The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-24 00:00:00

THE ADVERTISEMENT DUTY.

(From the Morning Advertiser.)
There is a danger, amid the excitement caused by the
critical state of foreign affairs, and the attention devoted
to political questions of home interest, of forgetting
matters of very great importance to the community,
though not kept so prominently before the public eye.
In this category may be mentioned the advertisement
duty. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is about to
bring before the house his project for modifying the sup-
plement, the stamp, and advertisement duty. These are
matters—especially the advertisement duty—on which
the public have a deep interest, and it is of importance
that they should be duly alive to the fact, that they may
bring the needful pressure to bear on their representa-
tives when that portion of Mr. Gladstone's budget is
brought before the house for its sanction.

With regard to the stamp duty on supplements, we
are willing, under all the circumstances, to accept the
plan of the right hon. gentleman. It is not what we
could have wished it to be, but it is a vast improvement
on his original proposition. A grasping and monopoly-
seeking rival, will not get from the scheme, as it now
stands, all the benefit which it would have derived from
the proposal as it was originally made. It will place us
in a position to cope still more effectually with our con-
temporary than we have yet done,—though our success
in that way has immeasurably surpassed the most san-
guine (expectations we had ventured to form on the
subject.

With respect, also, to the advertisement duty, we of
course prefer a sixpence impost on the announcements
made in our paper to one of eighteenpence. To the
humbler classes of society in want of situations, or having
intimations of any other kind to make to the community,
the saving of a shilling will obviously be a boon. But
it is much to be regretted that Mr. Gladstone does not
at once extinguish the impost entirely. It is a pity that
he should mar the merit of that part of his financial
scheme by retaining so small a portion of the advertise-
ment duty. Apart altogether from the public interests,
it seems undignified to retain a tax of sixpence on the
public notices which appear in the journals of the day.
The revenue which will be derived from that source
cannot be expected to exceed 100,000/. a-year, if it even
reach that amount ; and, therefore, it is unworthy a
great country like this to retain a sixpenny tax on ad-
vertisements, so unproductive, when we have an annual
revenue exceeding 54,000,0001.
We cannot help thinking that, could the matter be
fairly brought before the mind of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, he would at once be led to view it in the
same light as that in which we are now endeavouring to
place it. He is not an obstinateman. He is not doggedly
attached to his own plans. He has already modified other
features of his budget, and why not this ? He is prepared to
abandon his original intentions with regard to licenses,
and to adapt that part of his measure to the wishes of
the public. He has given up his first plan with respect
to the duty on newspaper supplements. He now ac-
quiesces in the justice of the representations made to him
in this and other journals relative to the injury which
would be done to the entire newspaper press, with one
exception, were he to persist in abolishing the stamp
duty only on those supplemental sheets which exclu-
sively contain advertisements. All supplements are
now to escape the stamp duty, provided their dimensions
do not exceed a certain number of superficial inches.
_ _

And having made these concessions to public opinion,
on proper representations being made to him, we cannot
doubt that could the Right Hon. Gentleman be but in-
duced to reconsider his resolution as regards the adver-
tisement duty, he would abolish it altogether, and thereby
make the measure worthy of his financial reputation, in-
stead of retaining so miserable a sum as sixpence.
But even should Mr. Gladstone still persist in re-
taining the sixpence, we trust the House of Commons
will interfere, and prevent the continuance of so paltry
an impost. If the Right Hon. Gentleman will not
make that part of his measure what it onght to be,
let Parliament do it for him. It is in their power,
and by exercising that power they will be doing him, as
well as the public, a service. They have already, by a
considerable majority, voted for the entire remission of
the advertisement duty. If they only adhere to that
vote—if they only be consistent, the advertisement duty
will be abolished altogether. We are bound to assume
that Hon. Gentlemen will stand by their former opinions
on this point, as exemplified by their votes for the entire
abolition. Nothing, we know, has since occurred to
justify a change in their views. We do not suppose
that any member who voted with Mr. Milner Gibson
for the total repeal of the advertisement duty, will now
vote for the retention of a part of that duty.
But what we do fear is, that Ministerial influence may
btsfiN
si!e,
in-
fluence, iepoine. usedne aen
iyett
the
athatheyi
duty,a certain number of those who voted, on
en
ote
on . t.his qi
oetrsi
ei
co
.oenne,
ts
ii ars
nts
ea
nt cooyn,
the occasion in question, with Mr. Gibson, to absent
n
themselves from the division, and that there may be a
d.anger, on that account, of Mr. Gladstone carrying his
d
en-
bmt
eisiohewsyoteuldlcoi
tosehol
remind
stillfar
oi
ns stultify
be
those
hiiafnoye
sefeteahsvHesoiybuo
Irnpe.roeGftvoiie
previous
Isrceehvnt
division, they will not only seriously damage their own
awayeiinrj from the coming
ucloensttiltieumenstesl
s otl stay
uyt th
constituents.
irre-
ctrbiaervaaebtleyr

COALS BROUGHT INTO THE PORT OF LONDON.—
Yesterday a return was issued which showed that last
year 3,745,345 tons of coals were brought into the
port of London, against 3,490,963 tons of the preceding
year.