The Sun.
London, England, 1853-04-15 00:00:00

matters with something like gradual progress. Had no
progress been made in this matter since the •times to
which the right hen. gentleman referred, when Lord
Castlereagh's acts were passed ? The stamp duty
upon newspapers was then 4d. ; it was now id. ;
it sounded like one-fourth—practically it was rather
less than one-third. That, at all events, looked
something like progress. (Hear, hear,) With respect to
the advertisement duty, it had been reduced from 3s. 6d.
to is. 6d. ; surely there again was something like progress.
(Hoar.), Not that was a reason for stopping—it was a
reason for going onward—(hear, hear)—but, for goodness'
sake, before we went onward let us consider our general
principles. (Hear.) He was quite sure he might appeal
to a gentleman of the acuteness and good sense of the right
hon. member to consider what a mischievous precedent he
was setting by inviting gentlemen to give votes upon a
series of resolutions, all of them to be given upon isolated
grounds, without any general or comprehensive view of the
state of the revenue. (Hear, hear.) Did the right hon.
gentleman think, that if the house were to encourage this
Practice of condemning particular taxes by one vote and
another, it was likely to be for the benefit of the commu-
nity? Did he think it likely that the expenditure of the
country would be balanced by its income; that the credit
of the country would be maintained ; that in the end the
burden upon the public would be lightened ? (Hear,
hear, hear.) With the very slight experience which he
had had in the office which he had now the honour
to hold, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did nor feel
any hesitation in calling upon the house not to force a
decision upon a subject which there had not yet been the
opporitunity of fully and fairly considering. (Hear,
hear.) He felt it his duty to represent to the house the
danger which menaced that great assembly of sliding
unawares into a practice perilous to the public inte-
rests and the public credit and the character of the house.
(Hear, hear.) What had been the propositions made to
that house during about eight weeks that he had sat in it
athseCNihraenstceßllokg
runof the Exchequer? The hon. member for
said a few nights ago that the house had
been voting away money at the rate of 1,000,000/. an hour ;
well, the house was most liberal in voting the public money
—(hear, hear) ; but, if it chose to do so, it must exercise
some self-command in refusing to shut up the resources
from which the public money was derived. It was im-
possible to combine the two things ; you could not play
with this system of condemning and vituperating taxes
unless you were prepared to give them up, and you could
not give them up unless you were prepared to adopt mea-
sures to which the house—the great body of the house—
did not see its way as to a total change and great contrac-
tion of the public expenditure. (Hear, hear.) What had
been the demand made upon the house ? The house had
met but a few days when an honourable member opposite
moved the remission of the hop duty ; that, he said, it
was impossible any Chancellor of the Exchequer could care
about, for it was a mere nothing—only about 380,000/.
(a laugh), and he was supported by a considerable number
of gentlemen in a vote to strike off that duty without
any consideration of balancing the> income and expendi-
ture of the country. (Hear, hear.) It was, however, a
moderate demand compared with some others. The hon.
member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), who came next, raised
his terms very much, for he moved for the repeal of Cus-
toms' Duties to the amount of no less than 1,350,0001.; the
hon. member did not indeed wish to press his motion to a
division, but a division was called for, and into the lobby a
number of gentlemen went in support of that proposition.
That was on the 3d of March. On the 10th the noble
lord (Lord R. Grosvenor), one of the most formidable an-
tagonists any Chancellor of the Exchequer ever had—(a
laugh)—descended from the hills with his motion against
the duty on attorneys' certificates. His demand again was
moderate—no more than 120,0001. That demand he pressed
to a division, and the house was pleased to affirm his pro-
posal,
in defiance of 'such opposition as the Government
could offer. (Hear.) , The house met on the 4th of April,
after the Easter recess. On the sth, an hon. member (Mr.
Oliveira) made a motion with regard to the wine duties,
affecting revenue amounting to 1,700,0001. He, however,
only proposed to take away about two-thirds of the amount
in the firstinstance, and with great kindness and considera-
teness he was content withthe discussion he had raised and
the opinions he had elicited, and did not press his motion
to a division. That was on the Tuesday. On the Thurs-
day—for there were two days in the week for these attacks
upon the Exchequer—a motion was made with respect to
the Irish Consolidated Annuities ; and that demand, sup-
ported by a considerable number of members, involved
2,003,0001. and upwards of revenue. (Hear.) On the next
Tuesday—they kept their times regularly—(a laugh)—
Tuesday and Thursday—(a laugh)—the hon. member for
Westminster (Sir D. L. Evans) made a motion to reduce
the duty on carriages, but the amount he affected again
sank miserably from the standard of the week before ; it
aesxsporkesinsidenasefnoatntoandistviradeet
the
se
house, and
la3n,dooone/t..
teanedalhe call
for
opinion. We had now arrived at the 14th, and there was
a most formidable ascent again in the figures, for the right
hen.
the house, not by a distinct
plain to condemn revenue amount-
teethwe
gentleman
vote
tto
part was a
with,
irtehr
butr ing
amount-
ing to 1,400,0001. Such was the rate at which demands
had been made upon the Exchequer during this short time
—amounting within these eight weeks to 7,800,000/.—
(hear, hear)—so that while the hon. member said the house
voted away public money at the rate of 1,000,0001. an
hour, large portions of the house had shown a vele, strong
reduction,asfirsei
pntlahnlaepcaactl iirtnetdghncoeteaeo softsnicwtteohoh, nefaoienrunfr
atetogeolhtt
0:s
:vsotfaoha
°hoc
oatreeneg,
ntuo
otedahnnhweeaoteetiaclrhy,
cyahoaffi
aduwtewdesnhceaneeeonsttetnso
no more
uemtmyhen(aaoynHdtntrishsyie
eddattsrbeerhoearty.
l
economy—the
rate,
raurrthwm,yeffhh,citanaeai
tettcsel
hxshtdwiechavetabehwephsootthealvuoii
to
stepeoitehoru anssbwhul
aalgoi
serioustolerably
disposed to think that the best mode of managing the
the instance of individual members, regulated by
mo-
tion should come first—(hear)—if they thought it a safe
course to encourage these motions and divisions with re-
spect
a public economy which might be highly acceptable to
many—(hear, hear, from Mr. W. William )particular
Williams )—a
the office he had the honour to hold. (Hear, hear.)
He
knew no conceivable reason why a gentlemani should be
appointed at a considerable salary, and decorated with a
certain title, as steward of the public revenue and guardian
of the public credit, and responsible for presentinc, to the
house, in some tolerable shape, a balance between ex-
pendittu-e and the income of the year, if the house, which
was supreme in all these matters, was deliberately of opi-
nion that the best node of dealing with them was by con-
demning on successive motion-days ono sum after another,
the lowest being the insignificant amount of 120,0001., the
highest rising to the dignity of 2,000,0001. (Hear, hear.)
That was matter for the consideration of the house. It
was impossible for him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer),
upon the present occasion, to say more, he thought, with
regard to the fiscal question than ho ad already stated.
With regard to the question of policy, he had stated in
the most distinct terms that the Government had no wish
to retain, and would not retain, any restraint whatever
upon the press for the sake of restraint ; that for them the
question would be a purely fiscal question ; and that the
claims of newspapers for relief from taxation, if it could
be shown (which probably it might be) that they paid more
than an equivalent for the service they received, should
meet with fair consideration, and he meant by fair consi-
deration a just and impartial comparison between those
claims for relief and the claims of the other great interests
concerned in the reduction of taxation. (Hear, hear.) The
right hon. gentleman could not ask him for more ; if he
stood where he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was
standing, he was quite certain he would not give more—
he would not consent to these affirmations. If the right
hon. gentleman (Mr. Gibson) were finance minister, he
would not consent to adopt a policy of promises instead of
performances. (Hear, hear.) There was a time, once a
year, when the minister was brought to book, and when
it was his duty to show what he meant to do; let him be
held there. If his proposals were good, let them be taken ;
if bad, let them be rejected. But let not the house deal
with the country in words and phrases. (Hear, hear.)
He had no doubt of the right hon. gentleman's sincerity ;
but he would say it was a dangerous practice to adopt re-
solutions expressive of general intentions, which he would
not say flattered passions, but raised reasonable expec-
tations—expectations which yet hon. gentlemen were nut
prepared to fulfil. (Hear, hear.) Were they, or were
they not, prepared to fulfil expectation in this instance?
Was the right hon. gentleman prepared to throw over
every other claim ? Would he cut off revenue to part with
these taxes ? It was fair enough in the right hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Gibson), as in the hon. member for Westinin-
ster, to raise discussion as the means of impressing upon
the public mind what was just, and upon the mind of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, if it were thought that let-
ters, and newspapers, and interviews were not sufficient ;
but not the house be led into the practice of dealing so
lightly with questions of public revenue, as they would un-
awares slide into, if they accustomed themselves to a course
of condemning one thing and another, and dissociating the
opinions they expressed from a carefully and well-weighed
estimate of their means of giving practice • I effect to their
resolutions. (Hear, hear.) These sentiments he had
thought it right to express. They were not in collision
with the doctrine of the right hon. gentleman as to the
freedom of the press, which was not merely. to be permitted
and tolerated, but highly estimated and prized, for it tend-
ed to bind closer together all the national interests, and to
preserve the institutions of the country. (Hear.) He (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not wish to convey an
approval of the taxes with respect to which the motion was
made. (Hear, hear.) He had stated frankly as regarded
the advertisement duty, he had stated as regarded the
paper duty, ho had stated without entering into detail upon
the amount of advantage derived by newspapers from the
post, as compared with the payment, that he should be
delighted to see the day when the burden upon newspapers
might be removed—(hear, hear)—and he hoped the right
hon. gentleman would not be surprised, considering the
number of departmental and financial questions which had
been pressed upon him during these three months, if he
was not prepared to enter with the right hon. gentleman
into the whole details of the statement with regard to
the proposal, for which no doubt there was much to
be said, of charging newsP
spore for Post-office services.
(Hear.) But he must own he did not quite understand the
system which the right hon. gentleman intended to pro-
pose. He said he
• would leave the established newspapers
as at present, but let the penny prints contain news and
go free. [Mr. Gibson—" I said, let the established papers
have the option of remaining as
of they are, paying the
for freedom transmission •if
stamp as an equivalent , they
do, there will be no loss of revenue, and allow a penny
paper to contain news."] But, the established papers were
seal,
not a corporation acting under to say as a body
whether they would remain as at present or not. (Oh !)
With respect to fiscal burdens, he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) entirely agreed
that, if there was to be a fiscal
was to
burden affecting the press, it affect the press in
comon with so many oth bl
er vlu e essentia thingsand
because of the necessity of raisian°e a publ' revenue,l and be,
cause we were obliged-
often to be satisfied with what we
had got, even when wo would have it otherwise if we
could. These necessities of revenue, however, might, at
some future period, admit of being modified. Whether
trusted the house would notpro-
ceedthoy did so or not, he
they .were prepared to give
to condemn taxes until
effect to their
resolution.(Hear.) With regard to the
second resolution, his objection again to the affirmation of
was extremely strong. He
abstract principles of policy not to seek tothe
en-
tirely agreed that we ought restrain
cheap periodical press from narrating current
event by re-
es,_under any notion that the cheap
strictions and duti
• dice] press ought to be regarded as otherwise than
Pen° • es a great engine of public instruction
capable of being ma
and public utility. (goe •
r, hear.) He agreed also that
newspaperspublic
the law relative to taxes onandu prints
deserved the attention of
world Parliament.act upon the t'
e hoped the
right hon. gentleman
for carrying on ettlenpleitllnc affairs
he would act if responsible
ch bett t public
1' ta d
of the country—that it was v_ery er o t iges an
mature plans of legislative refoniaat on which they thought
could be
than to deal in promises which were of no value whatever,
attended by promises, and which, in-
except as they were
was apt to lag very woefully be-
hind,asmuch performance
would become instruments of popular delusion and,
won.
though well intended by those who made them, the foun-
dation of a practice highly derogatory to the public in-
terests, and the dignity and honour of Parliament, and
tend greatly to weaken the confidence dof the people in
bli
those whom they had entrusted with the charge of pu o

affairs. (Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") He begged to
move the previous question.
Mr. BRIGHT thought that every gentleman who had
heard the debate must have come to the conclusion that,
at least, " the brains were out," whether the evil com-
plained of would die or not. (Hear, hear.) The speech
of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gibson) had not had any-
thing like an answer from the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
and, from the motion with which he had just concluded,
it might be presumed that he did not intend, to any se-
rious extent, to controvert the positions laid down by the
right hon. gentleman whose speech was so comprehensive
and so logical, and so full of facts that might well carry
conviction to every mind, that probably in the whole of
our fiscal arrangements there was nothing more stupid—
(hear)—whether it was a question of finance or of educa-
tion, than the whole of this body of legislation which had
come to be known as the " taxes on knowledge."
(Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Exchequer began by
admitting that the law as to the stamp duty was very un-
satisfactory, and he said that, with regard to the case of
Bradbury and Evans, the Government would undertake a
new bill to define the law more clearly. He appeared a
little annoyed at an exclamation which came from that
(Mr. Bright's) part of the house, and perhaps it was not
quite so courteous as it might have been—(hear)—but the
fact was that it was caused by a feeling of amazement that
the right honourable gentleman should have got no further
than this—(hear, hear)—that with this Government, con-

taining men who ought to understand the question
thoroughly, he was about to propose a new law to re-
enact restrictions which would have the same effect upon
the general question of the public press as the restrictions
now in force. The exclamation was one of amaze-
ment that he should have proposed to do no more. Yet,
towards the end of his speech, he held out, half-
coaxingly, the hope that the Government would con-
sider the question of reduetion. But, while ho concluded
with that delusive expectation, he commenced with
that " fullness of the heart " out of which " the mouth
speaketh," by proposing to bring in a bill which should
define the law more clearly and exclude Mr. Dickens, care
being taken that there should not be an untaxed press
throughout the united kingdom. [The Chancellor of the
Exchequer was understood to express dissent.] He (Mr.
Bright) wished the right hon. gentleman had said that the
proposed bill would sweep away those obnoxious laws.
With respect to arithmetical calculations, the right hon.
gentleman had made as great a blunder as that which he
charged against the mover. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer argued as if, of the 166,0001., not more than one-
third would be received into the Exchequer. But when
you had got an establishment with servants engaged and
salaries in course of payment; and when you came in the
end to a large amount of business, every charge having
already been made on the amount of receipts, those receipts
were then, for the most part, profit, and increasing profit,
to the establishment. His right hon. colleague was there-
fore fairly entitled to believe that of the 166,0001. at least
two-thirds, if not three-fourths, would be profit to the
Post-office. (Hear, hear.) The loss to the revenue, then,
became insignificant, if not obliterated, when the enormous
facility was considered which would be given to business by
the proposed alteration. But the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer was a Minister of progress. He (Mr. Bright)
believed so ; he had no expectation of having any Govern-
ment in this country again which was not formed of a
Ministry of progress. Those who had most pretended
otherwise within the last few years were just as fond as
others of progress when they found themselves on the Trea-
sury bench. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was more
ingenious than he was likely to prove successful when he
attempted to persuade the house that, because the stamp
and advertisement duties were reduced some years ago,
there was no reason why they should hurry forward—admit-
ting, however, that the reduction was no reason why they
should stay where they were. The right hon. gentleman
said the demands for reductions were likely to abolish
his office ; but on the wine and the carriage duties the
expectation of making up the revenue was stated. It
was not till the division become close that the window-tax
was abolished. The argument on the taxes to which the
resolutions related, as compared with others, was used by
all Chancellors of the Exchequer, but this proposition was
not brought forward as a question with respect to the
existing press, but because those taxes were the instrument
by which a much larger amount of press, so to speak, than
that which actually did exist, was suppressed and extin-
guished. Many of the most notorious journals did not
wish the house to interfere with the penny stamp duty.
One unfortunate result of a tax of the kind was, that it
narrowed industry till it became a monopoly in the hands
of old-establish.d firms and persons of large capital. He
(Mr. Bright) hid that day read a pamphlet, published by
the editor of a newspaper, against the motion, but one
could not peruse a passage without seeing that the author
was looking to his own journal, his own advertisements,
his own receipts, the absence of rivalry and competition,
and that his own interest had blinded his eyes on the ques-
tion. The extract of a letter from Lord Brougham to the
hon. member for the West Riding, which had been read by
his right hon. friend, deserved serious consideration. For
those classes of which the agricultural labourers might be
taken as constituting the chief portion, a London news-
paper was too large, too extensive, treating of matters
which, to their limited information, were entirely foreign,
and which were beyond their understanding. A London
newspaper gave them more news than a man such
as that had heart or power to read ; he had not broad
enough knowledge of history, of geography, of the
world, to relish the mass of information to be found
in a London newspaper. He wanted something more
applicable to his own condition—something more lo-
cal. Nothing was more true than_ the remark that

what a man did know must be made the medium of corn

municating information to him ; and when you interested
his faculties in a variety of subjects, and enlarged his
circle of information, you might at last have an educated
people. It was the small news of his own neighbourhood
that interested the agricultural labourer ; and that which
might be called of inferior quality might be made the
vehicle for conveying to him the knowledge of that which
was of superior quality. He (Mr. Bright) was glad the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had not committed himself to
the view taken in the time of Lord Melbourne's Govern-
ment. So he should have expected from the general libe-
rality of the right hon. gentleman's ideas, and ho believed
the noble lord the member for London took the same view
—that it would be unworthy of the present ago to main-
tain those taxes except on the principle of revenue. There
were persons who said, if papers were allowed to circulate
as freely as men to get on the top of a barrel and address
a crowd, the country would be flooded with pestilent pub-
licaUons. One met men who used oaths and obscene
remarks in their conversation, and desired to avoid them.
Would the public prefer what was nauseous and foul to
more wholesome mental aliment ? But the latter was
denied to them, the former freely allowed. Penny pub-
lications were permitted to issue with exciting and

horrific accounts.of matters, such as stimulated the pas-
sions, inflamed the imagination, and produced the most
evil effects, especially on younger readers. He held in his
hand a circular which contemplated this alarming state of
things and proposed a remedy. It was issued by the editor
of a paper called the True Briton' who, after acknowledg-
ing the generous support given to his views by Lord Shaf-
tesbury and others who were distinguished Christian phil-
anthropists, proceeded to urge the necessity of having
" papers of sound opinion, manly sentiment, and honour-
able tone, teaching what was right between man and man!"
Eut it was explained in other passages which the hon.
member quoted, that it was impossible to obtain a circula-
tion sufficiently extensive, unless clergymen and others pro-
moted such circulation in their parishes, the reason why
the paper did not compete with papers of another class
being, that those amazing accounts and exciting topics in
which the latter could not be furnished. If to the moral
essays were added an account of facts passing in this and
other countries, those facts would give a medium through
which these good things desired to be taught would be con-
veyed • and Mr. Abel Heywood, a respectable bookseller in
Manchester, and a large vendor of cheap publications, said
that the good infalliby, in the long run, and, even in a
short time, drove out the bad. That circular, dated April
29, 1852, was followed by another on May 6, 1852, which
spoke of the desire among the population for whom the
paper was intended to have " something that should be
fresh every week." Men now resorted to public-houses to
get a sight of a newspaper. But every man would have
his cheap newspaper on his table every morning, and not
only would it be an invitation to him to read, but an invi-
tation to his wife and children. The art and power
of reading would be as entirely possessed by every
member of the family as the facility of hearing or
of speaking. (Hear, hear.) The publication referred to
was described as having a considerable but not a paying
sale. The stamp strangled that and many other publica-
tions equally meritorious, yet it was not sufficient to put
down publications containing the most filthy and abomin-
able things ever printed, whether as regarded morals,
government, or religion. Let them make the press
the corrector of the press. An extension of political power
could not be prevented, and this of all times was the time
when a Government professing a great regard for education
should make a bold attempt to settle this question. It
was not a question of revenue. The Chancellor of the
Exchequer was only half the Minister who ought to have
answered. It was a question of education. If the stamp
were abolished the circulation of newspapers would in-
crease probably five times; but, supposing ld. or id. im-
posed on newspapers entering the Post-office, the amount
now levied for stamps would be made up, and probably
exceeded. With respect to the paper duty, he did not ask
on this occasion that it should be abolished, and thought a
Chancellor of the Exchequer might prefer dealing with the
soap-tax. The choice might be puzzling ; but the stamp
and advertisement duties raised a question which did not
materially belong to the office of Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. Their removal would be in accordance with the
policy on which the noble lord the member for London
had set his heart. With the general agreement which
existed in the opinion that the people should have no
restriction placed on their education, that free discussion
was the law of the constitution, and the law of the
prevalent religion of this country, he (Mr. Bright) could
not believe, after the speech of his right hon. colleague,
that the house would permit any Chancellor of the Exche-
quer for any long period—not, it was to be hoped, beyond
this session—to maintain the stamp duty on newspapers
and the duty on advertisements. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. WILLIAMS observed, that the only objection
which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had urged against
the adoption of these resolutions was, that he could not
afford to lose a revenue to the amount of 1,400,0001. The
right hon. gentleman calculated that the falling off of the
revenue would be equal to the diminution of taxation ; but
that was evidently is great error. It had been found by
experience that the reduction of a tax diminished the re-
venue in the proportion only of one-third of the amount of
that reduction ; and he would venture to say that if the
1,400,0001. were taken off the fall of revenue would not ex-
ceed 500,0001. He had shown tho right hon. gentleman
how he might greatly increase the revenue by equalising
the probate and legacy duties. (A lau.) He wished to
make the hon. gentleman who laughed pay as much on his
succession to his estate as the poor labourer paid on coming
to a legacy. If tho Chancellor of the Exchequer would
adopt the plan he (Mr. Williams) had suggested, he might
be able to repeal the whole of the 7,000,0001. of taxes
which the right hon. gentleman said he had been called
upon within the last eight weeks to remit. (" Divide !
divide !")
Mr. DANBY SEYMOUR would not detain the house
many minutes, but this was a question in which his con-
stituents took a very deep interest. He rose to express
his approval of the resolutions, and hoped the right hon.
gentleman who had introduced them would not be deterred
from pressing them to a division. Judging from the man-
ner in which ho had been met, the right hon. gentleman
had no reason to fear that his argument wouldwhbiechweha-
ened in the judgment of the house by the cave
been urged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. That
right hon. gentleman had stated that several
had been m present to him during the t •aPPlicatim3
maim for a re-

peal of different descriptions of taxes. The proper answer
to give to that argument was, that inasmuch as not one of
those applications had been granted, there was the greater
reason why the right hon. gentleman the member for Man-
chester should felicitate himself in the belief that he had
made out a stronger case for pressing upon the Government
his claim, and for calling upon them to make an exception
in his favour. It was not fair to put this question in the
same category with the hop duty or the wine duty. It was
not a question simply affecting the perishing wants and
necessities of the people, but it was one which concerned
the education and the • intellectual cravings and tastes of
the great body of the poorer classes of the community.
When, therefore, the right hon. gentleman asked the
house to accede to his resolutions, he was making an ap-
peal to them on higher grounds than those on which any
of the other appeals mentioned by the Chancellor of the
Exchequer were based. The Chancellor of the Exchequer
seemed very much to disapprove of abstract resolutions.
Now, he could not forget the memorable night, soon
after he took his seat in that house, when an abstract
resolution was most ably and fully discusscd—whether
the free-trade policy was "wise, just, and beneficial"—
(hear, hear)—and it appeared to him that the resolutions
now before them were equally worthy the attention of the
house. (Hear.) And what, after all, was it that was now
asked ? Not that the house should give a distinct pledge
to repeal the whole of the duties mentioned in the resolu-
tions, for the right lion. gentleman confined himself at pre-
sent to a sum of 170.0001. only ; but what he asked the
house to do was to affirm the principle of the resolutions.
No one could deny that the advertisement duty was unjust
in its incidence. The rich man who announced a sale, in
order to put money into his pocket, could aCord the tax ;
but the poor man who wanted employment could not make
his wants knowwnithwirtehgoatrl
to
beingtie stamp i equally
anllydtuatayeodn.
nelN7vsapsatphearst
it had been said that somaecoottnveid3entosaptiaosns
twharso
just ? Then,
ugivenh t the rPtohsatt-
duty by the paper being ll
office ; but that compensation was absurdly partial, for,
while you might send a paper backwards and forwa.rdsfrom
one end of the kingdom to the other by virtue of the penny
stamp duty, you could not circulate the same stamped
paper within the three miles' district of London without
paying postage, in addition to the stamp duty on the paper
itself. But it might be said that it was a question affect-
ing the improved character of the press, and it had been
observed that " cheap and nasty" were terms applicable to
literature as well as to other things. But experience vin-
dicated the argument of the right hon. gentleman (Mr.
Gibson), as the Penny Cyclopedia. Chambers's Journal,
and the works of other enterprising publishers throughout
the country fully proved. Upon all these grounds he should
give his cordial support to the resolutions. (Cries of
" Divide !")
Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE said he was not disposed to
mew) the repeal of the tax on paper for the present, but
with regard to the other two duties, he thought that the
right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had used the
most sophistical arguments in answer to the clear, compre-
hensive, and most conclusive speech of the right hon. mem-
ber for Manchester. There could be no doubt that at pre-
sent the country was inundated with a flood of mischievous
and pestilential publications, which stimulated the worst
passions of the vulgar, and which the house was unable to
encounter, because it would not allow salutary publications
to be issued on the same terms. Even if such an object as
this could be purchased with the sacrifice of a considerable
amount of revenue, he would say it was worth the sacri-
fice ; but when it was proved that this sacrifice would be
little, if anything, he was at a loss to conceive how any
person holding the character of a statesman, should hesitate
to repeal a tax that was so obnoxious and so mischievous.
He would not go into the origin of these taxes, but he ap-
prehended it was admitted on all hands that the intention,
when they were first imposed, was to restrain the diffusion
of information. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had re-
pudiated any such intention ; why, then, did he retain the
tax ? (Hear.) He thought the right hon. gentleman had
urged the objection drawn from the other motions that had
been made for a reduction of taxation as lif all these mo 7
tions had been successful. But the facts were not so. He
had himself voted with the right hon. gentleman against
the other demands that were made upon the Treasury; but
here the evil was so great, the sacrifice so small, that he
felt it was the duty of every man to record his vote along
with the right hon. member for Manchester. He asked no
man to vote with the right hon. member who believed that
the sacrifice was great, or that the object to be attained
was small ; but he had a right to ask those gentleman who
thought the sacrifice was little, and that the education of
the people was important—he asked, and he had a right to
ask them, to convert what was an object of alarm into an
instrument of good—he asked those who had made bread
cheap to minister to the wants and cravings of our intel-
lectual nature. (Cheers.)
Mr. J. L. RICARDO said the question immediately be-
fore the house was the repeal of the advertisement duty,
and to that proposition the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had given no satisfactory answer. Before going to a divi-
sion, the house was entitled to expect a declaration of the
opinion of the Government with respect to the policy of
the whole subject. In 1836, Lord Melbourne said he would
never consent to decide the question by paltry considera-
tions of revenue, but would treat it as a great social ques-
tion. The noble lord the member for London held office
under Lord Melbourne at that time, and it would become
him to speak out now on that part of the present Govern.
ment. The hon. member then expressed his disapproval
of Mr. Timm, the solicitor of the Inland Revenue Depart-
ment, in summoning the vendors of unstamped newspapers
instead of their publishers, before police magistrates for
infracting the law ; and, in conclusion, he called on the
Attorney-General to explain the provisions of the measure
which the Government was about to introduce relative to
the stamp duty on newspapers.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the publication .
against which Mr. Timm had proceeded—and which was
issued in the district with which the hon. member who
spoke last was connected—was as much a newspaper as the
Times, herald, or Chronicle, and it was only fair that
it should be subjected to the same stamp duty as
was imposed upon these journals. The object of the mea-
sure which the Government was about to introduce was to
remedy certain defects in the stamp law, and to remove
the doubt and uncertainty which had been caused by the
decision in the Court of Exchequer in the case of a publi-
cation called the Narrative of Current Events. The bill
would insure the payment of the stamp duty by all publi-
cations which were really newspapers, while it would
exempt from it publications like the Narrative of Current
Events, which were published at intervals exceeding 26
days.

After a few words from Mr. WILKINSON in support
of the 'notion,

Lord J. RUSSELL reminded the house that the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had shown that he had been called
upon to repeal taxes to the amount of 7,009,009/. before ho
had had an opportunity of making his financial statement.
It was said, on the other hand, that the house had not
sanctioned any of the proposals which had been made for
the remission of taxation. Very true ; and the Chancellor
of the Exchequer asked the house to pursue the same
course on the present occasion—(" Hear" and laughter)—
and to leave him at liberty to explain on Monday next the
manner in which he thought it desirable to proceed rela-
tive to the remission of taxes. This seemed to be a rea-
sonable request, and one which the house ought to accede
to. On the other hand, it could not be a matter of sur-
prise that the right hon. member for Manchester, being
strongly impressed with the idea that the taxes under con-
sideration were injurious to the country, should bring the
subject under the consideration of the house and enforce
his views with the ability which belonged to him. The
right hon. gentleman brought his three propositions under
the consideration of the house last year, and the house then
rejected them by a considerable majority. Tho propositions
must be considered separately, for they stood on different
ground, and the general term " taxes on knowledge" was
not one which, by any latitude of construction, could be
properly applied to the duties referred to in the resolutions.
Hear, hear.) As to the duty on advertisements, the right
hon. member had very truly stated that it interfered with
the general business of the country—with the requirements
of those who wished to obtain situations, to dispose of pro-
perty—in short, with all transactions connected with buy-
ing and selling. (Hear, hear.) It might be said that the
tax was not of large amount, but it interfered with the
business of the country. Besides it was a third tax ; first,
there was the tax on paper, then the stamp duty on the
newspaper, and, thirdly, the duty on advertisements.
The right hon. gentleman's other propositions stand on
different ground. It was said that the tax on news-
papers was intended as a restraint on the diffusion of useful
information. If that were really the object of the tax, it
would be inconsistent with the policy of the country. (Hear.)
Let information he diffused as widely as possible, and let
people form their opinion according to all the lights they
could obtain. For his part, he looked upon the stamp
duty as a tax imposed for the purpose of revenue, rather
than of restraint. The argument on the other side was pushed
too far, and the benefit which might be expected from the
repeal of the duty was exceedingly exaggerated. (Hear.)
Could it be seriously maintained that the removal of the
duty would encourage moral and religious publications,
and yet afford no advantage and facility to persons who
wished to issue publications of an opposite character?
It, unfortunately, could not be denied that there was a
portion of the community to whom publications intended
to appeal to the imagination and excite the passions were
more attractive than publications of a moral and religious
nature. (Hear.) He confessed he could not see that any
great advantage would be gained by the repeal of the news-
paper duty, and he believed that Lord Brougham's idea of
newspapers being circulated throughthecountry by hawkers
would not, under those circumstances, be realised. As to
the papers which were sold at 5d., and of which the stamp
formed one-fifth of the cost, it was that price which ena-
bled the proprietors to obtain, at great expense, authentic
information of what was going on in the world ; and, if
that information was to be obtained, it was not likely that
the price would be much reduced. As to the third ques-
tion, respecting the Excise duties, an hon. gentleman had
stated that he was not sure, in the event of a proposal being
made for the repeal of the duties on soap and the duties on
paper, which of the two he would
ho
choose.
gentleman was in this state of doubt,was If
unableihe h °IC;
ruensdoleurattioannd. how he
peacroeidild be ready to vote for
sstble
ththaettghd
eirn.
ntlpemtheneirshomuilnddvsotnepaegnaitnhset asutba reeNtv.henßutthewyhhaatdhneowt made
thechiefly
EExchequer
oc h
epciunt e to
wouldt hehouse a was,ke
his thatfi.n
sans n
itahle
statement Chancellor
on
feaeirnsti3dweraardttsenhiomf,
aonn t
(Hear, hear.)
part Monday o f thene xListe,wtoouledn thearrudpl
that
thei Government, and
yonbetah t time.
im-
portanton He t asked,heta part xt
therefore. withinetfho the
epfi.
evorens odntahyhesolPodafirtngothe office of Chancellor
of the Exchequer, that in these circumstances the house
should not without any necessity decide upon any question
affecting the taxation of the country. (Hear, hear.)

ISRAELI said, the noble lord having referred to
the discussion of last osticoxneunseeahrliymsifmorilmarakto.
3-77-. D
the present, the house would perhaps motion
ing one or two observations on the subject. He could quite
understand and sympathise with the feelings expressed by
her Majesty's Ministers generally on 'notions of this kind.
Ho and his colleagues had, when in office, to consider a si-
milar proposition to the present with the same responsibi-
lity. They had to consider, with regard to the three taxes
which the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Gibson), in a speech
of signal ability, had that evening brought before the house,
consider this
what course they ought to
pursue, and they had aLso to
question before the announcement of the
budget. He consulted Lord Derby and the rest of his col-
ject, and he endeavoured to conveyto
the house the impressions and conclusions at which they
had arrived, and the principles which guided Lord Derby
and his colleagues in the conclusions to which they came.
Objectionable as the tax on paper, in their opinion, was,
they did not think that, on the whole, in the present state
of our financial system or of the Excise duties, it would
kayo Dem; prudent, On that and other ooheideratione, at. all

to approach the subject of the duties on paper with a view
to a repeal. That was the conclusion which he conveyel
to the house ; but he said then, as he would now say, that
they opposed the two other taxes with very different feel-
ings—that they recognised a great difference between the
duty on advertisements, and the stamp on newspapers, and.
the Excise duties on paper. (Hear, hear.) They also were
of opinion that there was a great difference between th
duty on advertisements and the stamp on newspapers. fit,
said, then, that they acknowledged, especially with respect
to the duty on advertisements, that it was one of so grave
a character that it must receive the attention of the house.
(Hear, hear.) He asked the house, however, to postpone
their decision on the subject ; and fortunate was the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer who could induce a majority of that
house to support him in postponing the declaration of their
opinion till after the declaration of his—(hear, hear)—bu.:
ho must remind the house that he confessed frankly that
he considered it a great emergency, and that he informed
them they were not to suppose that he thought no person
was to propose a measure for the remission of taxes but the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Hear.) That would be an
extremely dangerous doctrine, sad one that he hoped all
sides would be careful not to admit. (Hear.) Acting upon
the opinion which, on the part of the Government of Lord
Derby, he was the organ of communicating to the house,
he had to consider the question, especially of the duty
on advertisements ; and it was the opinion of himself
and his colleagues that no time should be lost in proposing
the repeal of that duty to the House of Commons. (Hear,
hear.) At a subsequent period, however, circumstances
over which they had no control led to an increase of the
estimates, and made it necessary for hint to ask a supple-
mentary estimate, so that it was necessary to revoke that
immediate decision. (Hear, from Lord J. Russell.) If
the noble lord supposed that he was making a declaration
in that house that was not maintained by facts, he could
only say he would not have presumed to refer to anything
that occurred in council, or in private conversation ' • but
it would be recollected that a deputation waited on Lord
Derby, and that all that was said by him was said by Lord
Derby on that occasion. (Cheers.) That being the case,
and having shown to the house by a reference to this cir-
cumstance that there was a sincere determination on the
part of the late Government to teminate the duty on all
advertisements, he was now called on to look to the cir-
cumstances of the existing Government as to their ability
to meet a demand of that kind. (Hear, hear.) The house
would recollect that the duty on advertisements did not
come up to the sum of 180,00/. a-year. Now, the knew
from the published revenue accounts on the table that the
surplus now at the command of the Minister was more
than that which he had, he must be allowed to say, pru-
dently estimated. He hoped it would not be considered a
flagrant estimation on his part that he had gone upon that
calculation of a less revenue than it would appear had.
been 'actually realised. (Hear, hear.) He must, there-
fore, impress on this house these facts—that the surplus
was greater than last year, and that the amount of adver-
tisement duty they had to deal with was unquestionably
less than 180,0001. Were they justified, then, in dealing
with the first resolution of the right honourable gentleman?
His opinion was that they were not justified in dealing
with the third resolution. Totally omitting from his
consideration all those political and moral questions which
the right hon. gentleman had brought before them, and
looking at the subject merely in a financial point of view,
he did not think they were justified in dealing with the
third resolution, which involved a question of so much re.
venue. In the first place, he must repeat the opinioe
wwiethtohbee ecxonpresidsseereddlaasstfisyceaalrautthiaets
aanlldthneostehingthreesisde,uatineso
tthat,
olnoosikdienrgataitonthoef qaunesatinioonuasnt oonfenooft trsat.Tann, it involved
with( ea rt,he hear.)
first
e resolution,proposed
advertisements, and which involved a sum of less than
wh
which
washe
present to repealn t a
thenc instance
to
y deal
o on
180,0001. (Cheers.) Now, what was the principal argu-
ment that had been brought forward by the noble lord on
this subject? If there was an inference that could be com-
pletely drawn from it it was this, that no proposition for
the repeal of a tax should be made before the budget, an
what chance a proposition of this kind would have after
the budget he left the house to decide. (Cheers.) If they
sanctioned the proposition of the noble lord, that the Ad-
ministration of the day should possess the privilege and
monopoly of proposing the remission of all taxes, he asked
the house to consider well what would be the effect of such
a principle. (Hear.) Let them take any taxes the remis-
sion of which were acknowledged generally to have pro-
duced benefit to the community, and he asked if their
repeal had been proposed by the Ministers or by pri-
vate members of the house? (Hear, hear.) Why, it.
it was only after repeated discussions, and after public
opinion had decided in favour of their repeal, that it.
became the policy of the Minister. (Hear, hear.) It was
so with the motions introduced by Lord Althorn and other
gentlemen after the peace. (Hear.) Look at the repeal of.
the taxes on leather and other articles. The motions for
carrying out these objects were not made first by the Go-
vernment, but by country gentlemen ; and it was only
after a course of long-sustained argument that these remis-
sions were adopted. He need not refer to still more for-
cible instances in modern times—in times in which they
themselves lived, and in the house in which they them•
selves sat. Were those taxes repealed in accordance with
steps first taken by the Government ? Was the repeal
not, on the contrary, adopted by Ministers frequently
against their convictions, or after conversions as singular
as they were sudden? (Hear.) He thought, then, that
the proposition which the noble lord had so strongly im-
pressed upon them that night was one of a most dangerous
character, and one against which the house ought most
carefully to guard, if it regarded itself as being something
more than an assembly that had only to register the de-
crees of the Minister, and he didnot think that was a posi-
tion which any gentleman there would be willing to take.
(Hear.) He would recommend the house, then, to deal.
with the opportunity before them with great moderation an
great temper. He did not ask them to come to any extra-
vagant vote that he would not sanction himself, but ha
asked them to support the repeal of the advertisement
duty. That might not satisfy the right hon. gentleman
the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his friends, but
his business was not to satisfy the right hon. gentleman
and his friends—(hear)—but to do that which in all the
circumstances was most prudent and politic—to take that
course which was most beneficial to the country. (Hear,
hear.) He was not of the opinion that the press of
country could be too free. (Cheers.) He knew that, is
the press was now constituted, it was considered that its
agency and its efforts were not favourable to the opinions
he and his friends held or the views they advocated. It
was more probable that a press eminently utilitarian, and
which appealed only to reason, would exercise its influence
against them, but a Conservative press was not only a.
press that appealed to reason, or ought to do so, but was
one that appealed to the feelings ; therefore if its power
were greater, its influence more extensive, and its agen 'y
more diffused, it would be in proportion more valuable
and more influential. (Hear.) But he was now speaking
on the general theme. He looked at the first resolution of
the right hon. gentleman, and he saw thatii recommended
a policy which he believed to be sound and beneficial, an.i
which, both when he was in opposition, and when i
more responsible position, he advocated and uphold.
(Hear.) He did not think they ever could advance wits
the general question that had been opened to their con-
sideration that night if they missed the present opportu •
nity, and therefore he recommended the house to support
the rsght hon. gentleman in his first resolution, and settle
for ever the repeal of the duties on advertisements. (Hear,
hear.)

Mr: S. HERBERT should be sorry if the house were t,l
divide under the impression of the statement made by the
right hon. gentleman who had just sat down. (Hear,
hear.) In consequence of a cheer which came, from his
noble friend near him, the right hon. gentleman, in a tone
of some indignation, asserted what no one denied, that to
a deputation which waited on Lord Derby and himself last
year, they expressed their abstract opinion in favour of tho
repeal of the advertisement duty. (Hear.) But abstract
opinion unfortunately was sometimes overruled by great
financial necessities—(cheers)—and the right hon. gentle-
man, holding this abstract opinion, did not think it neces-
sary when he proposed his budget—(cheers)— did not think
it necessary to repeal that duty, or, even when the repeal
of this tax was proposed, to express any very strong opinion
in favour of a modification—(hear)—but to every one of
the propositions for repealing these taxes he and the gen-
tlemen acting with him were opposed. (Hear, hear.) Is
his budget there was no proposal for a repeal of this tax
but was that all that took place? That budget dived som :.
nir :
,t 1 hsryaistnnnt
distance into futurity, but the "abstract opinion" wa-.
not brought to bear upon any part of the right hon.
gentleman's future financial policy. (Hear, hear.) And
what did he ask the house to do now ? The financial state•
ment was coming on next Monday, and he told them not
to imagine that the surplus of the current year was to be
judged of by the past, but that there was to be a larger
surplus, and therefore the proposition of the right hon.
member for Manchester should be acceded to. (Hear.) Now
he would not anticipate the statement of the Chanoellor of
the Exchequer, but no one would imagine that ho would
have a surplus as large as that of the right hon. gentlemen
last year. It was the height of ingenuity and unfairness
to say that, though ho and his friends, when in office, hwi
a larger surplus to deal with than now existed, and refused
to adopt any proposal for the repeal of this tax, yet the
present Government, though their surplus was smaller,
were bound to repeal the tax. (Hear.) Ho hoped the
house would not be led away by the mis-statement that
had been made. They had heard the explanation of his
s i partyte, t'e
whoa
hopedr ight hon.they
sufficientfn
.0,
n.
gentleman
confidenceo f t hetosEac hm.t ei.
wgnq appeareder
carried:
ah,
htait
ohens
hot
actu
a htlhie(a
Have
went not to embarrass the financial exposition w
had to make by a previous vote for the repeal of any par-
ticular tax. (Hear, hear.)
iphbyeatwhmyoeulmmd,bitehbrsetohnpeopoobjects for
hde rwethuterhn of their would
give
hadvo e ri. v
no 'lb
i. e BALL
cordialAwouldLr
odrreslianjrcoecit
their friends to
power.
eareuasseonthfeorretwheaschaanchgaenoefeoopfinii
arrived. He would not support the resolution. before the
merely
Mr. which
c ttleitir vote
taNer ofe
said,w`ha se
Divide
u h If the hon. gentlemuna
d on which the right bon.
member for Manchester could ever hope to get his sn
(A. laugh. n was always to act on that
principle,then the only gro
would be by his
lhaaosugt srea.,n:b ee
&jig aßlarantee that he would
accept the offers of assista
minority.
The question was, would they
advertisement duty bePPo
in r:
tance with all hisy
heart.
9 carry the first propositions as to the
too true that when hon. gen(Chtlemeeeran.
side of the house tonee from gentlemen on the other
must say he accepted their assis-
)wenltt was, s unhappily,eoo
and took up their seatson the left of the Speaker's chair,
they became more prolific in promises and more liberal in
their professions an when they were on the other side of
the house ; and this rule applied equally to gentlemen now
on the Treasury benches. But the experience of 12 or 33
years in that house had convinced him that if anything
were to be done for the country, there was but one waylof
getting it, and that was for the party who took up a ques-
tion to avail themselves of any party in that house who
would help them. (Hear, hear.) They had been talking
as if the repeal of the penny stamp were about to pro-
duce a great number of penny publications ; but the fact
was, that the penny weekly and monthly periodicals al-
ready exceeded in numbers all the others put together.
The character of these cheap publications was not the moat
desirable for the instruction of their readers, for it was al,
most wholly imaginative, in the absence of all allusion k
the current events of the day. Mr. Heywood, of Man •
chester, one of the largest vendors of cheap literature in the
kingdom, stated before the select committee that he sold
100 per week of the Black Monk, 100 of the Blighted
Heart (a laugh), 100 of the Bridal Ring, 550 of iie_f;:t,
.Duval, 50 of the Hangman's Daughter (a laulj.,)o,Bo"weit,7alt
numbers of other works of the same class These
kind of literature Parliament forcingwasn 'anupod drat 3
theat was tphl ese
novels, issued weekly at the price of lel:;
to insert in their columns Xaatt Q
(hear, hear), because they would not oftfaaclitowmithetheeicourzurnals