much left in the dark. He was convincedm
if the duty were removed, that many
—many eminent men of letters—would come. forward
w the
publish cheap journals—not, however, vr g
n stamped
Times, but works which would convey opinions
egn
could connected
exalt
avowed name. He
with the responsibility of the authors'
would not
was convinced that this cheap competition
eminent public
and
lower, but would rather elevate the moral character of the
With
ga.ennyttlheimn
social position, it would be doing away with the anony-
npreewssspaanpda
newspaper
the
li
tera social
mous character of public writers (we understood). He
turpeo;siftoiorn if anything
willingly admitted that no snore able and accomplished
gentlemen could be found than those who contributedte the
political department of the leading journals ; but, then, it
was in vain to deny that most persons felt an uneasiness at
their presence, and in holding social intercourse with men
who, in the exercise of their talents, must make secrecy a
necessary law. One naturally feared that the newspaper
contributor with whom ho associated to-day
might, in the
discharge of his professional duty, sting him darkly and
to the quick to-morrow. Mr. Fox told an anecdote of a
man who was giving evidence in a court of law, who said
he got his information from a ghost. "Well," said the
judge, " I know of no objection against taking the evidence
of a ghost ; let him be brought into court.' (Laughter.)
Anonymous Newspapers were a kind of ghosts—he had no
objection to their evidence, but at the same time he should
like to have them brought into court. (Laughter.) The
hon. gentleman (Mr. Deedes) appeared to argue the case
too much as if it was a question between the press and the
tax collector. He could not help smiling to hoar the hon,
gentleman say that the proprietors of newspapers slid not
complain of the tax, and why then should it be altered?
But what corporate body ever did complain of a tax which
restricted competition in their department, and. secured
monopoly to it? HeXwas amused to see journals which
formerly were warmest in their advocacy [of free trade
doctrines, now arming themselves with all the most anti-
quated arguments in favour of protective duties amounting
to absolute prohibition, which had been used so success-
ful:y during the last 10 years of the corn laws—arguments
which even the farmers would not have been beguiled by.
(Hear, and laughter.) The question was this—whether it
was not now high time to enforce the good principle of
the constitution, a principle consonant to liberty and com-
mon sense—that opinion should be free, and should not be
suppressed or fettered by fiscal arrangements, through
which liberty was filched and stolen away, but that it
should only be'subject to the laws of the country directed
against treason, blasphemy, and slander? Here he would
say one word on behalf of a class who were-the chief sups
porters of cheap publications—it was, that no claw in, the