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

of Bs. 4d., to which he wrote 100 replies, paying another
Bs. 4d. ; various persons inserted 25 advertisements in the
Leicester Mercury, paying 375. 6d., and received 300
answers, paying in postage 11. 55., and Henry Pitman, of
Guildford, inserted one advertisement in the Times, paying
is. 61, and received 43 answers, paying in postage 3s. 7d.,
to which he wrote 42 replies, paying in postage 3s. 6d.
He trusted that, on the basis of such facts as these, the
house would think he had made out a fair case for the re-
Nal of the tax. (Hear.) He should add that the unfortu-
nate proprietor of periodicals was not required to pay the
tax merely on the advertisements for which he himself re-
ceived payment ; he had also to pay it on those which ho
inserted for the purpose of giving utility to his paper, such
as announcements of coming events, pieces of intelligence,
of news, in fact, for the insertion of which he received no
payment. This was a great injustice in itself, and a great
impediment to the diffusion of information, and, as such,
various subterfuges were practised for evading it so far as
was possible. For example, when new books were an-
nounced, in the Publishers' Circular say, the practice was
to state that such or such a book had been published, but
the information to the public was left incomplete, because,
in order to avoid the impost, the publisher's name was
omitted. New periodicals would gladly insert such an-
nouncements for the public information free of charge to
the book publishers were the tax repealed. (Hear.) Hav-
ing thus disposed of the subject of the advertisement duty
he came to the second resolution he had to propose, with
reference to the policy of restraing the cheap periodical
, press from inserting news. He bad good justification for
submitting this matter to the house. He had been chair-
man of the committee of that house which, in a former
Parliament, inquired into the working of the stamp duty
on newspapers. The report of that committee recom-
mended that the attention of Parliament should be drawn
to the anomalies of the stamp duties, the state of the law
on the subject, and the expediency of the policy of pre-
venting the cheap periodicals from containing news. He
would not read the words of the report, but he had referred
to it as a justification for calling the attention of the house
to the subject. It was said that this was a question of re-
venue; in the first place, he was prepared altogether to con-
test that view of the question. From the time when the
press first had influence in this country there had been
legislation for the purpose of restraining it—there had been
th censorship, there had been the licensing system, both of
which were abolished in 1699, and throughout there had
always been a great jealousy on the part of the authorities
of what was called news. (Hear.) It had been said that
extreme political writings, and writings questioning the
truths of religion ought to be prevented ; but, if they
looked into the proceedings of past times, they would find
that there was something else which the authorities had
always been very much afraid of, and that was the circula-
tion of news— the narration to the country of the current
events of the day. (Hear.) In the London Gazette of May
5, 1680, there was this announcement :

" This day the judges made their report to His Majesty in
Council, in pursuance of an order of this board, by which
they unanimously declare that His Majesty may by law pro-
hibit the printiug and publishing of all new books and pam-
phlets of news whatsoever, not licensed by His Majesty's au-
thority, as manifestly tending to the breach of the peace and
disturbance of the kingdom. Whereupon a proclamation
was issued restraining the printing of newspapers, books,
and pamphlets of news without leave,"
This restraint upon news continued down to the end of
1694, when the licensing system expired. The authorities
then went on for a few years without interfering with the
wparortteoM.rf the
Hrealilganmof Queen Anne,
in his rrees,,s'u Llr
but
newspapers,"
thea
p latterers
Constitu-
tional History,--
" Not merely designed for the communication of intelli-
gence, but for the discussion of political topics, obtained
great circulation, and became the accredited organs of dif-
ferent factions." _ _ _

" The Tory Ministers," added Mr. Hallam, " were annoyed
at the vivacity of the press, both in periodical and other
writings, which led to the stamp duty, intended chiefly to
diminish their number, and was nearly producing more per-
nicious restrictions, such as renewing the Licensing Act, or
compelling authors to acknowledge their names."
They did not renew the Licensing Act, indeed, which had
been abolished, but with the same intention they adopted the
stamp duty on newspapers for the purpose of lessening the
number of those papers. If hon. gentlemen would look
over the journals of the house at that period they would
see that Ministers had come down, time after time, for the
purpose of doing something to restrict the press, until at
last a Committeo of Ways and Means suggested that the
object in view, of restricting the press might be accomp-
lished by a heavy tax on all newspapers and printed pam-
phlets. That was the origin of the stamp duty on news-
papers. He now come to the act of 60 George 111.,
chap. 9, one of Lord Castlereagh's Six Acts, the pre-
amble of which fairly set forth :—" Whereas, it is
expedientfrem to restrain
press in great numbers, and at a lowrestrain the small publications which
issue
price, be it therefore enacted that a stamp duty
shall be imposed on every paper containing public
forpos elBl9, theof
Lordlle n asupply news, intelligence, occurrences, or any remarks or observa-
tionsp the'
upon
a tj press. etsy
Ns
thereupon." The act, than, was not "for the pur-
,.e"wblsuputappaioeswmteandmelryp,
granting
purposeE be
of
ruh t
restraining
said,ohis f
Act :

" It was not against the respectable press that this bill was
directed, but against a pauper press, which, administering to
the prejudices and the passions of a mob, was converted to
the basest purposes—which was an utter stranger to truth,
and only sent forth a continual stream of falsehood and malig-
nity—its virulence and its mischief heightening as it pro-
ceeded. If he was asked whether he would deprive the low-
est classes of society of all political information, he would say
that he saw no possible good to be derived to the country
from having statesmen at the loom and politicians at the spin-
ning jenny." (Hear, hear.)
At present, however, we legislated against the very things
which were the antidote to the poison ; for by preventing
the circulation of facts, and of the current events of life,
we prevented the circulation of the antidote, and permitted
men to become the dupes of political or other imposters.
Lord Erskine was so impressed with this at the time, that
he left upon the table of the House of Lords the following
protest :

" Because by the stamps imposed by this bill, and by its
further directing recognisances to be entered into by the
printers and publishers of the pamphlets and papers therein
mentioned, and in sums so large and disproportionate to the
probable credit of such persons, or the profits of such small
publications, it is manifest, and has, indeed, been not very
indistinctly 'admitted, that a discouragement amounting to
almost a prohibition is thus suddenly aimed at a very large,
and often useful, branch of trade ; because the great mass of
British subjects have no such means of being informed of what
passes in Parliament and in the courts of justice; or of the
general transactions of the world, than through cheap publi-
cations within their means of purchase ; and I desire to ex-
press my dissent from that principle and opinion that the safety
of the State and the happiness of the multitude in the lab )1-Rn-is
condition of life may be best secured by their being kept in
ignorance of political controversies and opinions, as I hold, on
the contrary, that the Government of this country can only
continue to be secure while it conducts itself with fidelity and
justice, and as all its acts shall, as heretofore, be thoroughly
known and understood by all classes of the people ; because
this obstruction to the sale and circulation of small periodical
publications is not confined to those of a political character,
but most unaccountably extends to all such as shall contain
any public news, intelligence, or occurrence, or any remark
or observation thereon, or description which obviously com-
prehends and involves all the transactions of human life upon
which reasonable beings, putting national freedom wholly out
of the question, can seek or desire to communicate with bne
another."

Now, who, he asked, were the opponents of the act, the
60th Geo. 111., c. 9 ? They were Sir James Mackintosh,
Mr. Brougham, Mr. Tierney, Viscount Althorp, Lord J.
Russell, and Sir James Graham—(hear)—whose names
were to be found in the minority against that bill on the
ground, as stated by Sir James Mackintosh, that it was an
attempt to put a restraint upon the liberty of the English
press. The distinguished leaders of the Whig party in
that day were the men, small in numbers, who fought the
good fight of freedom in behalf of the press against Cas-
tlereagh and the ministers of that clay; and he called upon
them to refer to their former eloquent and enthusiastic
speeches, expressed sometimes with a feeling and in terms
that he would scarcely venture to imitate, to act in con-
sistency with those great principles ; and, to come now in
other and better times, when we had a contented and happy
population, when there was no signs of disorder, and
when they were contemplating the extension of the politi-
cal franchise—ho called upon them to let the precursor of
that political franchise be a free and unrestricted press,
giving to the masses that knowledge and intelligence by
which alone they could be enabled to exercise their politi-
cal franchise with advantage to their country. (Hear.)
But he would pursue the question to a later date. The
GOth of George 111., c. 9, was imported into the Act of
William which reduced the duty on newspapers. Upon
that occasion Lord Lyndhurst said, acting in co-oporation
with the members of his own party, " Bring in another
bill—bring in a bill to repeal the whole of the statnp duty
on newspapers." That was the reception which Lord
Lyndhurst gave to the bill for reducing the stamps on
newspapers. The answer of Lord Lansdowne upon that
occasion was this—

" The noble and learned lord, in concurrence with parties
with whom he would not offend the noble and learned lord by
saying he usually acted, declared himself anxious to take off
the whole of the duty levied on newspapers; but, under
presant circumstances, he was not prepared to say that the
tax could, with safety, be remitted to that unqualified extent
to which the noble and learned lord expressed himself favour-
able."

Was there
en on Loth
parties should nobteirnelig
unite
apenlue askedpromul-
gated e
vainuq
up to ons t
hisig
question.
nn.
conscience, that
Tiehtoernusle‘w` saasfeitty'sa'sweansoawlie(cHl
(Hear.)
orre
rea-
son why the leaders of both
the altered circumstances to remove that duty ? He
trustedhesidest li (olf
not
o didv iewn house.o t
thisi appealia
se a declared,pi nrty
(Hear, hear.)
gated ; and in these days he did not see that any party in
All parties had an interest in their views
the State could fear the consequences. On the contrary,
they ought to hail with exultation any means that might
be devised for extending useful knowledge—aye, and poli-
tical information, among the great body of the people. The
house would remember thatwhen Lord Melbourne reduced
thesstamp duty he was charged with having " courted the
Radicals. ' (A l) But these were times when to be
a Radical could be no reproach. We had got a Radical in
the Administration, we had a Radical in the Cabinet; and
more than that, we had a Radical acting with those who
once were Conservative Minn
(Cheers.) Tho days,
then, for any reproach upon Radicalism were past. Old
party watchwords had lost their force. Each day these
old conflicts were becoming more and more matters of tra-
dition, and every party now that aspired to power must
found its claims upon the utility of of its' policy and its
sincere desire to benefit all classes of the people. It might
be supposed by some that the reduction of the duty accom-
plished all that was required. and that a penny upon a
newspaper was but a small tax after all. But re-
member that the penny tax was upon the " news."
Penny publications there might be ; but insert news and
the paper became liable to the tax ; the price must be ad-
vanced to 2d., which might prove a fatal circumstance,
and securities must be found. Upon this part of the ques-
tion Lord Brougham, in a letter recently written, said—
.' Now, the stamp is by far the most hurtful of these bad
taxes in one essential particular. The instruction of the
working classes in the country districts, where it is most
wanted, has been almost entirely prevented by it. When the
Useful Knowledge Society made, for years, efforts of every
kind to diffuse sound information among the peasantry in the
villages, cottages, and farm-houses, we were always met and
defeated by this stain!). Our only chance of making those
poor people read was by wrapping up good information of a
lasting value in news—especially news respecting farming
matters and things in their own neighbourhood. But the
penny stamp made this impossible. The paper of twelve
octavo pages, of which four would have been newspaper
and the other eight of a more general description and more
permanent value, Listructive or entertaining, or both, could
easily have been sold for a penny, after the necessary allow-
ance to the hawker or other retail dealer. The history of
the Penny Magagine shows this. But tho vast circulation,

at one time 220,000, enabled us to sell so costly a work very
cheap. lam now referring to what would be more cheaply
produced, and have a much more limited circulation; but it
could only be done where there is no stamp. That makes it
quite impossible; and all our plans so far failed that we could
not diffuse the knowledge where it was most wanted. Our
books were read, and they did great service, and still do, be-
sides having brought down the price of all books. But, like
mechanics' institutions, we have not yet got low enough in
society ; and that we owe to the stamp, because we found
that mere cheapness did not make the most ignorant classes
readers; another stimulus was wanted—news. Of course,
my remarks apply also to people in the towns; but they have
both more helps and, from their social habits, more excite-
ment than the people in the country. The lowering of the
stamp from 4d. to Id. I really can hardly regard as a benefit
at all, if it was a sacrifice of revenue, for it only relieved two
classes who required no relief—it put considerable sums into
the pockets of newspaper proprietors, and saved you and me
a few pounds a-year, to whom this was but of little import-
ance. It did not enable us to help general education at
Now what, he asked, had been the consequence of the re-
duction of the stamp duty ? Had our press been deterio-
rated by it? Mr. Walter, the father of the present member
for Nottingham, had made a speech in that house upon the
subject, in which there was a vast deal of valuable matter,
but he said he feared the reduction of the stamp duty to
so low a rate as a penny. Well, but had not the Times
progressed under the reduction ? Had the Times been
ruined by the increased rivalry that it was then predicted
would arise? Nothing of the kind? The Times, with re-
ference to the rest of the press, bore a much larger propor-
tion of circulation than it did in those days, and afforded
an illustration of what folly it was to attribute the success
of a newspaper to the operation of any particular 'tax or
duty. It was not protection that had improved the Times.
What had raised it to its present high position was the
great capital, the great skill, and the great enterprise which
had been employed in the conduct of that great organ.
Thus it was that it had attained the confidence of the public
and its present large and extended circulation. (Hear.) It
was not the protection afforded by the high rate of the
stamp duties of former times that had done it, nor did he
believe that the removal of that stamp duty would have
any other effect than to allow cheap papers to circulate in
fields into which at this moment no newspapers entered,
without in the slightest degree injuring the portion of those
newspapers which had already established their hold upon the
public confidence. It was supposed that the stamp left upon
newspapers was an equivalent forthe postal privileges which
they enjoyed; but remember that the tax was not upon
the publication, but upon a certain indefinable thing
called " news and intelligence." But if the stamp upon
news were said to be an equivalent for the post, he would
make this proposition :—Let the existing established news-
papers remain as they were, and, if they would stamp every
copy of their impression, let them retain the postal privi-
leges which they now possessed with the power of repeated
transmission through the post. If it were true that the
stamp was an advantage, they would retain the equivalent
afforded by the Post-office, and if they did there would be
no loss whatever to the revenue. The penny publications
would not be prevented communicating news, and if they
wanted to use the post they must pay for it. They would
be content to take it upon those terms. They said, "Ar-
range your established press as you please ; but do not
oppose insuperable obstacles to the insertion of news in a
penny publication." Of what did that news consist ?
Proceedings in the courts of justice, in the police courts, in
the houses of Parliament, or in the sanitary world, showing
men what was necessary to be done in order to preserve
their health and promote their physical comforts. (Hear.)
It was impossible that laws could be obeyed if the Legisla-
ture took steps to prevent their being known. If this in-
formation were not permitted to be circulated in penny
publications, it was impossible it could reach those classes
whom it was most desirable that it should reach. Work-
ing labourers did not read the Times, or the Morning
Herald, or the Morning Post ; but because those news-
papers did not suit that class, that was no reason why the
Legislature should step in and prevent them having their
news at all. He gave the established press, therefore, the
benefit of their position. They would in no way be
affected if they adopted the option which was offered to
them ; but if they refused that option, what was there
more simple than for this country to take the course which
was adopted in the United States, and permit printed
matter up to a certain weight to go through the Post-office
under a certain stamp? Lot those who used the Post-office
pay for it, but let them not connect the Post-office with
the printing of news, because there was not the slightest
connection between the two things. The Times went free
by post up to 4oz. ; but the penny publication unstamped
was permitted to go by post if it paid according to its
weight, and was precisely upon the same footing as a
letter. At present, if a Times newspaper under 4oz. in
weight were sent to Liverpool, it went free; but if he sent
a Family Herald, which weighed 20z., it was charged 41.
It was said, " You can stamp it." That was true ; but
that involved the stamping of 200,030 copies, and the
entering into securities to the extent of 1,6001., which
the publishers of a small publication might not bo
able to accomplish. Under the treaty with the United
States a penny publication might be sent to that country,
and might go to the remotest part of it, 3,000 miles away
from Now York, for ld. ; but if it wore posted. in London
to go to Greenwich it would be charged 4d. And this was
what was called the postal privilege for the diffusion of
knowledge ! (Hear, hear.) He contended that it was no
privilege at all. It was true that, by a Treasury minute,
it was declared that if a person registered a publication
and called it a newspaper, and so on, it might have all
these postal privileges, just as if it were a newspaper.
This was a very improper Treasury minute to come from
persons professing to be guardians of the public revenue,
for the fact was that it exposed the revenue to extensive
frauds. He would give the house an instance of how it
operated. A Mr. Savory printed a trade circular which
contained a number of drawings of candlesticks, snuffer-
trays, candelabra, &c„ with the view of circulating them
through the country as advertisements; and, in order to
get the benefit of the post, what did he do ? He wont to
the Board of Inland Revenue, and made a declaration that
his circular was a newspaper, which it was not—(hear,
hear)—and, having made that declaration, he swore he was
worth 4001. over and above the sum necessary to pay his
debts. He then found two securities to the extent of 4001.
each, binding themselves to be forthcoming to pay any
penalties he might incur if in his circular of snuffer-trays
or candelabra he should be guilty of publishing any " blas-
phemous or seditious libel." (Laughter.) And, having
done all this, Mr. Savory was entitled to some stamped
paper, and to have his stamped circulars carried free by
post ; but, unfortunately, as the stamp was inside, and not
outside, the Post-office authorities never knew whether
any particular paper had got a stamp or not, because they
had not time to open them. If they did, they would de-
lay the other mails ; consequently, if a man wont to the
Board of Inland Revenue and stated that something was a
newspaper—though it was not—and entered into all the
required recogniso.nces and sureties, he would put himself
in a position to defraud the revenue—he (Mr. Gibson) did
not say that ho would do so intentionally—but at all
events he would be entitled to send his publications
through the post without paying any postage at all, be-
cause he did not need to take much stamped paper ; ho
might print as many as he chose on unstamped paper, and
the one would go just as freely as the other, it being im-
possible to examine the different printed papers to see
whether they were stamped or not. (Hear, hear.) He
did not mean to say that these frauds were extensive.
He believed that there was so much honest feeling among
Englishmen generally, that they would not willingly de-
fraud any branch of the public revenue. (Laughter.) But
this he would say, that it became those who set themselves
up as the guardians of the public revenue, and who pro-
fessed such extreme care that the position of the national
creditor should not be affected that they would never agree
to the smallest reduction proposed by an independent
member,—it behoved them, ho said, to devise some less
clumsy means for the protection of the revenue. (Haar,
hear.) It was shown before the committee that all the
copies of a particular publication were on one occasion ex-
amined at the Post-office, and that no fewer than 5,0a0
copies were found without a stamp. But there was no re-
dress for this ; because, having no news, the publication
was not, in point of law, liable to the stamp, and nothing
could be done but to throw them all aside without for-
warding them, because the parties to whom they were
addressed would of course refuse to receive them when they
found postage charged upon them, and nobody could tell
who had put them into the post. Punch was allowed to be
printed without a stamp, as well as with ono, and there
was nothing to prevent an unstamped copy of Punch being
sent by the post free of charge, for there was nobody to
examine it, and it would go just the same as a stamped
copy. This mixing up of stamped and unstamped copies
of publications, therefore, was a most clumsy expedient,
and ought not to be allowed to continue. (Hear, hear.)
Ho would recommend a plainer system, viz., that which
was suggested by Mr. Walter, when the question was dis-
cussed in that house some years ago. Mr. Walter said :
" If you want to levy a postage on newspapers, do it at
the Post-office, and then you will not be involved in all the
difficulties and litigations to which you are now subject in
order to ascertain what is a newspaper, and what publica-
tions are liable to the stamp and what are not."
He (Mr. Gibson) called upon the house to vote for his re-
solution, not pledging them at all to any particular plan
of postal regulation, but merely with the view of pointing
out the necessity of some changes in the present system.
He believed if they wore to abolish the present stamp
duty and impose a small postage charge upon all printed
papers that went through the Post-office they would more
than replace the revenue that would thereby be sacrificed,
because many of the numberless penny publications that
were sent at present by railway and otherwise, in large
packages, would then be sent by the post, and thereby add
to the revenue. It would be a great convenience to all
parties in the country, and he was sure would be highly
appreciated by the labouring population. But what was
the state of the law ? Was it creditable to the house
to have a statute which they could not enforce ? (Hear.)
He maintained that there was a perfect knowledge on the
part of the authorities that they could not enforce the law
in its integrity. If they carried out the strict meaning of
the words of that act, there was hardly any publication
that was not liable to the duty. What were the words of
the act with respect to securities, for instance?—

" And be it further enacted, that from and after 30 days
after the passing of this act, no person shall print or publish
for sale any nawspaper, pamphlet, or other paper containing
public news, intelligence, or occurrences, or remarks, or ob•
servations thereon, or upon any matters of Church or State,
where the same shall not exceed two sheets, and be published
for less than Gd., until he shall have appeared before a Baron
of the Exchequer, or one of his Majesty's justices of the peace,
and enter into recognisances, himself in 4001., and two other
persons in 4001. each, binding themselves to pay such fines
and penalties as may be imposed upon conviction for printing
any blasphemous or seditious libel."

The penalty for a breach of the law was 201. Now, was
it possible to enforce such a law ? and did they enforce it?
He would ask the law officers both of the present and late
Government whether it was meant to enforce such a law ?
and, if not, why not ? If it could not be enforced, let
them repeal it. (Hear.) But don't let them go on in the
present absurd way, calling upon 'Mr. Savory to enter into
securities not to publish any blasphemous or seditious
libels in his trade circular, and not enforcing the securities
against works of an obvious political character. The
existing practice of the authorities was not to enforce the
recoguisances unless in the case of papers containing news,
or where, as in the case of Mr. Savory, a person declared
that his publication was a newspaper, the consequence of
which was, that a person might publish a paper for the
avowed purpose of libelling private character, of question.
ing the truths of Christianity, or bringing discredit upon
the Sovereign or the throne, without being asked to enter
into any iemrities whatever—for, as had been said, no one
was ever a •ked to do so unless he gave news which, it was
easy to avoid doing, according to the interpretation put
upon the word by the authorities, or unless he declared
that his publication was a newspaper, which he need not
do unlo s he found it convenient for that purpo,
Novelle, of the Musical Times, might sell that publication
Without a stamp. He (Mr. Gibson) was a member of the
Society of Arts, of which Prince Albert was president, and
that society was allowed to publish an uns
"news," did
which, though it gave what people called did not
give what the Board of Inland Revenue considered to be
nem." The society
abstained from commenting on any
"

matters of church cr State ; and yet, in order to secure the
postal privilege for their stamped copies, they were required
to enter into securities that they would be responsible for
any penalties that might be incurred for blasphemous or
seditious libels. Was it not trifling to go on in this way
when they found some of the most offensive publications,
such as Sam, Sly, brought out for the express purpose, and
no other, of libellinc, private character? A clergyman who
was libelled in that disgraceful publication having heard
that there were laws which made persons responsible
for the publication of libels, resolved to bring an action
against the libeller; but he found that, because the publi-
cation did not contain what the Board of Inland Revenue
chose to call " news," the proprietors had never been re-
quired to enter into any securities, and that it was of very
little use to bring an action on the case, because the pub-
lishers were men of straw. (Hear.) His (Mr. Gibson's)
resolution merely asked the house to declare that the law
Wtl3 in an unsatisfactory state, and demanded the attention
of Parliament. The acts of the Government proved that
the law required the attention of Parliament. They com-
menced a prosecution for penalties in the Court of Exche-
quer against the publishers of one of the most eminent and
useful public writers of the day—he alluded to Mr. C.
Dickens—(hear, hear)—on the ground that Mr. Dickens
had inserted news in a monthly periodical. Now, suppos-
ing that the Government had succeeded in their efforts to
put down Mr. Dicken's monthly periodical, what benefit
would the country have derived from the result? (Hear.)
Would the revenue have been benefitted ? No, because if
the Government had succeeded in their action, the publi-
cation must have been discontinued, as it would have been
impossible to sell it at an increased price. The prosecu-
tion, it was said, was commenced to test the law, and to
put down that class of monthlies. A pretty policy in these
days, when they talked of educating the people, to attempt
to prevent a man with a mind and intellect like Mr.
Dickens, from addressing the greatest possible number of
his fellow-countrymen by stupid laws, which were a dis-
li
grace to the Legislature ! (Hear.) He used advisedly the
word "disgrace," because if they put down Mr. Dickens's
publication they would not confer a particle of benefit on
the country. They would neither benefit the revenue nor
would they consult the interest of any established paper ;
because no one could believe that such a publication would
ever come into competition with The Times, or that one
copy less of the Times would be sold if Mr. Dickens were
let alone. (Hear.) If any doubt had existed whether that
publication came within the Stamp Act, the Government,
instead of prosecuting the publishers and putting them to
the expense of defending themselves in a court of justice,
ought to have brought in a bill at once, if they ever in-
tended to do so, to exempt it from the law. But, instead
of doing that, they went to the Court of Exchequer and
tried to enforce the penalties. The judges, however, over-
ruled them. And did the Government stop there ?
They said that the judges had given bad law—that Mr.
Timm, of the Board of Inland Revenue, knew the law
better than the judges, and that an attempt ought to be
made to set aside the decision in favour of Mr. Dickens.
The publishers were therefore once more put upon their de-
fence. After incurring further expense, in came Lord
Derby's Government. The law officers of that Government
considered that the persecution—for it was a persecution—
had gone far enough, and they tried to bring in a bill to
stop further litigation, to exempt the publication from the
stamp duty, and attempt to define what was a newspaper.
That bill, however, had since disappeared ; he did not
know what had become of it. It was true that he had ob-
jected to its being introduced in violation of the forms of
the house ; but it would have been very easy to re-intro-
duce it, if necessary; but not ono step had since been taken
in the matter, and, for aught he knew, another prosecution
might be commenced to-morrow against the publication of
a monthly paper containing news. The Board of Inland
Revenue had fancied that they had put down a great
many of these publications. There was one, entitled
Burniston's Northern Luminary, respecting which the pub-
lisher received the following letter :
" Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house, London,
March 12, 1849.
" Burniston's Northern, Luminary.
" Sir,—This publication having been brought under my
notice, I have to inform you that it is a newspaper, and that,
by publishing it as such, you are incurring heavy penalties.
I beg, therefore, to suggest the propriety of your immediately
registering it as a newspaper or discontinuing to publish it.
If you adopt the former course, you must give the necessary
instructions for the documents at the Stamp-office at York,
without delay.—l am, ice.,

" J. Tune,
Solicitor of Inland Revenue.
" Mr. J. Burniston, printer, &c., Kuaresborough."
A note was added, stating that the paper had been discon-
tinued, Mr. Timm having imagined that he had frightened
it out of existence; but he (Mr. Gibson) could show the
house that Mr. Tinun was mistaken, and that the Northern
Luminary had set only for a short period, and had risen
again since the decision of the Court of Exchequer, and was
now being published, notwithstanding Mr. Timm's letter,
with perfect freedom. But Mr. Timm sometimes told them
that frequency of publication had nothing at all to do with
constituting a newspaper, and that if a person printed a
Queen's speech once, or even an account of an execution,
he would expose himself to a notice from Somerset-house.
The following letter was sent by Mr. Timm to the printers
of a paper entitled " Execution of Sarah Ann Thomas ":
" Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house,
Loudon, April 26, 1849.
" Gentlemen,—A printed paper, entitled " Execution of
Sarah Ann Thomas," printed and published by you, has been
brought to the notice of this board. I have, therefore to inti-
mate to you that, by publishing such paper, which is a news-
paper, on unstamped paper, and without, in other respects,
complying with the requisites of the law, you have incurred
serious penalties. The commissioners are ready, however, to
attend to any explanation you may think proper to give as to
the irregularity, and any statement you may send to me upon
the subject shall be submitted to them.—l am, &e.,

" J. 'Lim,
" Solicitor of Inland Revenue.
" Messrs. Mathews, printers, 44, Broad-street, Bristol."

The following was the reply of the Messrs. Mathews :
" 44, Broad-quay, Bristol, April 25, 1849.
" Sir,—ln reply to yours of yesterday, we beg to say that
we must plead entire ignorance of the existence of any law
which we have infringed in issuinc, the tract referred to. We
have nothing in " Hansard's Instruction to Printers" which
at all deals with the question. We have also inquired at the
Stamp-office to-day, and can get no information on the subject.
We most certainly would not knowingly lay ourselves open to
the penalties of infringement. You would, therefore, greatly
oblige by stating where the information can be obtained. We
have for many years (in common with our brethren of the
Profession) printed reports and tracts on passing subjects, and
cannot therefore perceive wherein we have offended.—Wo
are, &c., MATTLIEWS, BROTIIERS.
" J. Timm, Esq."
Mr. Timm replied as follows :

" Inland Revenue-office, Somerset-house, London,
April 26, 1849.
" Gentlemen,—l have received your letter of the 25th
instant, in .explanation of the publishing by you of the tract,
as you term it, entitled Execution of S. A. Thomas,' and, in
reply, beg to furnish you with the necessary information for
your future guidance. A newspaper is defined to bo any
paper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences,
printed in any part of the United Kingdom, to be dispersed
and made public.' The paper in question, with the excep-
tion, perhaps, of that which relates to the history of the
criminal, is, from beginning to end, within this description
of matter. This board is not disposed, I apprehend, to treat
the present case as a wilful infringement of the law, and the
notice thus taken will probably be deemed sufficient.—l am,
&c.,

"J. Toast,
" Solicitor of Inland Revenue.
"Messrs. Mathews, printers, 44, Broad-quay, Bristol.'
So that the board did not attempt to enforce the penalties
which they had threatened. But what wore people to
think of such notices? The penalties were very serious,
and it behoved the Government to be able to tell distinctly
what a newspaper was, and what it was not, in order that
people might know precisely how to act. It was sometimes
said that if a publication confined itself to one class of sub-
jects it was not a newspaper. Mr. Keogh, for instance
stated to the committee that the Legal Observer might'.
with propriety, give any information relative to Papal
agression, provided it merely gave what lawyers thought
of it, because that kind of news would be interesting to a
class—viz., lawyers. Mr. Keogh also stated that a report
of a meeting of lawyers on Papal aggression in the Legal
Observer would not be news ; but that, if it contained a
report of a meeting of clergymen, he had not the slightest
doubt that penalties would be incurred. (Laughter.) This
was_ a refinement which he hoped his hon. and learned
frienl the Attorney-General would make clear to the house.
(Hear. hear.) There was, therefore, avhat was called the
one subject principle. If persons stuck to one subject they
wore safe ; but not if they meddled with miscellaneous sub-
jects. Ho begged to remind tie house, however, that there
was not such a word as "miscellaneous" intho act. (Hear.)
But even '` one subject" was not always allowed to escape ;
for what was the account of the execution of Sarah
Ann Thomas but "one subject ?" (Hear.) And it ap-
peared that a publication entitled the Bedford Charity
.Record, which related to one subject, had also been threat-
with penalties. He thought, therefore, ho bad succeeded
in making out an indisputable case with respect to the un-
satisfactory state of the law, and to show that it was the
duty of the Government to delay no longer in settling the
matter; for it was infamous, to say the least of it, to have
the Board of Inland Revenue frightening small useful pub-
lications out of existence without anybody being able to
say whether they were legal or not. These were the leading
features of the nase he had to submit to the house. He
Would now place his resolutions in the hands of the
Speaker, in the confident hope that the house would give
them its favourable consideration. He assured hon. gentle-
men on both sides that he brought forward the resolutions
without any party feeling, and without hostility to any set
of politicians in the country, but simply from an earnest
desire for the promotion of education and the diffusion of
knowledge, and from a wish to put an end to an anomalous
state of press laws, which ha was sure no one could witness
without regret. o must remind hon. gentlemen that sepa-
rate divisions would be taken upon each resolution, and
that, therefore, those who could not support the 41/4
might vote fur ono or more of them. Ho only ase
the house would not reject all three resolutions,
but would
give them that favourable consideration to which he
thought their importance entitled them. (Loud and con-
tinued cheers.)
[A. messenger from the House of Lords appeared at the
table to request that their lordships might be furnished
with a copy of the evidence taken before the Clitheroe elec-
tion committee, and it was ordered that a copy of the evi-
dence be communicated to their lordships.]
Mr. EWART said that, in seconding the motion of his
right hon. friend, it would not be necessary that he should
trespass for more than a few minutss upon the attention of
the house, for his right hon. Mend had completely ex-
hausted the subject in his most admirable speech. (Hear,
hear.) He thought the result of the debate must be the
final, if not the speedy, repeal of the advertisement du
-12)'
ty
He s
and eventually of the stamp duty on newspapers. H
ported the motion of his right hon. friend mainly because
lise.
he believed that the abolition of these duties would_ be fa-
vourable to the cause of knowledge and
_()rdel dered that it would be vain to found sehools,..tollesetablnissih-
libraries, or to take other means for extending information
to the people, if they did not ene° u
ledge of the current literature of th e Idt 13lao ng
th
eti ilh
eas t axe s
know-
were not taxes upon the accumulated stores n
odf knowledge,
but upon what might be called the
lating medium of instruction.
mi.current coin and circu-
s was the very kind of
knowledge which it should be the anxious duty of a Legis-
lature to circulate thorouoill
, y among the masses of the
people. lie was desirous that the people should be invited,
if possible, to educate
themselves.
(Hear. hear.) It might
be remembered that Gibbon said that men received two
given them by others, and another
given them by themselves. Now,
he would k, how they
could better extend this species of self-education than, by
encouraging the free circulation of local newspapers? He
believed the effect of the repeal of the stamp and adver-
tisement duties would be to give such an impulse to the
circulation of newspapers as was witnessed in the United
States. He was aware some persons imagined that the
consequences of the abolition of these duties would be the
prevalence of bad publicationS, but unquestionable testi-

mony had been adduced before the committee on the stamp
duties on newspapers that, in large towns like Manchester,
the good.publications eventually triumphed over the bad.
11 also supported the motion of his right hon. friend be-
cause he believed it was favourable to the cause of order.
They would find that those countries which, during the
recent revolution that had taken place iu Europe, had re-
mained most unshaken, were those in which the press was
most free. Austria, France, Prussia, and the countries
where the press was most shackled, had been shaken to
their foundations and almost ovcrtarned in the political
earthquake which had agitated Europe ; while, on the
other hand, Sweden, Belgium, Switzerland, and England
had remained firm and unshaken. The United States pre-
sented a most remarkable example of a firmly-seated Go-
vernment, less agitated by the shocks of internal commo-
tion than any other country in the world, and ho main-
tained that this was to be traced, to a great extent at least,
to the freedom which the press enjoyed. One of the most
admirable distinctions which existed between ancient and
modem times was, in his opinion, that whereas in ancient
times the people were appealed to by their orators, they
were now appealed to by the press, and while formerly
they were appealed to by interest and passion, they were
now appealed to by calm deliberation and argumentative
reasoning. He held that the leading articles of newspapers
were far better guides than the speeches of ancient orators,
and he contended that they ought to avail themselves of
this power to the utmost extent of which it was susceptible,
and not to retain any longer impediments to its unre-
stricted use. These shackles were an excrescence and a
deformity on our constitution ; their origin dated some
140 years back; they were introduced in the reign of Queen
Anne for a bad reason, many of them on account of the
continuance of a war ; and, as ho believed, there was rn
express understanding with regard to the paper duty that
it should cease when the war was concluded. He thought
it was the duty of the Legislature to sweep away these ex-
crescences on our constitution. Ho was rejoiced to find
that this great cause had so able an advocate as his right
hon. friend. He believed it would gain ground from day
to day, and from session to session, and that the Govern-
ment would eventually be obliged to concede the principle
for which his right honourable friend was contending.
(Hear, hear.)
_ The SPEAKER then put the question on the first reso-
lution "That the advertisement dut ought to be re-
pealed." y

Th? CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
had listened with very great interest both to the able and
comprehensive speech of the right hon. gentleman
who moved these resolutions, and also to the very tempe-
rate and intelligent statement of the hon. member for
Dumfries. He freely owned that in those speeches there
was much matter that deserved the attention of the house,
but they related.partly to subjects of policy and partly to
subjects of revenue, and those subjects it would be his
duty, as far as he was able to disentangle from one another.
Although he did not, in the least degree, wish to qualify
his description of the speeches which had been made on
this subject, he would endeavour to show the house that it
would not be wise to adopt the resolutions which had been
proposed. With regard to questions of policy, those were,
tool' cohourldsgae, vme a t ehimr s
nuponspecial
which
authority th e office
ts he had the p
eak.The
com-
paratively limited question on which the right hon.
gentleman had bestowed considerable notice—namely, that
awnhdichEgrvaenws—oiwitasofonthee
tporowsmecicihtiohne (the Chancellor
case of B
Exchequer) ought, perhaps, in the first instance, to advert.
He fully acceded, with respect to that question, to the
Bradbury
fbitirhye
opinion expressed in one of the resolutions before the house

—"
That the law relative to taxes on newspapers, and other
regulations affecting public prints, is in an unsatisfactory
state, and demands the attention of Parliament." (Hear,
hear.) It was the intention of the Government to propose
—and he hoped they would be able to do so within a
very short period—a bill for the
purpose of clearing up the
state of the law. (Some cries of "Oh," from the Minis-
terial side.) Well, if clearing up the state of the law on
this subject was not considered desirable by some hon.
gentlemen, he was sorry to differ from those who enter-
tained that opinion ; but it was the intention of the
Government to bring in a bill for the purpose of clear-
ing up the state of the law with respect to newspapers,
and of preventing any harsh or severe interpretation
of that law, quite irrespectively of the further ques-
tion, which, he fully granted, still remained for consi-
deration. ,It appeared to him that there was a clear dis-
tinction between these two subjects. The question of the
stamp duty upon newspapers, which involved a large sum
of money, was a material question of revenue. The ques-
tion that had arisen with respect to the liability of certain
publications to be classed as newspapers was one with re-
gard to which persons would have a fair right to complain
if any considerable or unnecessary delay took place in call-
ing the attention of Parliament to the subject. Now, with
reference to the general principle upon which these resolu-
tions rested, the 2d resolution declared—" That the policy
of restraining the cheap periodical press from narrating
current events, by rendering it liable to stamp duties and
other restrictions, if any public news, intelligence, or oc-
currences, or any remarks or observations thereon,' be con-
tained therein, is inexpedient." They had been told that it
was not as a matter of revenue that these restrictions were
imposed, but that it was the, policy of those who placed the
acts upon tha statute-book to restrain the circulation
of intelligence of the kind referred to. He would not enter
into the historical question as to whether that bad been the
policy of a former Government or not, but he thought that
so many membersof her Majesty'spresent Government had
given their voices in favour of the free circulation of intel-
, ligence, that the house must feel assured that the policy of
a former period was not likely to be the policy of the pre-
sent Government. He cordially concurred in the opinion
expressed by his hon friend (Mr. Ewart), that perfectly free
discussion was not only not to be regarded as an evil or to
be subjected to repressive legislation, but was a system
which, if it were fairly and manfully encouraged, was
likely to contribute to the stability of the institutions of
the country—(hear, hear)—and ho was quite certain that
nothing would either be said or done on the part of the
Government to lead to a contrary result. He must now
request the house to look at the question involved in the
motion of his right hon. friend, who proposed, by his first
resolution, that they should condemn the advertisement
duties, by the second the stamp duties, and, by the third,
the paper duties. This was the part of the subject upon
which it was his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) more especial office to speak, and it would be a breach of duty
on his part if he were to encourage or to advise the
house to pass these resolutions. He had protested before—
and he must now repeat the protest—against condemning
taxes which the house was not prepared on the instant to
repeal. (Hear hear.) He trusted the house would never
lower its character by sliding into a practice which, un-
doubtedly, had many recommendations—recommendations,
he meant, addressed to feeling and convenience—of dealing
in expressions and promises which might produce a popu-
lar impression, but which created and raised expectations
that Parliament was not prepared to fulfil. The hon.
member for Dumfries had himself given an illustration of
the vanity and futility of understandings with respect to
the repeal of taxes ; for, in referring to the origin of the
newspaper stamp duties and of the paper duties, he had
said they were imposed with a clear understanding that
they should be repealed at an early period. Now, did not
this show the worthlessness of such understandings as to
the repeal of the taxes? (Hear.) Did it not show the
deceptive and delusive character of mere expressions of
opinion about taxes, as distinct from the practical measures
which it was the duty of that house to take ? With
respect to the taxes under discussion, the right honourable
gentleman who brought forward the motion had said that
there was a great and culpable indifference on the part of
y was
Chancellors
to b e raised.o f
the
Chancelloi a of the Exchequer as to the mode in which the
gentleman revenue of the
accusedc e country t
Eixlch eeright
olr
a
great want of discrimination between the different modes
of raising the revenue. If that, then, was tho habitual
and established fault of Chancellors of the Exchequer,
surely the right hon. gentleman was prepared to show that
he proceeded upon a different principle, and discriminated
between the wise and unwise modes of raising the revenue
of the country. The right hon, gentleman now invited
the house to come to a vote by which they were to con-
demn nearly a million and a half of that revenue. The
right hon. gentleman said the house nee 1 not adopt all his
resolutions, hut, as they were proposed all together, ho
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought he was
justified
iu concluding that the right hon. gentleman wished the
house to adopt them all. Well, did the right honourable
gentleman, who condemned Chancellors of the Exchequer
for not discriminating between wise and unwise modes of
raising public money, make such discrimination himself?
The right hon. gentleman had condemned the unwise modes
of raising the revenue; Eel he pointed out a wise mode?
(Hear, hear.) [Mr. Gibson
tioned postage.] Yes, certainly the right honourable
gentleman had pointed out that a charge might be laid
upon newspapers sent by rest, but was that to produce a
million and a half of money ? It would do no such thing.
The right hon. gentleman, then, had not pointed out any
substitute for the revenue he proposed to condemn,
and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) trusted the house
was not disposed to fall into the practice of condemning
taxes until it was either prepared to dispense with them or
to provide substitutes for them. With regard to the ad-
vertisement duty, ho was sorry that ho differed from his
right hon. friend upon a qusstion of arithmetic. The right
hon. gentleman had said they might assume that for each
additional advertisement eight additional letters would
through tho Post-office, and he computed that passadditional advertisementse if
5,000,000
doning the duty, an additional 40,000,000 of letters pass through the post, which would yield would
166,000/. The rie•ht ho a revenue of
n. gentleman told them that the
advertisement duty only yielded
170,000/. or 180,0001., and that thereforeabout the same amount,
would at most be very trifr the loss of revenue
of the Exchequer) wanted ing. Now, he (the Chancellor
to know whether 166,000/. de-
rived from the Postage of l tt
for 160,0001, derived, f e ers would r(a'ly be a substitute
Unless he (the Chancelfoormofaticaleuty on advertisements ?
mistaken the accounts
of the Post-office revenue, for every
31, returned in that department about 21. was absorbed in
the expense of collection—(hear,
hear)—and therefore the
substitute proposed by the t
hon. gentleman, instead of
yielding 166,0001., would only produce about 55,000/. The
right b.on• gentleman proposed that the house should con-
sent to abandon a revenue amcwiting to 1,400,0001. a-year.
If ho proposed to abandon it, ho (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) should say, we had not the means of doing it ;
as it was not proposed to abandon it, but only to condemn
it,he would venture most respectfully, br t most earnestly,
to express a hope that the house would not consent to a
vote of that kind, but join with him in the vote which he
should propose, called "the previous question." (Hear,
hear.) For he did not wish to imply a hostility to tho
object which the right hon. gentleman had in view. (Hear.)
With respect to the paper duty, he would fully grant, that
large as was the revenue derived from that source, he
should be delighted to see the day when wo could dispense
with it. (He: r.) The right hen. gentleman must recol-
lect that, though certainly it was a duty which there were
abundant reasons to make us wish to get rid of, it was no
a duty laid merely upon the paper used for literary pro-
ductions, but a duty pressing upon the coarser description
, of paper used for inferior purposes • but no doubt the ttii!cr.
or
duty had the effect of a most objectionable tax upon
ndhn for it
ature and upon mental effort and productions, and
there-
fore he should be as happy as the right 9 gentleman
when the day came that wo could find a substitute
the
same
way
with
or dispense with it. (Hear, hear.) In
respect to t advertisement
duty, he would fully grant
that at present the charge imposed by it was a very heavy
the t h gentleman
on.
and onerous charge—(hear)—but
would recollect that after all we must be oantent in these