The Sun.
London, England, 1852-05-13 00:00:00

upon the proceedings of trades through the medium of
public opinion, care will be taken that the public revenue
shall not be given away for the profit of teese particu-
ler parties.—(Hear, hear.) It is probably within the
knowledge of many whom I am address ng that a
most interesting, and, I think, a most i i pertant
struggle, is now in progress in the book trade—(Hear,
hear)—that, as I think most unfortunately, a large
number of the booksellers of London and of the country
—some say using the publishers of books as their in-
struments, others say led on and authorised by the pub-
lishers—are attempting by restrictions, as it seems to
me, of a most imprudent and unwarrantable character, to
prevent the price of hooka, which is so enormously high,
from being mitigated even to the extent of a few shil-
lings per cent. by the enterprise and energy of those
among the retail traders who are disposed to give the
public the advantage of that enterprise and energy.—
(Hear, hear.) I think it would be very unjust at the
present moment to bear hard upon this body of publishers
and booksellers, because, in a spirit which I think does
them honour, they have consented to refer the question
to the judgment of some distinguished persons—(Hear,
hear)—and at this moment Lord Campbell, with Mr.
Grote and the Doan of St. Paul's, is engaged in the
consideration of this question; and they have, I believe,
kindly undertaken to give their judgment upon it.—
(Hear, hoar.) To that judgment, I believe, the London
traders in books are prepared to submit.—(Hear, hear.)
I must confess I cannot much doubt what it will be.—
(Hear.) Tho House should be aware what is the
exact nature of the question. The publishers of books
are in the habit of supplying the retail traders at a
fixed price, that price being usually (with the excep-
tion of the case of wholesale purchases) at a dis-
count of 25 per cent. upon the publishing price.
The custom of the retail trade is, not to grant
the public who purchase a greater discount than
10 per cent., leaving 15 for the retail trade.
Some retail dealers say they can give a greater discount
than 10 per cent.; but then this combination stops in
and says, " You shall give no greater discount than 10
per cent. to the public, and if you do not come under an
engagement to that effect, we, by combining among our-
selves, will exclude you from the trade in books;" that
is, deprive you of the means of livelihood in the vocation
to which you have devoted yourself. This restriction is
in my view a great evil.—(Hear, hear.) I do not pre•
tend to compare the price of new publications with that
of articles of bodily subsistence in regard to the urgency
of the questions they raise; but I do say, that it is a
very great evil that the price of books should be raised
above what may be called the natural and legitimate
amount.—(Hear, hear.) And further, I venture to say
that the state of the book market, except so far as it is
partially mitigated by what are celled cheap publica-
tions, is a disgrace to the present state of civilization.—
' Hear, hear.) The controversy now going on with cer-
.
tsin retail traders, who in my opinion deserve great
credit for the energy with which they have struggled
against the power they have endeavoured to cope with,
is bat a part of a system.—(Hear.) I wish the House
were aware of the fact; in regard to the pro-
duction and the sale of books in this country. The
truth ,is, that monopoly and combination have been so
long applied to the whole subject, that they really have
gone near—l do not say to the extinction of the trade,—
but to reducing it to its minimum.—(Hear.) We have a
country that has by far the largest educated class in the
world. (A Member—" There is America.") I was
thinking of Europe, but, even taking America into ac-
count, we have a country in which the class that ought
to be purchasers of new books is the largest in the
world; I mean the educated class in that sense—the
men in possession of each fortune as ought to make them
the natural purchasers of new publications. That class
in this country is counted by twenties, and by fifties, I
might almost say by hundreds of thousands. But what
is the fact with regard to the state of the book-market?
It is, that with 'the exception of certain very highly-
esteemed and distinguished authors—with the exception
of such cases as Mr. Macaulay's " History of England,"
what are called new publications, not only in a majority
of cases, but in an enormous majority, scarcely ever
pass a sale of 500 copies. An immense proportion of
those that are published do not pay their expenses at all;
and I believe the proportion of them passing the sale
of 500 copies in this country, with its enormous means
for the cheap production of books, and for supplying an
extensive demand for them, is not more than something
like 5 per cent.; or, at any rate, not more than 1 20th
to 1-10th of the whole number produced.—(Hear, hear.)
Now what is the consequence ? It is a matter within our
personal experience. The purchase of new publications
Is scarcely attempted by anybody individually.—(Hear,
hoar.) You go into the houses of your friends, and un-
less in the case of books for which they have a profes-
sional want that must be satisfied, or unless they happen
to be persons of extraordinary wealth, you do not find
copies of new publications upon their tables, purchased
for themselves; but you find something from the circu-
lating library, or something from the book club.—(Hear,
hear.) But what are these book clubs and book societies,
which are engaged, with such an enormous loss of time
and waste of machinery, in the distribution of books
throughout the country? They are the ingenious ex
pedients which, under the pressure of necessity,
men have adopted to mitigate the monstrous evils
they experience from the enormously high price of
hooks, and satisfy in some degree their own demand
for that description of mental food —(Hear, hear.) Let
the House observe too how, in cases of this kind, one
system of combination generates and maintains another.
It has been the practice of the book trade to combine (I
do not use the term offensively) against the public; and
what is the consequence? The printers combine against
the book trade—(Bear, hear)—and very naturally.—
(Hear.) Ask a publisher why the price of books is so
high; he will tell you one reason is, "the printers have
entered into a combination against us"—(flear)—and is
it not perfectly natural, that if the journeymen printer
sees the publishers and booksellers combine against the
public, ho will say, "I will step in and get a share of the
fruits?" and so it is. —(lear.) I hold in my hand a paper
which has reached me, and other Members I suppose,
signed by two persons on behalf of the London Society of
Compositor;, and they say, " We draw your attention to
Mr. T. M. Gibson's motion for the repeal of the taxes on
knowledge; we believe that those taxes present unne-
cessary obstacles to the spread of useful knowledge
among the public generally." But I should like to know
whether it is not also the case, that the London compo-
sitors, who have so genial a sympathy with the Right
Honourable Gentleman, and so anxious a desire for the
spread of useful information, are and have been for some
time in strict combination together, and that the terms
and effect of the combinations are to raise the price of
printing per sheet in London, and Oxford, and Cam-
bridge, and I believe some other places, at least 25 or
30 per cent. above the price at which it can be executed
anywhere else.— (Hear, hear.) Now I hope, whenever
the Chancellor of the Exchequer may be in a condition
to propose to the House a remission of the paper duty,
these matters will be well looked into—(Hear, hear)---
and that we shall take care that the public revenue is
not given away for the purpose of facilitating or promot-
ing the extension of these combinations.—(Hear.) The
Government, no doubt, can do a great deal for the relief
of this immense evil; individuals cannot do it.
If a particular person who has a work to publish
chooses to say, " I will fix the price at one•half the
ordinary amount," he merely makes a victim of himself,
without acting in the least upon the state of the market
or acting sensibly upon the demand for his own book,
because the consequence of a bad system has been to
generate a machinery adapted to it, and book clubs
and societies are not sensibly affected by the price of a
book being more or less—(Hear, hear)--and the 3 o era-
tion of the natural and healthy play of the demand
principle
that ought to regulate the price, and of the
pl
that a book ought to sell for what it will tetchnineicithe
r
more nor less, is totally intercepted by the system which
has been so long in action.—(Hear, hear.) The Govern-
ment has been endeavouring to do something for pro_
muting the book trade in this country. For many years
negotiations hare been going on with foreign countries
for the prevention of piracy abroad. I had the satisfac-
tion when I was at the Board of Trade with my Hon.
Friend the Member for Glasgow (Mr. Macgregor) of
conducting negotiations with Prussia, and handing them
over to Lord Dalhousie, who was able to put his hand to
the first treaty of international copyright. There has
been a treaty since with France under the late Govern-
ment, and treaties have likewise been made with other
parts of Germany. That is most important to the
book trade of England, because, undoubtedly, the sale
of piratical publications is very injurious, and, by nar-
rowing the market, tends to force the elevation of price
in this country.—(Hear.) But as, by means of the in-
fluence of the State, we have opened foreign markets to
the English book trade, we have some right to expect
that efforts should be made by those who direct that
trade to produce books upon reasonable and moderate
terms with a view of supplying that demand.—(Hear,
hear.) The case of the colonies is a most remarkable
one. We attempted to vindicate the rights of English
authors in the colonies; but, owing to the monstrous
price of books published here, the grievance in the colo-
nies was felt to be so oppressive, that I believe it was
found necessary again to relax the law, and not attempt
to prevent the entrance of piratical P üblications —(ficar,
hear.) I believe there is hardly any article .on which
hthigehpuablirc are called upon to pay a price that bears so
1) ()portion to the actual cost of production as in
the case of books.—(Hear hear.) But the actual cost
of production itself is not a proper standard, because
that cost '
books thanisoenormonsly
nature enhanced, more perhaps on
then "Y
other commodity, by the restricted
of
demantdrade and the narrowness of the
that in this
circle of
—(Hear, hear.) I do conceive
for the production countryof we have the greatest facilities
der the disadvanta es cheap books.--s Hear, hear.) Un-
is quite plain, fro gOB
the efforts
the paper duty imposes, it
efforts which have been made
by enterprising and successful publishers, that even now
we can produce, quality consideredtiae, as cheaply as any
a) I sin convinced, if the
(uld permit you to resign the
finances country
ont.
theth e
State world.—(Hear) . w---o
paper duty, ycu ought to be the cheapest producers of
have the greatest advantages,
books in the world.—(Hear.) But
so
s, uso ptrhoad uce rs
wh
you
you have the
of the market and the demand tor books, scope
other csuntry.
nisterials for greater advantages than any
ocks ought to be
than in any oth r
The state of facts ought to be this ;_books
state (f facts
cheaper here and the sale larger.
country whatever. On the. centre!.
i 3, that so far as new publications are concerned, th
demand for books is narrower nod the price highsr then
in any other country in the world.—(Eltar, hear.) I
hope the (louse will forgive ma for drawing attention to
this important and interesting subject.—([l, ar, hear.)
I am happy to see that good sense and public feel-
ing have already acted so powerfully upon that
intelligent and respectable body, the London publishers,
as to induce them to refer this matter to arbitration
(Hear, hear.) I trust when that combination breaks
down, all other combinations affecting the book trade
will break down also.—(Hear, hear.) lam sure the
judgment expressed hero will act materially upon public
opinion, and.ehrough that upon the bock trade; and I
do trust, that before a great length of time, the eireura-

stances to which I have nivesteil, and which I say again 1
arc a scandal to the country, will diS3Dpear.—(Hear.)
Sir W. CLAY did not wish the debaten to turn wholly
upon the first of the three resolutions—that for the re-
peal of the paper duty; he thought the strength of the
case, at least with reference to immediate legislative ec-
tion, Icy in the other two—for the repeal of the news-
paper stamp and the advertisement duty, and he would
suggest that it would be well not to divide on the first
resolution, the ddision upon which would not be a
just indication of the feeling of the House, but would
be influenced by reasons apart from the real merits
of the case. There were, indeed, very strong
reasons for taking off the duty on paper, but that might
be said of many other, and especially of Excise of duties.
When, too, the paper duty was classed in the resolu-
tions with the rest of the " taxes on knowledge," it must
be recollected that a large proportion of the paper made
was not used for the diffusion of knowledge, but in ma-
nufactures, or fitting manufactured articles for exporta-
tion. Then, again, the House should not express an
opinion upon the paper duty, if (which he believed)
the Government could not fairly be expected to proceed
to act upon it in the present state of the revenue.—
(Hear, hear.) The paper duty should be one of the
first duties taken into consideration with a view to re-
duction; but it ought to be considered fairly
with reference to other duties and upon a ge-
neral via,/ of finance. These reasons for doubt
or hesitation did not exist with reference to
the other two duties—on newspapers and on adver-
tisements; the resolution as to them might fairly be
pressed, nor could ho see why they should not be
repealed.— (Hear, hear.) If the newspaper duty were
removed, a moderate postage duty would probably, in
a very great degree, supply the loss to the revenue; and
the extreme doubt as to the law with regard to the ques-
tion what was a newspaper?" would warrant the house
in incurring a greater risk of loss. The repeal of the
advertisement duty would extend the circulation of
newspapers and the diffusion of knowledge among the
people. One of the very ablest mea he ever knew said
he only read the law reports and the advertisements,
which he thought gave the most complete view of the
times. No one could doubt the great ability manifest in
the leading articles in the Times, or its admirable
arrangements for the collection and prompt diffusion
of news from all parts of the world ; but if
you went into the shops and warehouses and counting-
houses of men of all shades of political opinion, and
asked them why they took the Times, you
would find them all concur in one reason. After
paying a just compliment to its talent, they would tell
you—Wnig, Tory, and Radical—that it was indispens-
able to them to take in a paper in which they found such
a vast amount of information as was supplied in its ad-
vertisements.—(Neer, hear.) He would repeat that the
repeal of the advertisement duty would increase the cir-
culation of newspapers and the spread of information; it
had been said that he would be a very well informed
man who should every day diligently read several of the
daily papers.—(Hear, hear.) A friend of his, jest re-
turned from America, af:er a tour in some of its wildest
portions, told him that in a log hut on the very borders
of the prircmval forest he had found persons, in more
than one instance, better informed with regard to the
Great Exhibition, and the character of the articles ex-
hibited, and number of persons attending, than would in
most provincial towns of England, or perhaps in many
houses of the lower class in London.
Mr. MO WATT believed that it took years, and con-
stant repetion, to
.obtain from Parliament the removal
of evils, however gross; and therefore ho was not sorry
the debate had been adjourned. But it was for the
Chancellor of the Exchequer or his colleague to explain
the motives that induced him to suggest an adjustment,
and to represent that, on the eve of the budget, it would
not be advisable for tho House to express an opinion
upon this subject. It was now clear that that sugges-
tion was not made with any bond fide intention of meet-
ing the grievances complained of.—(Hear, hear.) The
matter before the House touched, perhaps, two of the
most important questions of the age—the education and
employment of the pe iple. We professed to be anxious
for the education of the people, but we gave 250,000/.
towards this object, and took from them 1,400,000/.
Messrs. Chambers were obliged, mainly by the paper
duty, to give up their Miscellany, when it was circulating
80,000 a week.—(Hear, hear.) The well-known pub-
hiller, Mr. Charles Knight in a work entitled Struggles
of a Work against Excessive Taxation, showed
that no less than 32,000/. was paid for paper-duty on
account of the Penny Cyclopodia. In consequence, he
obtained no return. The penny stamp made a larger
amount of capital necessary for a journal than, would
otherwise be required. With respect to the advertise-
ment-duty, what could be more cruel and unjust than to
throw difficulties in the way of people who had to
struggle for a livelihood announcing their wants, and so
having recourse to one of the most available means of
obtaining employment? Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who
had been getting up protection associations, showed the
inconsistency of their conduct in raising the cry that
native products were not protected when they sanc-
tioned such a gross interference with native
industry as the tax under discussion involved.
France read this country a practical lesson in
the employment it gave by the manufacture of articles
of luxury from paper. he manufacture of paper itself
was kept in a stationary condition, was yet in its in-
fancy, owing to these vexatious duties. France and
America were outstripping this country daily in the
paper trade; and America actually bought at the doors
of our cotton manutactories the dross and refuse, which
were conveyed across the Atlantic, made into paper,
and sent to our colonies, where he had seen that Ame-
rican paper. It was said the revenue could not afford
the reduction. So long as the particular impost under
consideration could bo shown to press unfairly in a sense
apart from its peculiar pressure, a case was made out
for a reconsideration of the impost. The Government
were bound, for the reasons stated, to remove the paper
duty, even if a deficiency should arise. There never
was telt any difficulty in making good a deficiency from
any other cause. The true reason for refusing the pro-
po,ed reduction was, that the pressure from without
had not sufficient influence; the class who had most in-
flums were not sufficiently represented in that House.
What was it the Chancellor of the Exchequer took
credit for in the budget? Was it not that he admitted
in substance the great truth that, by continually re-
ducing import duties and Excise duties, succes-
sive Governments bad been able to give an impetus
to the public prosperity? The Right Hon. Gentleman
ought to have said, " That was the course adopted in
spite of my denunciations, and I will follow the same
policy." But the budget of the Right Hon. Gentleman
was a stand-still and do-nothing budget. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had interposed on this very topic,
holding out inducements to the belief that ho would con-
sider the imposts which were the subject of discussion;
experienced and crafty, he said he did not mean this one
or the other in particular; but, if he did not mean the
House to understand that ho had a bona fide intention of
dealing with those imposts, why should he indulge in
mysterious and vague enunciations?

Mr. REYNOLDS, in stating his intention to support
the motion, wished to caution the Right Hon. Member for
Manchester against taking the advice of the Hon. Member
far the Tower Hamlets, not to divide on the first propo-
sition—namely, the repeal of the paper duties. That was
the most valuable; it would emancipate labour, add to the
employment of the people, and prove the means of re-
lieving the pressure of distress. They could not well
educate the hungry. Tho paper duty was a war tax
introduced in 1711 by Sir Robert Walpole. As an
Irish representative, he (Mr. Reynolds) complained of
the continuance of that duty. From 1711 to 1798 there
was no such tax in Ireland. In 1793 a tax was imposed
on the machinery employed on the manufacture. Ireland
having been politically married, by a sort of forcible ab-
duction, a charge of 3d. per lb. was imposed on paper of
all qualities, which in 1837 was confined to wrapping
paper, 4d. being then charged on the finer qualities. A
commission appointed in 1834 to inquire into the policy
ortpst
the
reported
cieoEnrhug ont
Irish
cihwonhi
wuset
distillers,i
thatqhgnauegul
eoeprnttaohh et
cl
questions
owrcyneyh dmsoouuat
giihenhaset
to
remained.
d putb
He
be
leather,
ie mpaskede oa ffl e glass,ch
as;eacrt hdhaeatnnhodear
Chancellor
al
upon
appr paper,
ofw coulditchonatni
continuing
oibnuegt hatfnouslweorf
chargee a
t7iol
ptheer moonshine,cb eunbdyt:
cut valorem on the conversion of rags into paper could be
justified, when the Right Hon. Gentleman permitted the
Manchester manufacturer of cotton to convert cotton into
every imaginable kind of fabric without a duty at all,
and the woollen manufacturers of Yorkshire to convert
wool into all kinds of woollen manufactures also
without a duty? If there was one part of the united
kingdom which would reap more benefit than another
from the repeal of the paper duty it was Ireland. Hon.
Members might think, but abstain from saying, that
Ireland abounded in the raw.material for rags; but on
the contrary, rags were imported from Germany. The
fibrous portion of the bogs would be found the best
fabric for brown paper; the beat foolscap could be ma-
nufactured from straw ; the fibrous material of fl tx,
worthless for other purposes, could also be converted
into paper; but these materials could not be manufac
turgid into paper because of the Excise duty. The col-
lection of the paper duty cost 12 per cent. in England
and 20 per cent. in Ireland, on the amount collected. In
1850, 30,0001. were collected in the district of Dublin' at
a cost of 6,0001., or 20 per cent. on the amount collected.
In 1837 the Irish paper manufacturers manufactured
3,700,0001 b. weight of paper; the duty was altered that
}ear, .and the result in 1849 was that the quantity had
increased to 6,500,000ib. In 1837 the quantity of
paper that paid duty in Great Britain was
77,000,0001 b. ; in 1849, 127,000,0001 b. The eman-
cipation of trade had increased the quantity
manufactured. The Thames and Mersey had :been
opened for the reception of food from all countries, and
Ireland had received no equivalent benefit on the repeal
of the corn-laws, at which repeal he rejoiced. But the
ityofFilrlrs idle;eenchgra and he asked the House to
inandofFrenchmillinghad
set the hrieorlri,h millers
grant this small pittance of justice. He asked them to
his mill, on which in
sl eotm tels ei Irishta ne
efisoisi
or
omoiol
rhaad"bleyen expended, to the con-
version of the peat of the bogs into paper. He asked re-
lief for interests which were paral) zsd. The total paper
duty paid in Ireland in 1840, was 23,1601.; in 1843,
30 995/ ; in 1846, 38,559/.; in 1849, 41,163/. In 1846
the paper manufacturers of Ireland were forty; hsw
many were convicted of breaches of the excise-laws?—
thirry-two. The effect of the law was not only to man-
eel° labour, but to hold out a premium to manufseturers
with elastic c eisciences. Ho had presented petitions for
a repeal of the paper-duty, signed, not by owners of
mills, but by the men and women there c mployed. The
total signatures amounted to 1,219. Although he was
favourable to a repeal of the duty on paper and upon ad-
vertisements, yet he had great doubt of the necessity,
and a greater doubt of the wisdom, of repealing the
stamp-duty on newspapers. So long as they charged id.
for the transmission of a letter through the Post-office,
they ought to continue the stamp as a charge for the
transmission of newspapers.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO hoped his Right Hon. Friend
would not withdraw any part of his motion, for he did

not consider that the budget of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer showed that the repeal of these taxes could
not be afforded. The Right Hon. Gentleman heel most
ingeniously, to serve his own parpo3ea, mode the cur-
plus appear as small as possible; but ho (Mr. ltiearde)
was of opinion that the surplus would be quite sufficient
to meet the deficiency that would be occasioned by the
repeal of these duties. But he rose principally for the
purpose of pointing out to the Government the necessity
of affording some relief to the Attorney-General, for it
was quite impossible for any law officer of the Crown
to be in a greater strait than the Hon. and Learned Gen-
tleman was in respect to the stamp duties upon news-
papers. The papers were upon a sort of sliding scale.
There was a stamp on the daily papers, and, as the
weekly papers interfered with the daily, it was
but fair that the weekly should be stamped;
then came the fortnightly, which interfered with
the weekly; they, therefore, were stamped; bat
Government had recently found that there were
monthly papers which interfered with all the rest, and
it therefore was held to be only fair that the monthly
should be stamped also, and they had accordingly dug
out a clause from an old Act of Parlicment—the 60th
George In, for the purpose of carryinc, out this now
discovery. But that Act was not !Pissed with any re-
ference to revenue at all. It had nothing to do with the
stamp duties. It was one of the famous Six Acts, and
had no other object than the repression of the liberty of
the press. The Attorney-General, however, had found
that even that Act would not answer his purpose; the
consequence was, that the threatened prosecution against
the proprietors of these monthly public Itions were sus-
pended. He wished to ask the Attorney-General whe-
ther h: really meant to prosecute those parties or not?
If he did, there was no reason why he should not prose-
cute the publishers of quarterly publications. Nay, if he
insisted on having in sothly publications stamped,
there was no reason why a stamp should not be imposed
on the publication of the " History of England." He
would repeat the question—did the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman intend to prosecute these monthly publica-
tions, or not?
The AT rORNEY-GENERAL—I do.
Mr. J. L. RICARDO proceeded to address the House
for some time under the impression that the Attorney-
General had said that he did not intend to prosecute,
but having been informed by Hon. Gentlemen around
him of the mistake he had fallen into, he discontinued
his remarks on that point and made the following state-
ment to the House;—A gentleman of the name of Clark
commenced the publication of a paper at Wisbeach, and
issued it without a stamp. The solicitor of the Stamp-
office wrote to and informed him that it he continued to
publish it without a stamp he would be prosecuted.
Alarmed at a prosecution in which, even if suceessfuLhe
would have had to pay his own costs—for the Crown re-
ceived costs although it did not pay them—Mr. Clark
had his paper stamped. Finding afterwards that a pub
Hellion called the Stoke-upon-Trent Monthly Narrative
of Current Events was advertised to be published with-
out a stamp, he communicated that fact to the Govern-
ment, and asked whether he was himself really obliged
to publish with a stamp. The solicitor of the Stamp-
office immediately wrote to the proprietor of the pro-
posed publication, informing him that if ho issued
his paper without a stamp he would be prose-
cuted. His (Mr. Ricardo's) constituent (Mr. George
Turner) was not, however, so nervous as the gentleman
of Wisbeach, and he wrote to Mr. Timm, the solicitor of
Stamps, referring him to his (Mr. Turner's) solicitor.
The solicitor of Mr. Turner wrote to Mr. Timm, saying
that he wrs instructed to receive any process which
might be issued against his client. Mr. Timm, in reply,
stated that he had received no instructions upon the
matter. Now, could, there (he would ask) be an act of
greater tyranny and oppression than this? Here was a
man who, having his capital invested in a publication,
was threatened by the law officer of the Crown with a
prosecution unless he discontinued that publication, and
when that man alleged that ho had not disobeyed the
law, and was prepared to prove it, the law officer
refrained from prosecuting, leaving him and
hundreds of others in the unpleasant alternative
of withdrawing their capital or of having it invested
in a business which it was illegal to carry on. He
hoped the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would take
notice of the statement which he (Mr. Ricardo) had
now made. There was another question which he
would put distinctly to the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man, and it was this—Did he intend to prosecute the
proprietors of the Art-Journal, the Musical Times,
Tait's Magazine, the Evangelical Magazine, and several
others of a similar character—all monthly journals, and
published exactly under the same circumstances as the
Household Narrative? Then there were the weekly
journals, such as the Friend of the People, Kidd's Ex-
positor, the Literary Gazette, the Lancet, the Legal Ob-
server, and last, but not least, our friend Punch, who
also was very fond of alluding to current events.—
(Laughter.) He hoped the Hon. and Learned Gentle-
man would give him an explicit answer to this question,
in order that all those who were interested in the publi-
cations he had named, and others, might know whether
they were to undergo prosecutions from the Government
or not.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL would endeavour to
answer the question pat to him by the Hon. Gentleman,
but he extremely regretted that he should have been so
entirely misunderstood. In the first place, he did not
think the Hon. Gentleman understood precisely what
were the duties of the 14w officers of the Crown. When
the Hon. Gentleman asked him whether ha purposed
prosecuting the proprietors of certain newspaper publi-
cations, he appeared to suppose that the Attorney-Ge-
neral instituted proceedings whenever he found any
paper unstamped, or considered that there were other
grounds for prosecution; whereas the course pursued was
:—lf the Stamp-office found that there was a publi-
cation issued without a stamp which they thought ought
to be subjected to a duty, they instituted proceedings
against the parties, and that, very frequently, without
any communication with the law officers of the Crown,
who would know nothing whatever of the proceedings until
the briefs were placed in their hands for the purpose of
conducting the prosecution before the court. Where
any doubt existed as to the liability of parties, the opi-
nions of the law officers might be asked, but it rarely
happened that their opinions were consulted before the
matter was ripe for trial. With regard to the proceed-
ings in the case of the Household Narrative, in the first
place ho had to observe that those proceedings were
instituted by his predecessor in (Aliso, and not by him;
but in saying that he meant no reflection on his prede-
cessor, because he thought he should have done precisely
what his Hon. and Learned Friend had done. If his
opinion had been asked whether the question should be
brought into a court of law, he should have been of opi-
nion that it was desirable to have the law on the question
settled. Proceedings hating been instituted against
the Household Narrative (which was considered, pro-
bably, the representative of a class of publications), it
was arranged that the facts necessary to raise the guns-
General), of course knew nothing what-
tion of law should be turned into a special case. Ho
(ts h
ae
of
Attorney-
everterms which were arranged, but, inasmuch
a
t h
speciale case was framed in
.order to obtain the
opinion of the court, it was impossible, whatever the
might have been, to carry the
judges were divided in opinion
judgment ma
tnehyne t
fs
uou
rfbtihtehec
ret .
The
; court might
the majority were of opinion that the
Household Narrative was not liable le) a stamp duty; but
Mr. Baron Parke was of a different opinion. When he
(the Attorney-General) came into office the opinions of
his predecessors and of the present Mr. Justice Cromp-
ton were placed before him for his opinion as to what
was proper to be clone under the circumstances, they
being of opinion that the judgment of Mr. Baron Parke
was one which was more satisfactory to their view of the
case
Now,
h antheifohpep(otsh opposite judgment of the majority of the
court.
Attorney-General) had not himself
entertained some doubt upon the subject, ho confessed ho
t
should have been considerably influenced by the opinion
of his predecessors, and should have felt it his duty not
to leave the law in so unsatisfactory a state as that of
having the opinion of the law officers opposed to a
judgment pronounced by a court'of law without the pos-
sibility of taking the opinion of a superior court upon it.
In answer to a question put by the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Member for Manchester, he (the Attorney-Ge-
neral) at an early period of his coming into office stated
that it would be necessary to obtain, if we could, the
opinion of a superior court upon the question; and that
he did not wish the law to remain in so unsettled and un-
satisfactory a state. There had been a misunderstanding
as to the coarse which it would be necessary to adopt.
It was supposed that he would carry the case of Mr.
Dickens to a court of appeal, whereas the nature of the
proceedings rendered it impossible for him to do so. What
he proposed to do was to institute another prosecution;
and he distinctly stated that the Court of Exchequer
would in that new case of course, and without argument,
confirm the
Judgment it had already pronounced,
and then that that judgment would as speedily 53 pos-
sible be taken to a court of error, in order to have a
final decision upon the subject. The Hon. Gentleman
had put the question to him over and over again, as if
he (the A ttoriaey-General) were afraid of answering it,
as to what was the course he intended to pursue. He
begged distinctly to say that the course which he had
pointed out as the one which he should adopt had been
already pursued; that another information had been
filed; that that information would result in a special
verdict, which was distinct from a special case, a special
case terminating in the court where it was decided, while
a special verdict admitted of an appeal. To show how
extremely desirous they were to have the question fairly
raised and disposed of, there being same dispute as to
the terms in which the ecial verdict should be drawn
up, it had been arranged between the junior counsel for
the Crown and the counsel on the part of she defendants,
that Mr. Baron Martin should settle the terms of
the special verdict, he being one of the judges
who decided in favour of the defendants. With respect
to the case mentioned by the Hon. Member for Stoke-
upon-Trent, he (the Attorney-General) assured the Hon.
Gentleman that he never heard one word about it until
it was alluded to by the Hon. Member for Montrose.
With regard to the question • of costs, that he admitted
was one of very great importance. The Hon. Gentle-
man was not perfectly correct in stating that the Crown
received costs but never paid them. The Crown never
received nor paid costs. But it was a subject which had
not escaped his attention. He had been very anxious
about it fur a considerable time, and was particularly
desirous that in cases of this description the defendants
should be protected in the matter of costs.—(llear, hear.)
He was extremely desirous of introducing some measure
which would give the deiendant costs where the verdict
should be in his favour. With regard to the whole mat-
ter, he would conclude by saying that ho had in this
case followed the course of his predecessors. He did not
wish to shrink from any responsibility e hich attached to
him. He had done that which he was sure his prede-
cessors, if they had been his successors, would have
done, and had adopted the course which ho considered
the best, with a view to obtain a satisfactory decision on
the law bearing on this important question.
Mr. MACGREGOR considered the paper duty to bo
one of the very first cases to which the Chancellor of the
Exchequer should turn his attention, with R view to its