The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-01 00:00:00

nVENINGI

TIITYR.SDAY.

TAXES ON NEWSPAPERS, AND THEIR
INJUSTICE.
(Frern the I.,:xp, sitor.)
N-,wspapers—:he porn:ars knowledge, the public
instructors in puliccal mat..ers, the medium through
which I.,vt-ul, scientific, find literary ittflmailon is con-
veyed to the public, the hertilds of the news of the day;
&godly needful to al! classes, from the i•Jile to the
mechanic—hive been by every Govternment, whether
Tory, Consrrvarive, or Whig (Protectionist inot yet
tried), tremed not only nnf.iriy, but unjustly. ..I{%ilroad

proprietors are now in pos;e-ssion of a privilege not
lenjoyed by the press, with all its allowed superior
advantage to mankind. We think we- hear our readers
say, can this ho poseiele? We say it is possible, and we
will state the grievance in as small a compass as the im-
portance of the subject merits.
It is pretty well kr owu to those conversant with the
sut.ject (aud to those who learn it for the first time from
this statement, we appeal to join the band already
formed to get rid of these unjust takes on knowledge)
that the newspaper proprietor pays on the article he
produces no less than three direct and distinct taxes: the
paper pays a direct tax per pound before it receives the
impression of the tyFe; a tax of id.
per sheet is paid to
the Ceranaissioners of Inland Revenue for the privilege
of having u blot of red on the corner of their paper in tee
shape of a distinctive die stamp; and they are again
called on to pay Is. 6 1. in the shape of duty for every
advertisement that appears in their paper. The first
tax on paper is injurious, ns not allowing papers and
periodicals to be published at a cheaper rate, or at ell
events preventing the proprietors of the cheaper
class of publications from paying men of talent as
they should be paid, consequently
not producing so
healthy and wholesome a pennyworth of knowledge as
the public would obtain, supposing this obnoxious im-
post to be abolished, The only argument, if it can be
so called, in favour of the stamp duty of ld. on each
newspaper is, that for this odious tax the Government
convey newspapers to all
parts of England gratis. This
is true, to a certain extent; but why tax the inhabitants
of large towns for the sake of those who wish the ad-
vantage of the post? It is well known that the large
towns throughout England, aye, aud small ones as well,
are not supplied through the post with the morning
papers.* They are sent by railway, and paid as parcels
to the railway companies by either the London or
country newspaper agent. This is not confined to the
morning papers; the weekly papers are conveyed to
country towns in the same parcel on Saturday morning
in most cases. If not, they send them by mid-day
-trains, So, to say the least, this is an unequal, cense•
quently an unfair, sex
Of the third tax, to which eve particularly. with to
address ourselves, we can only hope our observations
may have the same effect on the minds of our readers
that we have long felt, and with us consider this as one
of the most unfair, unjust, and unequal taxes that ever
entered into the mind of man to impose in a civilized
country. Unfair to tax any man who simply announces
in a newspaper he either wants to purchase a house, or
to sell an acre of land; yet the announcement may ap-
pear on bills posted on the walls, or exhibited on
boards by the roadside. Unjust 'to the poor ser-
vant ,who makes public in three lines that she
wants a situation, and charges no more to the peer
who requires a mansion, pleasure grounds, and ten
thousand acres of ground. Unequal in the case of a
poor decayed widow, who, in a very few lines, relates
her tale of woe ; for which the Government amerce
her in the shape of ls. 6d., and charge the wealthy
public companies, who occupy a column in seeking ad-
venturers in the Californian or Australian gold specu-
lation, no more. Let this pass, bad as it is. But what
do we find the Government allow? Highly as we have
shown the newspaper proprietor is taxed, we have the
extraordinary anomaly of the Government allowing
these railway carriages to be converted into newspapers,
and the walls of the stations into the mediums of pub-
licity, as far as advertising is concerned, without paying
one farthing in the shape of advertisement duty to the
revenue. Quite apart from the monstrous injustice of
this system, that allows railway proprietors to possess
the advantage of making known the wants and wishes of
advertisers free, while the newspaper proprietor is taxed
to the tune of ls. 6d. for every such advertisement,
look at the shortsightedness and stupidity of allowing
this system to continue, in a financial and revenue point
of view. Every advertisement exhibited at a railway
station, or iu a railway carriage, is really taken from
some newspaper, consequently is an injury to the news•
paper proprietor, who pays paper and stamp duty, and
is also a loss of Is. 6d. to the revenue which would be
saved to the Government it inserted in a newspaper, in-
stead of being allowed to appear in a railway carriage,
or exhibited at a station. To those who have had ex-
perience in advertising—whether as booksellers, ge-
neral advertisers, secretaries to public companies, or ad-
vertising agents—this fact will be patent, that a given
sum of money is settled as the amount to be spent on
advertising—of course modified by circumstances,
as the sale of the book, progress of the company.
&c. It is useless to say the money spent on railway
advertising is extra. We appeal to the classes of ad-
vertisers we have named in support of our assertion.
Why then, we ask the Government, is this, that the
newspaper proprietor is to pay ls. 6d. for every ad
vertisement that appears in his columns, while the
railway proprietors pay not a single farthing it,
the shape ot duty for advertising at their stations
and in their carriages? We especially commend
these last remarks on the injury to the revenue
to the consideration of every Chancellor of the
Exchequer, while this obnoxious impost con-
tinues. But we believe and hope the present
Chancellor of the Exchequer will take a more enlarged
view of the subject, and abolish the duty on advertise-
ments, paper, and stamps, at once. But, if he cannot
spare the trifling sum produced by the advertisement
duty, we urge on him the justice of dealing fairly by all
parties, and not allow the highly-taxed proprietor ot a
newspaper to be longer subject to the advertisement duty,
while the railway directors are allowed to continue
charging the public for advertisements that pay no duty.
This request is so fair and just, as we believe, that we
are anxious to hear what the advocates of railway mo-
nopoly have to say in reply.

INDIA.