The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-17 00:00:00

CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.

Mr. HE ADL AM wished to ask the Attorney-General
whether he was prepared to introduce into the Cha-
ritable Trusts Bill a clause exempting Dissenting chapels
from its operation.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he had received
deputations on this subject from various Wesleyan
bodies, but he must decline granting exemptions to any
party.
Mr. KEOGH put it to the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man whether there was any chance of disposing of this
Bill in the present state of public business, particularly
as its principle had not yet been discussed.—(Hear.)
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it stood on the
paper for to-night, but he should not bring it on after
ten o'cleek.—(ilear.) The principle of the Bill had
been recognised by both Houses Of Parliament, and he
was most anxious for it to pass into law.—(Hear, hear.)
He would, however, state en Friday what chance there
was of his doing so this session.—(Hear, hear.)
THE REV. MR. BENNETT.
The C EIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said Perhaps be might be permitted to
take that opportunity . of conveying to the
House the result of their inquiries, which
Government had instituted with reference to the insti-
tution of the Rev. Mr. Bennett. The law officers of the
Crown had reported to Government that her Majesty
had no means of making any efficient inquiry into the
subject through the medium of a commission, inasmuch
as tho commission would have no power to summon
witnesses, or to compel the production of any necessary
evidence that might be required. Besides, if such a
commission were to issue, the Crown might be embark-
ing in a course of investigation which might assume a
character of an ecclesiastical inquiry, which might be a
direct infringement of the Bill of Rights. The
Government had, therefore, acted in accordance with
the legal opinion. But had they believed it possible,
under the existing law, that a person in connexion with
another Church would be instituted to a living in the
Church of England, in defiance of its professed princi-
ples, they would not have hesitated, notwithstanding the
peculiar aspect of the session, to brine; in a Bill to
remedy so anomalous a state of things.—(Hear.) The law,
however, it was thought would be sufficient to meet the
case, and the Government had not deemed it prudent to
give an advantage to the offending party by trying to
vindicate the law in an illegal manner. He was satis-
fied that the coures which they had pursued would
meet with the approval of the House.—(Hear, hear.)
Her l'ilajeet.y.e Government bad been advised that the
present, state of the law furnished a remedy. By the 3d
and 4th of the Queen, cap. 86, commonly called the
Church Discipline Act, it was open to any pariehicner
of Frame to appeal either to the Bishop of
the diocese—(lronical cheers from the Opposi-
tion)—in which the offence was alleged to have
been committed, or to the Bishop in whose diocese the
offender now held preferment, and might call upon either
of those prelates to issue a commission of inquiry
to investigate the circumstances. If there were
proved before that commission a prima facie
case against the offender, it was in the power
not only of the prelates but also of the parishioners of
Frome to call for-a judicial inquiry, and on the guilt of
the offender being proved to punish him either by de-
priving him of the benefice he then held or suspending
him from his sacred functions. So far as her Ma-
jesty's Government had been able to learn, no
steps had been taken by any of the parishioners of
Frome to make any such appeal, and despite the iro-
nical cheer which had been raised on the other
aide of the House, her Majesty's Govrnmcnt had suffi-
cient faith in thel discretion and in the sense of
clivlipt that they could not supposes that they
ulOppose any obstacle to the exercise of this legal
tte,remedy. Her Majesty's Government had given great
coeparo
o uouconsiderationoiuiiou_toi thisw hiewhich
subject,he andtho
thought
ty bad
the
coma
n
House of
that beer Commons would agree with them—
,
e any other step were taken those who
complained of a
redress which the grievance ought to seek that
them. present state of the law afforded to

Go-
vernment had Luken a wished to know whether the Go-
Mr. GLAD
STONE
conduct of the Bishop nyi, s'epa to ascertain whether the
theanydoinWt evillshichhadthteeeffnoinn.
alllploeinctsaacAcoxrediEnt tr.,eo
R law,
EXCHEQUER said he
otheßel"hh.
could scarcely understit,eltaodwi
Gentleman w!shod to
prefermenta'-
could not see that
Alr. LIORSNIAN said' h
Honourable Gentle-
the remedy which the Ri he
man lisd referred to, as Obit
iDnDlythteo Pthaewecraine.f Theany
offences
in the diocese of
ca:ishionsr, was one which veeals
Rev. Gentleman now held
Continent, and
13 itb. and 'Yells, and part of the
refer the
that part.
Mr. 13:31nett had taken place eauetheees charged against
what cfict could the remedy relic
Right Ilonour..blo Gentleav4n have d on by the
As another illustration ho would
the Catholic Directory, published monthly, i House to
givea a list of pave rts to the Thrnan C' holm
in which was
'holm Church,
in which he ter. 1 the name of Mr. W. J p.
- ' B. Bennett
of St., Paul's, KnigLt,b-ficlgo, t 5 convert on jni' llte
1851, and at tie erAi of the announcement' D'h'
•atius• Now, he -- the
thanksgiving, Dec gi • would ask
what redress had the parishioners of Frn '
against this. The compo'6ition, too, of rhee
tribunal—composed of five clergymen nominated by the
Bishop of Bath and Wells—was not very satisfactory.
It was now a month since he had brought forward his
motion; and he thought that, if the law officers had
taken all that time to find out the existence of
this tribunal, there had been a considerable
time wasted. Ho gave notice that he should to-morrow
move for a Committee of Inquiry into the truth of those
foots which he had stated on a figmer accusivn.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
it would not be expedient to take any further steps until
the present means of redress had been exhausted.
Her Majesty's Government did not wish to mix them-
selves up with the circumstances of this ease, and they
did not feel it their duty to counsel the Queen to insti-
tute an inquiry, which they were advised, and which
they felt by their own experience would not result in
any good effect.
Mr. GLADSTONE said, that as the Government had
not appeared to have taken any steps to inquire into
tha conduct of the Bishop of Bath and Wells, which
on the occasion of the former discussion had been
stated to hove been entirely illegal, be wished to
give notice that when the opportunity arose he should
be ready to show that that Right Ray. Prelate had acted
throughout in entire conformity with the letter and
spirit of the law.
The subject then dropped.
THE MILITIA BILL.

The House then went into Committee on this Bill,
resuming at clause 14.
(LEFT SITTING.)

THE DIVISIONS AGAINST
KNOWLEDGE.
(From the Weekly Dispatch.)
Mr. Editor,—The conduct of our representatives is not
only closely watched just now, but they are fully aware
that it is so, and are evidently led thereby to conduct
themselves more carefully. Even short memories wili
last till hustings time. Let the caitiff tremble who has
reason to dread the poplar in'errogatory. Votes, now,
will not pass " unwhipped of justice;" nor, it may be,
unwhipped of prejudice either ; for the nonsense, the
selfish interests, and the bigotries of constituencies are
telling upon the House of Commons, as well as their
good sense, their patriotism, and their justice. All
those who have electors now think seriously of those
electors. When the Speaker puts a question to the
Members, he often puts many a Member to the question.
Feeling, as your readers doubtless do, a strong interest
in the repeal of the imposts popularly described as Taxes
on Knowledge, I have looked curiously on their behalf
to the debate and the several divisions of Wednesday
last. There are some things in them which deserve to
be noted and remembered.

The movers of the agitation against these taxes have

not gone to work in, nor been animated by, a trading
spirit. They regarded rather an intellectual result than

acommercial profit. The Paper Duties, however ob-
jectionable in themselves, only came into their view as
connected with the diffusion of intelligence and litera-
ture. Those duties stood last in their list as to import-
ance, though first by far as to the question of revenue.
The conjunction of this item with the Stamp and
Advertisement Duties, the addition of a commercial
and manufacturing grievance to a purely intel-
lectual one, and the co-operation obtained there-
by of influential parties connected with the paper-
making trade—all this has been effected in the political
managt ment of the agitation. A few votes have been
gained thereby; altogether, I fear, the cause has been
damaged. The tone of the discussion has been lowered.
Success has been postponed, rather than accelerated.
Another lesson has been added to the many which teach
us, that there are no tactics like simple and straightfor-
ward earnestness.
Tho newspaper stamp establishes a practical censor=
ship of the press. It puts the entire cheap periodical
press under the arbitrary power of the Board of Inland
Revenue. Mr. Timms is the autocrat of this species of
litetalure. He tolerates, and he destroys. Some publi-
cations he indulges with whole columns of intelligence;
nay, he patronizes them with a stamp, which
frees of post-office charge so much of their
issue as is destined for the country ; while
in other publications he will not allow the
shortest paragraph. Timms nods or winks no
longer. Forth comes a missive from Somerset-house,
and the reluctant editor, who never dreamed of offence
in just mentioning, perhaps, a Reform meting which
had been held, or which was about to be held, finds that
he has only to make up his mouth for the muzzle, or
he buried alive beneath a crushing pile of penalties.
Thus has journal after journal been suppressed. And
thus will it be, with our legal definitions of a newspaper,
until the stamp be abolished.
What literary man, what man of active thought upon
topics of deep interest. can communicate freely with the
public, unless by the grace of the large capitalists in
whom the present system vests a monopoly of the
media of communication? Talent is treated as
marketable, and that tends to make it market-
able. Look at the large sales which are required
to render a cheap publication profitable. How can its
proprietor dare to confront a popular prejudice? If 20,000
or 30,000 would answer, he could afford to tell the many,
in plain terms, when they were wrong. But if 70,000
or 80,000 bo necessary, he has no such margin; he is
faithful at his peril, and the bull will gore him to death
should he venture to take it by the horns. This is the
gravamen of the charges against the Taxes on Know-
ledge, considered specifically as such, and not as con-
nected with merely trading considerations.
Now, topics of this higher kind were very much
swamped on Wednesday by the allies of the cause, to
whom 1 have adverted. The protest against a degrad-
ing influence upon intellect was, to a large extent,
merged in a protest against the exciseman. The paper
of which we heard most was brown paper, for thft
wrappage of parcels, or that of which little boxes are
made to hold cotton threads. Had it been Disraeli's

cue to speak, he would have had a fine field for
sarcasm on this species of intellectual grievance.
It was not from the study, but from the shop, that the
csmplaint came. When Learning should have spoken
for Edinburgh; and Genius for Dublin, wo heard little
mora than a sordid grumbling of the exciseman's being
troublesome in the North, and of Ireland not being suffi-
ciently favoured by only having to pay a shilling upon
the advertisement and a halfpenny for the stamp.
Accordingly Mr. Cowan, who opened the adjourned
debate on behalf of the shopocracy, did not vote for the
repeal of the Newspaper Stamp. Mr. John Best, after

supporting the first, or trading motion, voted against
both the remaining propositions. So did the Hon. H.
Fi zroys Colonel Matheson, and Mr. J. Abel Smith. Sir
E. Buxton, Mr. Monsell, Colonel Boyle, Sir D. J. Nor-
rays' Mr. Osborne, Sir G. Philips, absented themselves.
And a negative was given upon the repeal of the News-
paper Stamp by Mr. M. Forster, Lord R. Gosvenor, and
Mr. H. D. Seymour,
So much for the heartiness or the sincerity of those
parties as to taxes upon knowledge. For some reason
or other—l will not inquire why—they want an Excise
duty taken off. For that end, though the sum is a large
one to abstract from the revenue, they are ready to turn
the screw upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer. But
a penny paper for the people is no part of their plan.
When we get to cheap news for the multitude they fly
off. They stir not to obliterate the brand from the
journal, or to dethrone the censor at Somerset-house.
The vote of Mr. John Walter was very significant.
He voted for the retention of the Paper Duty and of the
NewspapPr Stamp, and against the Tax on Advertise-
ments. Who cannot read monopoly against the public,
and cheapness for the monopolist?
Messr. Brotherton, Perfect, and Tenison, voted against
the repeal of the Paper Duties, and for that of the Stamp.
There were with them Headlam and Thornley, who did
not vote on the first division.

The following went for the repeal of the tax on ad-
vertisement?, having voted hostilely, on tho first divi-
sion :—Bailey (Monmouth), Brotherton, Castlereagh,
Dalrymple, Freestun, Mostyn, Perfect, F. C. Russell,
Walter. These may be added, who had not voted in
that division; some, at least, from accident:—Sir W.
Clay, Sir C. Douglas, Fordyce, French, Ilorsman, C.
Lushington, The O'Gorman Mahon, Tenison, Tiaorn-
ley, and Tuffnell.

pTe
pnhogert
threerbas knowledgewtehree oo second; tx r
less
da i is
bei
division
sael(evorenan
ttmusthhea than
stamp). mthe measure r theirno rit
Theirminority
Seutr
against the paper duty, and by 16 than that against the
advertisement duty. On that 100 they may rely; at
any rate within sight of an election. And they are now
in a condition to judge of the wisdom of being mixed up
intoe
L h fora million
al
shfmetcayilthoolemimgmo
common-place
the
olneiinaeonn-dnrvpde.e
revenue,
etcaoi
negAt
uagenet
dya
voterwttt
hhea eers
csaidwatageei
use:a eghlrt
eirranteviignt
taohs:gnt
eeetsl fa.
insteadpwnb paper-makers.d
psTea therh"
oderef
degradedeo
lemdekdsaesi
ntr
than
oh. nfa objection,
osnr.
taxis
at
ti c
thh pe r essasme e
u pt
iomn
ec, e tnaj i
unro uss feetclass,or
tt fah oeurghmii;,6ideonn be tfl eas s
the community.
But we see how it is that the House of Commons,
even on what is called the Liberal side of it, looks at a
question of this description. Few of them care whether
the people have the means of free mental communica-
tion. The question is subordinated to the profits of a
papermill. The book and the box are on the same
level. Each is considered as a manufacture. More
z2al is manifested to bar out the exciseman than to stop
the censor. One cannot but wish, and almost expect,
that Disraeli will turn round upon them some day, in
one of his bold freaks, and show that he better under-
stands the intellectual wants and wishes of the people.
The chief reason why he will not is, that he knows how
feeble, in their logical support, are the dogmas of the
party which he has to lead.
The Division Lists furnish materials, which have
never yet been fully used, for holding the representative
body to a strict responsibility. The votes should be
recorded and analyzed from week to week, from
month to month, and from session to session, until
the whole conduct of every individual Member, through-
out the duration of a Parliament, is before the public.
It should appear bow far he is attentive or negligent,
consistent or capricious. We shall have before us the
statistics of slavery to party and of crotchetty individua-
lity. The majority have little reason to care about con-
stituents. They buy and bribe them, or in many cases do
without them. For such, there is no responsibility, except
that of publicity. Yet even they may be capable of feel-
ing soma shame when a strong and continuous light is
thrown upon their doings. At any rate, the exposure
will help ns ou towards Reform. The number of elec-
tors, and the popu:ation of the places represented, should
always b appended to the division. Letjthe people see how
often they are outvoted, and by whom. Resolve many a
majority into its constituent elements, and it becomes a
pitiful minotity. Were the stamp off, there might be
publications appropriate to this purpose. Constituents
might keep them as a parent keeps a character book for
his child, with its good and bad marks. But Mr.
Timms would call this nevi s, and indite a letter of
warning to the editor.
Really, this is the most hypocritical country upon the
face of
makeof theesapretehches inits
.From one of it to the other we cant about
education. Our divines preach sermons, and our states-
men praise. And then its progress
is effeclually stopped by the religious difficulty at one
point,aLd by th© fiscal difficulty at another. When children
should be instructed, they are crammed and choked with
theological dogma. When the self-taught would read,
the bode or newspaper is taxed out of their reach.
Church and State unite to press down the intellect. The
arms of ignorance have for their supporters a Biabop and
a Chancellor of the Exchequer.