The Sun.
London, England, 1853-07-04 00:00:00

LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, JULY 4, 1853

GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.-CHEAP
EXCURSION to STROUD, GLOUCESTER, and MEL-
TENHAM,--On SUNDAY, 10th July, an Excursion Train will leave
Paddington at 7.45 a.m, returning the same evening from Chelten-
ham at 6.30, Gloucester at 6.45, and Stroud at 7.15 o'clock.

•
FARES THERE AND BACK AV
Y
Stroud, First Class 9s. Od.: Covered Carriages, ss. Od. Gloucester
and Cheltenham, First Class, 10s. ; Covered Carriages, 6s. Od.
Tickets may be obtained previously, at 27, King-street, Cheapslde,
269, Strand, and at 25, Regent-street (corner of Jermyn-street).
Passengers having luggage wil only be conveyed at the ordinary
fares.

'GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY.-
CHEAP EXCURSION to the WEST of ENGLAND.—On
MONDAY, the 18th July, an Excursion will leave the Paddington
Station at 8 o'clock in the morning for Plymouth, calling at Weston
Super Mare, Bridgewater, Taunton, Tiverton Road, Exeter, Star-
cross, Damlish, Teignmouth, Torquay and Totness, and wid return
from Plymouth on WEDNESDAY, 27th July, at 6.25 A H.

THE ADVERTISEMENT DUTY.

(From the Times.)
After a week of long speeches and late nights on
the Government of India, the House of Commons
on Friday descended to the more domestic question
of the advertisement duty. In matter of fact,
though it seems almost an offence to state it, the
broad sheet that lies fresh on the table of every
educated Englishman every day of his life occupies
a much larger share of his interest and attention
than the whole Indian Peninsula. India, however,
is a subject for declamation, and comes to a divi-
sion once a-week or so, with abundant notice, and
with very little probability of any member voting
or not voting by mere mishap. While it is under
discussion members become deliberate, ponderous,
and grave, acquire the pace of elephants and the
air of nabobs--postpone a visit to the country for
the duty of voting, and believe the vote, when they
give it, as solemn an affair as passing the Sutlej or
deposing a Mogul. After a week of this heroic
rythm, a " Committee on Customs, &c., Acts," as
it is expressed in the orders of the day, is a very
pedestrian affair, and members who have been on
stilts a whole week do not easily adjust themselves
to it, but trip a little, and make a few false steps.
So, at least, it happened on Friday evening. In
the proceedings of the above-mentioned committee
the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved :-4, That
from and after the sth day of July, 1853, in lieu
of the duty now payable on advertisements, shall
be paid :—For in respect of any' advertisement
contained in, or published with any gazette or
other newspaper, or any other periodical paper,
or in or with any pamphlet or literary work, 6d."
In place of this paragraph Mr 'Milner" GibsoYf'
had given long notice of a motion to substi-
tute the words--" And that all duties charge-
able on advertisements be repealed in ac-
cordance with a resolution of this house of the
14th day of April last." This explicit and long-
prepared amendment was accordingly moved
in due form, and there ensued a debate, the result
of which was, that the amendment was negatived
by a majority of 109 against 99—a very good num-
ber, considering that the house had divided on the
India Bill at 3 a.m. that morning, and a bail at
the Palace was impending. But now ensued one'
of those absurdities which we can never understand,
and which contrast very strangely with the thirty-
two folio pages of orders, notices of motions, &v.,
relating exclusively to Veneris, 10 die Julii, 1853,
printed by order of the house for its own guidance,
and now lying before us. After the above vote, in
a house of 208 members, come to about 7 o'clock,
nearly half the members present ran off to their
dinners and the other festivities of the evening.
No sooner was the house sufficiently thinned than
Mr. Craufurd moved an amendment, whereof no
notice whatever is to be found' in the above men-
tioned 32 folio pages of notices, &c., " to substitute
for the word sixpence' the cipher 0." The mo-
tion required two divisions—on the first Of which
Government was beaten by 68 against 63 •1 and on
the second by 70 against 61. Thus the 77 mem-
bers who a few minutes before had left the house,
after doing their duty as they thought, and assist-
ing at a final settlement of the question, might hear
within an hour that their vote had been reversed,
and the advertisement duty had been wholly re
pealed.

For our own part, we have only to say that the
second thoughts of the house were better than
the first, and that the wisdom of Parliament, in
this instance, did not lose by the subtraction of
that moiety which went off to dinner. But we
cannot, for the life of us, see why Mr. Gladstone
ever departed from his original proposition to re-
peal the duty altogether ; why, having departed
from it, he did not take the usual precautions to
carry his altered resolution ; and why, with all
this parade of notices printed in barrowloads by
the house every evening, an amendment, moved
with notice, was rejected, and, immediately after-
wards, an amendment to precisely the same effect,
moved without notice, was carried. All this sounds
mighty ridiculous, as if chance or jockeyship had
much more to do with the decisions of Parliament
than is generally imagined. In this case the
chance is a happy one. There is no denying the
truth of Mr. Milner Gibson's oft-repeated argu-
ments on the subject. Indeed, we will venture to
say, that but for the dire necessity which drove
Pitt to get money where and how he could, and but
for the desperate ingenuity inspired by that occ-
sion, we should never have heard of a duty on
advertisements, and the idea would not even
have occurred to the most speculative financier.
Unquestionably, the tax is a great restraint on
trade ; unquestionably, it is very unequal, pressing
equally on the sale of an estate worth half-a-million
and on the announcement that a girl of all-work
wants a place ; and pressing equally also on an adver-
tisement of which 40,000 copies are distributed all
over the world, and on one which scarcely attains
a metropolitan circulation of 1,000. It never was
our place to ask to be taxed, any more than it is
the place of fishes to ask to be fried ; but, on com-
paring the amount of financial depredation inflicted
on us and on our neighbours, we certainly did feel
that they were ill-used in having to pay the same
duty as ourselves on advertisements, which were
not of the same value because not so extensively
read, in their papers as in ours.
From what Lord John Russell says, it appears
that this immediate reversal of a vote, besides its
intrinsic absurdity, stands no small danger of
defeatingitself, and acting quite contrary to the
wishes of the contrivers. As the Chancellor of
the Exchequer's resolutions are for the reduc-
tion, not the abolition of taxes, the abolition
of the advertisement duty can only be effected
by a bill brought in for that particular purpose ;
and, should that bill be thrown out, which is by
no means improbable, especially at this late period
of the session, the only result will be that the
advertisement duty will remain at the present
rate of ls. 6d. This view of the entanglement
only increases our surprise that Mr. Craufurd's
motion was in order. The Speaker settles that
it was in order, and his authority is indisput-
able ; but it would tax the highest Parliamentary
intelligence to say precisely in what state the
question now stands. We only trust the reduction
of the duty is not perilled by attempting too
much. We have a right also to express our hope
that Mr. Gladstone's often declared intentions
with regard to the other burdens on the press may
not be imperilled by this vote. The gentlemen of
the Manchester school hold that newspapers ought
to have the utmost legislative encouragement up to
a certain size, beyond which they are to be freely
consigned to the tender mercies of the Exchequer.
They have always avowed with the most natural
feeling and the most praiseworthy candour, that
they do not like a newspaper bigger than them-
selves. We believe that the ideal of a " good and
safe" paper, in the mind of Messrs. Cobden and
Bright, is one with a circulation of about 10,000—
never more than that—with a good many small
shilling advertisements, a financial dissertation, se-
veral reports of meetings at which these two gentle-
men had spoken, no leading articles, and nothing
to show any political bias, except a general ten-
dency to cheesepanng. Such is the third rate
journal to which these gentlemen look with hope as
the middle class of literature, and the future
saviour of the country. On this point they and
the public are not yet agreed ; and we really hope
the Chancellor of the Exchequer will not be misled
into any measures calculated to give these third-
rate journals the monopoly desired for them by
their great free trade patrons.

(From the Morning Chronicle.)
The question of the advertisement duty is not of
vital importance, and the Exchequer will not be-
come bankrupt if, in deference to even an irregular
expression of the opinions which seem to prevail in
the House of Commons, the impost be altogether
abandoned. The complaint of the inequality of the
tax, although undeniably just, might be extended
to many other portions of our financial system. The
assertion that it is a tax on knowledge, even if it
were true, only amounts to a statement that duties
on consumption interfere with the enjoyments of
the taxpayer. No Chancellor of the Exchequer
can arbitrate among the different tastes which lead
men to require taxable commodities. The demand
for tea or beer may be as innocent and as reason-
able as the wish to read a newspaper, or to an-
nounce the publication of a new book. The most
distinctive grievance connected with the adver-
tisement duty consists in the exemption of pla-
cards and announcements of every kind, except
those which are circulated by journals. Lord
Palmerston is, it seems, about to make a descent
on the advertising vans, and to sweep the living
sandwiches, as Mr. Gladstone calls them, from
the streets ; but still the hoardings, the cabs, and
the railway stations will compete with newspapers
on the privileged terms once attributed to that
creature of fiction—the untaxed foreigner.
All indirect taxes affect the dealer in the articles
on which they are levied, even more immediately
than the consumer; and in the case of- the adver-
tisement duty, the proprietors of newspaper are
injured in their trade to a larger extent than
any individual advertiser, Yet the Chancellor

of the Exchequer will allow that he has not been
subjected to any undue pressure on the part of
those who are so directly interested in the removal
of the impost. Notwithstanding the inveterate
dislike of Mr. Cobden and Mr. Bright to an inde-
pendent Press, they will discover that journalists
have seldom used their influence over public opi-
nion to secure advantages for the commercial un-
dertakings with which they are connected. Mr.
Bright, of course, attributes the lukewarmness of the
Press in the matter to some selfish motive. We can
only reply that the repeal of the advertisement duty
would be an unmixed advantagement to the proprie-
tors of existing newspapers, but that we never-
theless decline to advocate its removal on the
ground of the benefit which a change might confer
on any special branch of industry. Mr. Bright and
Mr. Cobden concur in their desire to reduce the
London press to a condition of innocent mediocrity,
characterised by articles on teetotalism or on the
inutility of public dinners, diversified by second-
hand news, such as that which the journals of New
York extract from the English newspapers. It is
not easy to understand how the reduction or aboli-
tion of the advertisement duty will tend to destroy
the influence of which the Manchester leaders en-
tertain so strong a jealousy ; but even if the object
proposed were attainable, or in itself desirable, the
interest to be regarded with reference to the present
question is that of the consumer, or, in other words,
of the advertiser.
The tax falls with very unequal weight on diffe-
rent branches of trade. Butchers and bakers seldom
advertise, becausetheirsupplies are uniform in quan-
tity and average in quality. In London at least, and
in other large towns, all purchasers know that they,
can' procure a Idarof bread'or a leg of mutton when-
ever they want it. On the other hand, it is impos-
sible for a publisher to carry on his trade without
announcing to his customers every new article
which he is prepared to sell. The consumption in
this case is entirely dependent on the publicity
given to the production, inasmuch as it is impossi-
ble to read or buy a new work until it is known to
have been published. A similar remark will apply
to commercial and other auctions, and to all special
bargains, such as the sale of a house or an estate.
The safest and steadiest trades are generally re-
lieved from the necessity of paying for the an-
nouncement of transactions. Bankers do not ad-
vertise their readiness to lend money, nor do the
great London brewers inform the world of their
continued intention to deal in porter. There is
considerable force also in the contrast which has
so often been pointed out between the incidence of
the duty on a landowner who wishes to sell an
estate, and on a servant girl in want of a situation.
In short, the tax is levied on certain classes of
transactions which present no fiscal peculiarity.
Other stamp duties have at least the recommenda-
tion of coming under some general classifica-
tion ; and, in most instances, the tax-gatherer
has only to watch the cases in which money is
passing. Like all other indirect imposts, the
advertisement duty is unequal ; but it is dis-
tinguished from others as being one of the most
capricious burdens of the class to which it belongs.
All these objections had, of course, been consi-
dered by Mr. Gladstone ; and there is no reason to
suppose that he has failed to recognise their vali-
dity. The only reason for maintaining the tax is
to be found in its estimated produce ; and although
the amount of 80,000/. is comparatively insignifi-
cant, a large augmentation of revenue might doubt-
less be anticipated from the increase of advertise-
ments consequent on a reduction of price. It must,
however, be remembered that this argument is in
no small degree weakened by the repeated votes of
the house. The chance of maintaining the tax for
any considerable period is now considerably lessened.
The majority which affirmed Mr. Milner Gibson's
motion, before the production of the budget,
was premature and inconvenient ; and it was
probably judicious to give Parliament an op-
portunity of once more discussing the question,
with a fuller knowledge of the fiscal position of
the country. Friday night's division of 109 to 99
against the member for Manchester's renewed
proposal of a total repeal of the duty, can
scarcely be considered a sufficient reversal of the
previous vote ; and although it is difficult to un-
derstand how the matter stands at present, the
double defeat of the Government on Mr. Crau-
furd's amendment certainly supplies some addi-
tional reason for making a concession to the evident
feeling of the House. Scarcely a single speaker
recommended the retention of the tax ; and al-
though some of those who advocate its repeal may
be actuated, like Mr. Bright and Mr. Cobden, by
a dislike to an independent and active press, the
greater number of those who oppose the Govern-
ment on this question are undoubtedly influenced
by considerations of the demerits of the impost, as
well as by the wishes of their constituents.
If Mr. Gladstone should find it practicable, with
due regard to the public interests, to give way to
the House of Commons by repealing the whole of
the duty, he will not be encouraging any rash or
sweeping tendency to the premature removal of
taxation. In the long discussions to which the
Budget has given rise, the firmness and ability
of the Minister have been duly seconded by the
confidence of the House. During the present ses-
sion, as in former years, a practical confutation has
been furnished to the popular cant which im-
putes to the representatives of the people careless-
ness with respect to the maintenance of the public
credit. During two months, the House has, night
after night, rejected the successive amendments to
the financial proposals of the Ministry, which have
been obstinately brought forward for the purpose
of defeating the Government. Throughout the
whole of that period, with one insignificant excep-
tion the Chancellor of the Exchequer has never
found himself in a minority, until Mr. Craufurd's
scarcely regular amendment was proposed and
carried on Friday night. Under such circum-
stances, the bitterest opponent could not attribute
to weakness a disposition to yield, in a minor mat-
ter, to the evident wish of the House. It is pos-
sible that, as Mr. Bright suggests, some compen-
sation may be afforded for the abolition of the ad-
vertisement duty by the increased consumption of
postage stamps ; but, however this may be, the
sum in dispute is not of paramount importance.
The sacrifice would probably be unavoidable in
1854 or 1855; and it will give greater satisfaction
if the concession -is made at once. Should the
Government consent to the repeal of the tax, the
technical difficulties suggested by Lord John Rus-
sell may be overcome at the expense of a certain
amount of trouble and ingenuity.

(From the Morning Advertiser.)

We endeavoured to explain, in our impression of
Saturday, the singular position in which the question
of the advertisement duty had been placed by the votes
of the house on the previous evening. Mr. Gladstone
moved, in the first instance, that the present duty of
eighteenpence be reduced to sixpence. To this motion
Mr. Milner Gibson proposed, as an amendment, that
the duty be repealed altogether. After a brief discus.
sion, the house divided, when the amendment of the
member for Manchester was lost by a majority of
109 having voted against it, and 99 for it. Subsequently,
two other divisions took place on the same question,
though put in a different form, in both of which the
Government were defeated, the house voting for the
entire repeal of the advertisement duty by a majority of
five in the one instance, and of nine in the other.
The first impression of the public on hearing the re-
sult of the two last divisions would be, that the adver-
tisement duty is, in effect, repealed. But the fact, un-
fortunately, is not so. A mere abstraCt resolution of
the house cannot repeal an act of Parliament, and can-
sequently, as the eighteenpence duty
was imposed by
act of Parliament, it cannot be remitted until a Special
act has been passed by the house with that view. The
result; therefore, of the two divisions in which Ministers
were defeated, is what the friends of total repeal never
anticipated. It is to set aside the motion which Mr.
Gladstone had carried at a previous part of the evening
for the reduction of the duty to sixpence, and to leave
matters precisely as they now stand.
But this, we need not say, cannot now be. After
what has taken place, there must be either of the two
proposed alterations. We must have a total repeal or
the sixpence duty. Mr. Gladstone, we are told, means
to propose this evening, on bringing up the resolutions,
to re-introduce the word "sixpence. That, we need
not say, would be much preferable to the duty of
eighteenpence at present exacted on advertisements. But
we put it to the right lion. gentleman, whether it would
not be far better for the Government, as well as for
the public, to acquiesce at once in the entire abolition of
the duty ? Mr. Gladstone must have felt it very morti-
fying to be in a minority twice in one night on a matter
of such subordinate importance to a great country
like this, with its yearly revenue of 64,000,000/.
It is melancholy to see Ministers make so much
ado about the question, whether there shall bo a tax of
sixpence on all public notifications, or no tax at all. It
is really undignified for a Government like ours to be
placed in such a position. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer must feel that it is the sense of the house, as
well as the wish of the public, that all classes of the
community should be at liberty to make announcements
to their countrymen without being subject to any tax at
the instance of the Government.
It has been privately communicated to us, that Mr.
Gladstone is not disinclined to give way to the wishes
of the public and to the feelings of the house, and to ac-
quiesce in the conclusion to which it came in two divi-
sions on Friday evening; but that Lord John Russell is

(From the Times.)
Whenever the "knowledge taxes" come on for discus.
sion, it invariably happens that protective legislation is
advocated under the cry of Free Trade. This may be
done, perhaps unconsciously, but it is done nevertheless.
We are quite willing to indulge Mr. Bright himself with
the consideration which he graciously extended to the
Chancellor of the Exchequer on Friday evening, by ad-
mitting that he " was, perhaps, not wholly sensible" of
his own motives. The Manchester politicians may pos-
sibly persuade themselves that they debate questions of
newspaper finance without any undercurrent of political
purpose, and purely in the interest of the public at
large ; but, as any person may soon convince himself,
they are most undoubtedly mistaken.
The cry of this part.), is " Free Trade in newspapers,"
and on Friday night Mr. Cobden reflected with Home as-
perity upon the conduct of certain journals, whiO, after
promoting free trade in corn, were advocating what, in
his bpinion, was nothing less than monopoly in their
-own department. But what has Mr. Cobden him-.
Serf recommended in this respect I He has recom-
mended doWeright Protection. The law at present
affecting newspapers prescribes an artificial limit to the
intelligence which a newspaper may convey. The sheet
may contain 1,530 superficial inches of printing, but not
more—all space above this is considered " supplemen-
tary," and taxed anew. Nothing can be plainer than
the operation of such a Jaw to the damage of the.public,
inasmuch as it affixes a direct penalty on the goodness
of the bargain obtainable by the purchaser, and inter-
feres most injuriously with the advantages derivable from
freedom of enterprise and trade. But did Mr. Cobden
ever complain of this regulation—of this law circum-
scribing the measure which fivepenny worth of informa-
tion might reach ? Not a bit of it. On the contrary,
he regarded it with manifest complacency, as favouring
certain views of his own ; and when Mr. Gladstone pro-
posed, if not the removal of the restriction, at any rate
the enlargement of the limit, Mr. Cobden was positively
inclined to say "No." Our great Free trader therefore
avows a persuasion that in the newspaper trade bargains
should be regulated by act of Parliament.
But this is not the whole extent of Mr. Cobden's
Protectionism. In a previous debate he acknowledged,
with perfect candour, the nature of the public demand,
but desired to interfere with the supply. He admitted
that all purchasers wanted a supplement to their news-
papers, and that, in point of fact, if one paper pub-
lished a supplement, the others were obliged to conform
to the example or lose their custom, Nevertheless,
although thus perfectly cognizant of the state of the
market, the hon. member proceeded to argue that sup-
plements should not be encouraged by a removal of
the tax upon them, but that they should rather be so
discouraged by graduated penalties that papers without
them might be shored up to a level with papers pro-
viding them. A newspaper proving a good one, and
therefore being successful, is enabled to offer its cus-
tomers half as much again for their money. They, very
naturally, are delighted at this improvement of measure,
and the preference of the better bargain spreads so
widely that worse bargains find little favour. Here
Mr. Cobden would interfere to "protect" the dealers
in the inferior commodity by a special tax upon the
superior, so that some newspaper should only excel
others at their own peril. After having thus fairly dis-
closed his views on this question, he on Friday evening
had actually the innocence to ask—" Where were any
petitions in favour of the abolition of the supplement
tax ?" As if the opinion of the public was not sufficiently
expressed in its notorious resolution to get a supplement
wherever possible, and as if Mr. Cobdens's anxiety to
tax these supplements was not directly in the teeth of
such opinion !
We are in no danger of misrepresenting the Manches-
ter party. Their views have been expressed without cir-
cumlocution or disguise. What they want is not only
Ito call into existence a new class of newspapers, at the
exsense, as they anticipate, of newspapers now popular,
but also to suppress, if possible, by special legislation,
' certain functions of the press now existing. They wish,
as Mr. Cobden has said, in plain words, to destroy or
diminish the " political influence" of newspapers, and to
convert them from organs of independent opinion into
mere vehicles of local information. This sentiment
itself sounds strangely in the mouths of Liberal poli-
ticians, but that is a point which we dismiss for the
present. All we are saying is, that in their anxiety to
promote these particular views they falsify the great
principles which have made them what they are. Free
trade manifestly requires that newspapers should take
their own chance of success in the common market, and
that, if some are unable to attain the standard of others,
they should lay their account with the natural conse-
quences. Mr. Cobden Wishes actually to " protect" the
smaller and less successful papers by a discriminative
duty weighing upon the larger; a pretty doctrine to be
sure, from such a quarter ! He thinks that,. "small,
no infl
strugglinueng such
pleading no merit, and exercising
ce, but reporting speeches pretty fully, and
offered at a very low price, would be desirable agents in
promoting his political views. Perhaps they might be ;
but to encourage them by protective legislation for this
purpose is contrary, we should rather imagine, to
the Manchester notions of trade and government.
Protection is just as much protection when extended to
the small in favour of democracy, as when conceded to
the great in favour of aristocracy—it applies to third-
rate exactly as to first-rate articles. Free trade demands
that all such matters shall be settled by public opinion.
Mr. Cobden would impose certain discriminative duties
on periodical publications in the hope of affecting the
course of political sentiment. What could Lord Sid-
mouth have done more ?

Another error into which the same party is apt to fall
was very conspicuously exposed on Friday evening. They
disclose either the unsoundness or the insincerity of their
principles by constantly regarding these financial questions
n their bearings upon particular este blishments,whereas
no view of the case could be more absurd. Mr. Glad-
stone has chosen to revise the newspaper duties. His
decision in this respect will of course affect us, as the
largest newspaper in the world, but whether it does or does
not is of no importance whatever in the argument before
the house. We were surprised to find even Mr. Gladstone
observe that, inasmuch as his original resolutions on the
subject "would have been inoperative except in respect '
of some one, or a limited number of prints, the measure
would have assumed the character of legislation in a
spirit of favouritism." Le&islation should never be
affected by any such assumptions ; it should proceed on
the demonstrable mbrits of the question itself. As
it happened, Mr. Gladstone's original resolution
on the supplement-tax was intrinsically faulty, for
there could be no reason in taxing the 9th page of a
newspapers when it contained reports, and exempting it
when it contained advertisements. But if it had been
really sound it would have been defensible whether it
affected fifty journals or only one. All financial changes
must be felt more quickly and more extensively by some
than by others, but would it have been any argument
against free trade in corn to say that some great baking
establishment would be the first to profit by it,t; Free