The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-17 00:00:00

NEWSPAPER STAMP DUTY.

Mr. MILNER GIBSON rose to call the attention of the
house to what ho alleged to be the present unsatisfactory
state of the law affecting the press, and to move the fol-
lowing resolution :—" That it is the opinion of this house
that the laws in reference to the periodical press and
newspaper stamp are ill-defined and unequally en-
forced; and it appears to this house that the sub-
ject demands the early consideration of Parliament." The
right hon. gentleman excused himself for bringing for-
ward the question in the absence of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, on the ground that it referred, not to
finances, but to the state of the law. The duty of
bringing the subject under the consideration of the house
devolved on him in consequence of having been chairman
of a committee of the house on the question of news-
paper stamps, which came to a resolution which de-
clared that there were abuses incident to the present
system of the Newspaper Stamp Law, arising from the
difficulty of determining the meaning of the word " news"
The resolution which he intended to move on this occasion
was not a mere abstract proposition. It asserted two facts
—namely, that at the present time the law relative to the
press was ill-defined ; and, secondly, that the Executive did
not enforce the law such as it was with impartiality. Should
the house adopt the resolution, it would indicate the opi-
nion of the house that the Government should bring in a
measure for the purpose of defining the law, and also in-
struct their officers to enforce the law with impartiality..
The financial aspect of this question, in reference to the
newspaper stamp, was insignificant, compared with other
considerations connected with it. Instead of treating this
question as merely one of law, he might have taken higher
ground. and it would have been easy to show that a cheap
press and the dissemination of useful knowledge would
have an important influence in extendiag the work of edu-
cation. This view of the subject could be supported by
the most recent Parliamentary authority—namely, the re-
port of Mr. Horace Mann on the state of education in Eng-
land and Wales. In that document Mr. Mann states that
although much was being done in respect to providing cheap
literature, yet a vast deal more remained to be accomplished
especially in the department of cheap newspapers, an abun-
dance of which, he thought, would do more to assist edu-
cation than millions spent in elementary schools without
inducements to the people to attend them. Past experience
taught him that the question of which he was the advocate
would be met in a fair and liberal spirit by members on
either side of the house. It was not a party question. When
Lord Derby was at the head of the Government he (Ur.
Gibson) accompanied a deputation to the noble lord to
urge the abolition of the stamp duty on newspapers. On
that occasion Lord Derby said ho could not be expected to
enter into all the details of the question, but there was
one thing which had been clearly established—namely,
that the law was not in a satisfactory position. His lord-
ship also declared that, whatever the law might be, it
ought to be impartially enforced, and that his Government
felt no disinclination to the spread of knowledge. The
proposition which ho now asked them to approve was only
that the law was at present unsatisfactory, that it ought
to be made simple, and that it ought to be enforced ; and
therefore he earnestly begged hon. gentlemen not to con-
sider what his opinions might be, what theories might be
entertained on the general subject of cheap newspapers,
but to ask themselves whether any reasonable objection
could be made to the wording of the resolution. He would
now proceed to demonstrate—first, that the law was ill-de-
fined; and secondly, that it was not equally enforced. The
house would recollect that some time since a prosecution
had been commenced against the publishers of a work of
Mr. Charles Dickens, called the Household Narrative of Cur-
rent Events, for the purpose not of inflicting a penalty, but
of ascertaining whether by law the Government had the
right to put down such publications. He bad said on that
occasion that if the law was doubtful they ought to bring in
a bill to settle it, and to let the world know what they
might and what they might not do. (Hear, bear.) His ad-
vice was not acted on, and the prosecution was taken into the
Court of Exchequer, when a majority of 3 to 1 of the
judges decided against the Government, and held that the
publication was not a newspaper in the eye of the law.
The Government were again urged to bring in a bill so as

This doctrine as to the legality of a small quantity of news
was still a matter of doubt; and the counsel for the Crown,
in the prosecution at Dublin, had made the important de-
claration, that that case was to decide the law with refer-
ence to a very numerous class of publications in this
country as well as iu Ireland. With reference to the point
that the news in the journal was not political news, it was
endeavoured to be shown, by some sort of inuendo, that
the object of the Legislature in passing the Stamp Acts
was not revenue. The learned counsel for the Crown
said :

"Now, gentlemen of the jury, I will bring before your
notice what appears to me to be the question before you.
First, let mo say one or two words on the general policy of
stamping papers such as these. You aro aware, no matter
what may be said of the liberty of the press, a great deal may
also be said of its licentiousness, and the Government of the
country, to keep a proper control over the public press, and
to keep within its own power a proprietor of a paper, who.
departing from liberty, may indulge in licentiousness, has
provided a machinery by which every proprietor of a paper
is bound to restrictions, and bound to pay a certain stamp
to protect the public."

He contended withgreat deference, that this was bad law ;
and he defied the learned counsel to produce any act of
Parliament which said that any stamp should be imposed
upon licentiousness. The stamp was to be put upon a re-
cord of facts, and any one might publish as much licen-
tiousness, as much blasphemy, as much sedition, as much
obscenity, as much of extreme democratic views as they
pleased, without putting any stamp upon it. But a fear
had always been entertained of the circulation of facts,
and it was only upon records of facts that the stamp had
ever been imposed. But the journal in question was not,
in fact, a licentious paper. It happened to be a most
moral, harmless, innocent, literary paper, and no one
contended that it contained a word that could be con-
strued into what was called license. (Hoar.) He had
looked at the particular copy of the paper which had been
prosecuted, in order to see whether there was any ground
for raising a prejudice against it in tho mind of the
jury by talking about the licentiousness of the press,
and he found that it really contained nothing more than
some good natured half-complimentary remarks upon her
Majesty's present Ministers. In speaking of the present
Government it said—

" With all this undoubted personal ability, I have littl
hope that the new Cabinet will work well. It wants a prin-
ciple, and it is too rich in individual talent."

(" Hear" and laughter.) An attempt had been made in
the course of the trial to set aside the act which had been
passed last session, which was met by Lord Chief Baron
Pennefather, who presided upon the occasion. By that
act the stamp duty had been repealed upon observations or
commentaries upon news, but not upon news itself. He
thought it must have required an intellect of the refining
power which was attributed to the present Chancellor of
the Exchequer to have brought in a bill which drew a
distinction between a commentary upon a fact and a fact
itself ; but, at present, the law was that you might observe
upon a fact, but if you gave that fact you were liable to a
penalty. (Hear, hear.) The learned judge, in his charge
to the jury, said—
" One paragraph is contained in the paper on which reli-
ance has been placed on both sides. It is the Letter from
London.' Now, this contained a good deal of observation on
public occurrences. It consisted of matters of considerable
public interest, a good deal of observation and discussion on
what is considered political, change of Government, &c. The
fact of its containing observation and discussion, I must tell
you, in point of law, does not constitute that portion any-
thing that would make the publication newspaper.' The
mere fact of their being observations and discussions was at
one time a test on which a publication was to be determined
whether it was a newspaper or not, but that test no longer
exists in point of law. You will consider, with respect to
that portion of the paper, whether that letter conveys infor-
mation of a fact of a public nature—whether it contains
public news, intelligence, or occurrences.' So far as it
contains observations and discussions, you will exclude it
from your consideration as a test, but so far as it conveys in-
telligence of facts, you will give it such weight as you think it
deserves."

The committee upon which he had sat had reported that
nothing was more undesirable than to attempt to draw a
distinction between observations upon a fact and the fact
itself, and had pointed out that by so doing they would
produce a harvest of Exchequer cases, and the case to
which ho had referred was ono of the results of the course
which the Government had taken. The law was now,
therefore, in this position—if he published in an unstaraped
paper the despatch of Admiral Dundas, expressing his re-
gret at having been compelled to attack the batteries at
Odessa, he would be liable to a penalty of 20(.; but if he
published a violent commentary on Admiral Dnndas's con-
duct, and accused him of not having done his duty to his
country, he was free from all stamp duties. If they al-
lowed observations to be circulated through the country
free of stamp, they ought, as a matter of public policy, to
allow records of facts themselves to be circulated on equally
favourable terms, so that facts might correct erroneous
theories, and men might not be led astray by violent obser-
vations. He thought that this case of the Dublin Penny
Commercial ,Tottrual would be sufficient to induce the
house to come to the conclusion that the law required to
be better defined and rendered more intelligible. (Hear,
hear.) He had been told that, instead of the word " early"
in the resolution which he had moved, he ought to have
inserted the word " immediate," and he was certainly of
opinion that not only an early but an immediate settle-
ment of the question was required, as he had not conjured
up refinements to bring before the houee, but had shown
that practical grievances existed which demanded the im-
, mediate attention of the Government. He would now
give them another case of more recent origin with refer-
ence to the present state of the law. The discovery had
lately been supposed to have been made that musical
announcements came under the head of news. Mr. No-
-1 vello, the publisher of a paper called the Musical Times,
had received the following communication from the Board.
of Inland Revenue, dated May 8, 1854, so that it was
clearly a very recent discovery by the board :
" Inland Revenue, London, May 8, 1851.
" Sir,—l am directed by the commissioners of this board
to communicate with you respecting a paper entitled the
Musical Times, printed and published by you, some un-
stamped copies of which have been brought under their obser-
vation. As this paper contains news, as well as principally
advertisements, and is published at intervals of less than 26
days, it is a newspaper liable to stamp duty, and for every
copy printed upon unstamped paper a penalty has been in-
curred. I shall be happy to submit to the board any explaua-
tiou you may think proper to offer upon the subject. —I am,
Sir, your obedient servant,
" J. Timm, Solicitor of Inland Revenue."
In reply to that, Mr. Novelle wrote as follows :
" London, 69, Dean-street, Soho, May 11, 1854.
" Sir,—l have to acknowledge your letter of May 8. I
have delivered to the Stamp-office stamped and unstamped
copies of every number of the Musical Times for the last ten
years (as compelled by law to do) and each of these copies has
been thoroughly examined by your officers to ascertain how
much of it was liable to duty for advertisements, so long as
that impost was chargeable ; and I suppose that, both before
and since, it has been examined to see that it contained no
blasphemous and seditious libel, as I am compelled still to
deliver a copy for the latter purpose. During these 10 years
the news contained in the paper has always been precisely of
and w yourth
itsofa naturec e
;I have shown) • was
me
has been made, I must suppose that the ajrndw,
icasalnroionljectihanon,
) the
thoroughly sl
kind,
acquainted
during 10 years, been published with the sanction of your
office. I should bo glad, therefore, to be favoured by
your pointing out what particular passage of news you
now consider as making the paper liable to be all printed.
upon stamps. The Musical Times has always consisted
principally' of a piece of music, for which the same price
is paid, whether printed alone, or whether accompanied
by the matter of temporary interest, which is given away