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

(Fropa the- Ti2nes.)
The trumpeter who fell into the hands of the
enemy pleaded hard for his life on the ground that he
had taken no part in the, fight, but he was nevertheless
slain because he had sounded the call and given the sti-
mulus to war. That is the precise case of the press.
When the tax-gatherer comes down on us, we reply, not
to the actual functionary, but to the Legislature which
sends him to our doors, that we are about the very last
persons who ought to be taxed. Tax worldly vanities,
tax creature comforts, tax the luxuries, tax pomp and
pride, tax wealth, place, and power, but tax not your
instructors and a:dvisers ; tax not the light of the under-
standing ; tax net the fountains of knowledge ; tax not
that heavenly medium in which we become more than
animal, more than mortal, more than human. The an-
swer is too obvious. The press is taxed in order that it
may feel its responsibilities. It is the press, in one form
or another, Omit- persuades men to peace or to war. It
is the chief guardian of the public morals, and the
chief holder of the national purse-strings. If we don't
like paying .taxes, then let us do our best to promote
economy. Why should we alone be scot free ? The
old woman who has not a word to say on the sub-
ject contributes her Millions out of her dish of tea ;
the poor sct contributes millions from his gin ; the
labourer tastes war and water in his beer. All the
toiling- sons-and daughters of poverty are up to their
knees in taxation. By far the greater part of the re-
venue is'contributed by those who have no vote, voice,
or influence in the matter, any more than sheep in their
shearing. It is for others to act, but for them to suffer.
But the press is a demigod, all knowing, all powerful,
all good, and all wise—at least by the humble measure
of human understanding. Why should it not be taxed
It can defend itself. If it likes not taxation, then let it
set to work iilarduilly# id abate the nuisance altogether ;
but not protect itself alone, and leave others in the
lurch.
That is the case against the press, if there is any. case
or reason in the matter except the law of might, which
is perhaps the first principle of taxation. Such a case
admits, of course, what none can deny, that the taxes
affecting the press are pure, unmitigated evils. A tax
on paper must restrict the use of one of the most con-
venient and beautiful of those inventions which mark
the difference of ancient and modern times. A
tax on each copy of a newspaper is upon one of the
first necessities of civilisation. A tax on adver-
tisements, besides its gross inequalities, is a tax on
that commercial communication which it is the
great boast of our age to make as free as possible.
Nobody can say a word for one of these taxes. We
may not agree with every argument or every expression
in popular use about them. "Taxes on Knowledge" is
a fine sounding title, but not exactly correct. - Two-
thirds of the duty on paper is on brown paper, wrapping
paper of all sorts, and paper hangings, more useful and
ornamental than instructive and edifying. Advertise-
ments only communicate the knowledge that such an
estate is to be sold, such a house to be let, such an ar-
ticle to be procured good and cheap at such a dealer's,
and that such a girl wants a place as housemaid or as
cook. This is "knowledge" in the strict sense of the
word, but only as the titles and announcements of all
the shops in the Strand are knowledge. If this is all
that is meant, "Taxes on Knowledge" arc a minor
grievance. But whatever is meant by the term, the
thing is decidedly an evil. The unfait floss of all these
taxes is continually on the increase, as change of cir-
cumstances, and the sharpened ingenuity of man con-
spire to evade them. It is only a question of taste
whether you will paper or paint your dining-room. If
you paper it you are taxed. Your five coats of paint
go free of duty. If you advertise on a huge van that.
stops the traffic of the greatest thoroughfare in the
world, or on an empty house, or in a "'bus," or on the
pavement, or on the walls of a railway Station,' or in
any way that may most strike the senses and offend
the taste, you are untaxed. Advertise decorously
and inoffensively in a newspaper,- and 'you must
pay your eighteenpence for every act of advertis-
ing, though its virtue weirs out before night-
fall. With regard to stamps, we are ourselves
an example of the greatest unfairness, in having
to pay for a second stamp on our gratuitous supplements.
But the operation of the Stamp Duties is worse than
unfair ;it is positively ridiculous. When Mr. Savory,
having entered into a bond not to publish anything
seditious or blasphemous, circulates his illustrated cata-
logue of candlesticks, castors, and teapots, with a stamp,
as public intelligence, and so procures for it a free pas-
sage through the post, it must be admitted that, at all
events, the law requires revision, for this can never have
been contemplated by the Legislature. These taxes,
then, though they do not quite deserve the high-flying
title of " taxes on knowledge," aro not only evils but
growing evils, and becoming more and more absurd and
ridiculous, The objection against them grows stronger
every day, and it is plain that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer cannot much longer maintain them on the single
ground that while other things are taxed, paper, news-
papers, and advertisements must be taxed too.
Mr. Milner Gibson met last night with a success in
Ithis hitherto fruitless agitation, and actually carried
against Government his resolution for the repeal of the
duty on advertisements. For this he has to thank, not
so much the increasing merits of his cause as the oppor-
tunity of a rather unusual alliance. Mr. Disraeli,
though lie had no room for this measure in his own bud-
get, took care to give its promoters a little encouragement;
so now we witness the singular spectacle of the Protection-
ists combining with the Manchester School against a mo-
derate Administration. Against such tactics we have no-
thing to say, except what prudence will probablyh a.ve sug-
gested already to some members of the new alliance.
In politics one coalition is held to justify another, but it
is difficult to see what future assistance Messrs. Bright
and Disraeli will be able to interchange, and what direct
benefit either will receive from the triumph of the other.
Meanwhile Government has received another blow.
There is nodisguising the moral effect of such blows if
frequently repeated, and we certainly think it is high
time for Ministers to be mustering their adherents,
closing their ranks, and, above all, considering betimes
what they are prepared to concede and what to refuse.
If they choose their own policy well they need fear no
combination against them, as tactics of a purely factious
character soon wear themselves out by the mere force of
disrepute and disgust. They will, we presume, offer no
further resistance to the repeal of the tax condemned by
the resolution of last night. For obvious reasons it is a
question on which we should never assume the initiative.
It is not for us in our position to press for the removal
of our own burnd ens, as our duty is rather to the public
than to ourselves. But that the tax is heavy, oppressive
to certain classes, liable to be evaded by other methods
of advertising, and not very consistent with the great
principle of free.and cheap communication, we have ever
maintained • and must therefore congratulate the public
on its probablel removal.

(From the Morning Herald.)
In the House of Commons last night, Mr. Milner
Gibson brought forward, according to notice, three re-
solutions relating to the taxes on knowledge :-
1. That the advertisement duty should be repealed.
" 2. That the penny stamp on newspapers is inexpe-
dient, and the attention of Parliament ought to be
directed to the subject.
"That the Excise duty on paper impedes the. efforts
now making to promote education among the great body
of the people."

The first re3olution was carried by a majority of 200
against 163, leaving the Government in a minority of
thirty-one l—the second defeat Ministers have sustained
during the present week.

The second resolution was lost by a majority of 182 ;
and the third resolution by a majority 0f195.
The result of these divisions we think will b 3 satisfac-
tory to the public. The amount of the advertisement
duty is small—we believe about 180,0001.—and the loss
to the revenue, therefore, of little moment, when
.com-
pared with the boon afforded to traders by its reduc-
tion, for in these.days of puffs and quackory, who does

not desire to advertise, if the price of the advertisement
-did not too often prohibit the small capitalist from
doing so. Speaking for ourselves, we regret that the
Chancellor of the Exchequer did not offer a com-
promise, by reducing the duty to 6d., which, we confi-
dently believe, would have effected a great reduction in
the price of short adi,ertisements, without producing any
loss to the revenue, for, unquestionably, the number of
such advertisements would rapidly increase were the
price materially reduced.
For the reduction of the penny stamp no good or valid
reasons can be given. Stamped newspapers are sent
gratis by the post; and the vast majority of newspapers
pass through the post-office more than once. Irhe stamp
is,. then, no more than a postage stamp, and the reduc-
tion would be no boon to the public generally, for every
• one not resident in London who subscribes to a newspa-
per would have to pay to the post-office what is now paid
to the stamp-office. But one great evil would infallibly
arise from the reduction of the penny stamp—all sorts
of cheap newspapers would spring up in every direction
And the newspaper press, which is now generally Con-
ducted by respectable persons, and constitutes one of the
principal bulwarks of our liberties, would most probably
be converted into a licentious and tyrannical engine,
from froth which we should most anxiously desire
paper would, undoubtedly,
of literary works,
quickly relieved. The reduction of the duty
on
materially contribute to the
Navnedr
ei ss
utchher et
hfoarte
tdhee
sirab I the state of the revenue
production
Chancellorthe Exchequer could
afford to lose so large a sum , •hiena v
joiuyr, humblee aos iy-
nion, other taxes which press
be named, if there were any
of
but,e
any chance of their repeal, and
therefore we rejoice that the resolution was lost by a
ority,
large maj

(Feoht. the Daily News.)
The House of Commons has decided, by a majority of
200 to 169, that the Tax on Publicity ought to be re-
pealed. Henceforth the housemaid searching for " a
place," and the governess for a pupil may hope to be
able to make their wants known without paying
eighteenpence out of their poverty into the money-bags
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Milner Gib-
son has 'Mr. Williams in. getting a vote in
favour of a long-worked and well-advocated proposition,