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

Ger
- te
rev•:".";57,„
•••-•
7.i• ; • .
• -0
/and a t indefensible either on groundila, I •I''o:lC.4` 2
policy has been doomed to its fall. TkTe 9}drithiriii.,tt, ler>
railway carriage, -the lumbering street van,,th4 Vrr
tetie boardmen, the wall-chalker, the pavement pal'a ,
and the bill-sticker, are to surrender their monopoly.
The:journals that pay a double tax in paper and stamp
have been declared entitled to relief from the third-im-
postthey have hitherto suffered under. The Eighteen-
penny Plunder on each advertisement is to fall, and
henceforth we may hope to sea the business of the
Trader, the " want ' of the Servant, the school of the
Teacher, the sale of the Auctioneer, and the thousand
other needs of the active myriads who keep alive the
progress of civilised society, announceable in the press
without that monstrous check which has hitherto made
publicity in print a thing to be enjoyed only by high
payment. The maintenance of our social and corn-
, mercial position in the family of nations demands
the removal of all needless restrictions on honest
• activity. We cannot run our race of trade with
fair chance of success —against America for instance—
if our rulers surround us with regulations crippling
the energies needful for success. In New York the
trader can for a shilling tell, in a feW lines, in the befit
journals, what he has to sell, or wishes to buy, or desires
to hire, or intends to let. In England--from the opera-
tion of the advertisement and paper taxes—such a state-
ment in a journal costs at least five times the money.
The-advertisement duty—like other duties—does not
simply put the full amount of its own weight upon the
thing charged to bear it, but superadds additional costs,
and hence to advertisers the eighteenpence which the
Government takes on each announcement in a journal
rises in costliness in proportion to the additional weight
induced by bad debts, cost of capital, and the other con-
sequences of keeping up unnaturally the price of a thing
which, if untaxed, would necessarily be cheap. The
string of reasons for the abolition'of the advertisement
tax given in our columns yesterday seems to have had
its due weight in the House of Commons, and the vote
of last night having followed, it is needless for us now to
go again over the details of the subject—but one or two
considerations still force themselves on our attention.
The defeat—for defeat it was in its way—on Kilmainharn
Hospital,
followed by this adverse division on the Adver-
tisement ta; must tend to show the Coalition Cabinet
that they cannot beard public opinion with impunity.
They must, in accordance with constitutional right and
usage, shape their policy, fiscal and other, in something
like agreement with popular symyathies. They exist
only on the popular belief in their readiness to do right,
and the moment their views on general topics swerve
from those entertained by " the majority out of doors," •
they become—as tiiey must now feel—mere reeds in the
wind. On these subjects of taxation especially,' the na,.-
tion are inclined to demand justice. There is no un-
willingness to pay—no desire to cripple by mean snip-
pings or ungenerous thrift the full payments required
for amply rewarding public service. But the nation has
grown wise enough to see that, by the equitable adjust-
tnent of a few broad and common-sense imposts, the

taxpayer could know what to expect and how to provide
for the demands upon him, whilst his energies, his in-
dustry, his capital, and his intelligence might all be re-
leased from a number of petty and unprofitable demands
now emptying his pocket and chafing his temper. It is
not the just load that society puts on a man which makes
his journey through life wearisome, but those little
thorns in the foot which link each step with a twinge
of vexatious and unprofitable pain. Your petty taxes are
your great nuisances, making much grumble whilst bring-
ing little grist to the mill. So last night the House
of Commons-. seemed to think when they ended
the debate on Mr. Milner Gibson's advertisement
motion, by a majority of 31 in favour of removing the
Tax on Pnblicity. After that division, the Chancellor
9f the Exchequer must surely deal, on Monday night,
with this paltry and unprofitable, yet irritating, impost.
de cannot well put at defiance the clearly7expressed_
opinion of the house, on whose votes his tenure of power
depends, nor can he so far stultify himself as to overlook
the advantages which must accrue from the removal of
one of the three loads under which the Fourth Estate
now labours. The abolition of the Advertisement Tax
will, in truth, induce its own fiscal reward. Its removal
'mist give a stimulus, more or less, to all branches of
business—to say nothing of the special increase that
must take place in the consumption of paper and in the
Post-office revenue froip enlarged written corres-
pondence. The tide of commerce raised by the advent'
of Free Trade would by the absence of this check to •
publicity grow still higler, and out of the expanding
wealth thus arising the Government must inevitably re-
ceive new revenue. The country cannot be prosperous
without the Exchequer sharing in the general good ;
and it should, therefore, be a sufficient consolation to
the Coalition Cabinet, that if the division of last night
must lead to the abolition of an obnoxious source of
income, the very striking off the fetter will set free new '
sources of general profit—all sure to tell satisfactorily
on the public as well as the private resources of the
country.

(From th,s Morning Advertiser.)

It will be seen, from our Parliamentary report, that
the debate on Mr. Milner Gibson's motion for the
repeal of the taxes on knowledge, has this year assumed
a much greater importance than it ever did on any pra-
vious occasion. The fact of Mr. Disraeli and Sir John
Pakington— as the leaders of the Conservative party,
now divided into two sections—having severally spoken
in favour of the resolutions of the member for Man
chaster, converted the question into one involving the
stability of the Ministry. The result was one of the
most crowded houses of the session. The debate ex-
tended to a much later hour than on any former occa-
sion. To the speeches de:ivered on either:side,rwelhave
not space to advert to-day. On a division, the first re-
solution, affirming the expediency of abolishing the duty
on advertisements—was carried by a majority of 31,
the numbers being—for the resolution, 200 ; against it,
169. The other two resolutions were negatived.
The defeat of Ministers on the first resolution will
give them a severe shake. Mr. Gladstone-and his col-
leagues will feel it all the more, because of the strenuous
opposition which he and the friends of Government
offered to it, as well as to the other resolutions. Two
defeats in one week are awkward affairs for the Coali-
tion Cabinet. And we believe we do not:speak without
book when we say, that should Mr. Gladstone pm sist in
his determination to make no distinction between pre-
carious and fixed incomes, when he brings forward his
budget on Monday. Ministers will be defeated again
on that evening.