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

THE SUN, LONDON, WIINES,D,AY EVENING, MAY 17, 1854.

ound now, from the evidence of Mr. Novello, that from
the stamped and unstamped copies of the newspaper which
were necessarily deposited, there could have been little
or no difficulty to put him into possession of the data that
he required from the production of such returns. Under
these circumstances, he should renew his application in a
different form, by the adoption of which he had little
doubt of being more successful. With respect to the
question immediately before the house, he felt that his
right hon. friend had so well argued it that there was no
necessity for him to go over the same ground ; but, at the
s sme time, he must say, that he felt very much pleased at
the pledge which the motion of the right hon. gentleman
had extracted from the law officers of the Crown. (Hear.)
He wished to say a few words with regard to the postage
of newspapers, the management and regulations of which
he considered to be very inadequate and annoying ; and
he was of opinion that if, in the estimation of Mr. Rowland
Hill, id. on each paper was ample payment for the p stage
of the same, such penny ought to be paid. In the district
in which he resided there were, happily, only two news-
papers, and most people, to see these, as they had no wish
to incur the expense of purchasing them individually for
themselves, had to go to the public houses, where, of
course, they had to pay for ale or brandy and water, or
whatever they had to drink. If it were not for the pre-
sent restrictions this would not be so, but every man could
afford to have such newspapers at his own home. (Hear.)
He hoped that his right hon. friend would carry his
motion to a division, as he should like the people of this
country really to know who were or who were not honestly
their friends in this matter. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. CROSSLEY said that, although he was disposed to
be as liberal as most members with respect to these ques-
tions, nevertheless he could not agree with the doctrines
which he had heard propounded with respect to their
general effects upon education. He was one of those who
had voted against the late scheme of the Government rela-
tive to education, and he should always continue to vote
against such educational system, from the conviction that
it was radically wrong. His notion in these matters was,
"Hands off," and let the people educate themselves. He
was quite certain that they would do much better
without any interference of the house than with it. He
could not agree with the Attorney-General that when
there was a time of war all lightening of taxation should
necess irily be put a stop to ; and in considering such an
emergency, he thought that the advice given to him by an
old friend when he first commenced business might be
usefully followed, such advice being that " when difficul-
ties increased our energies should increase also." He had
followed and acted upon that advice, and could testify to
the advantage of having done so. He would propose to
Government that, in place of enforcing the restrictions
which were complained of, it would be better that it
should be made compulsory to put a stamp on all bankers'
cheques.
Mr. BRIGHT thought that the house would agree with
hint in the opinion that the language of the law officers of
the Crown was not so confideut on this as on former occa-
sions. These learned gentlemen had been complimented
on the tone of their language, and he certainly thought
that such tone was much more moderate than it had been
hitherto. He was glad to seethe learned Attorney-General
and Solicitor-General agree together in thinking that some
alterations were required as to the laws on this subject,
but still he could not help feeling that the. hon. and
learned gentlemen very widely differed as to the extent of
such alterations with his right hon. friend and colleague.
(Hear, hear.) If the hon. and learned gentlemen did really
so cordially agree with his right hon. friend, he (Mr.
Bright) could not understand why they should so strenu-
ously oppose his proposition, which was drawn up in so
moderate a spirit that he almost felt inclined to blame his
right hon. friend for not putting the question in more for-
cible terms than he had evidently thought it his duty to
adopt. The terms of his right hon. friend's motion, if he
properly comprehended it, were these—namely, that the
laws in reference to the periodical press anti newspaper
stamps were ill-defined and unequally enforced, and that
the subject was one which demanded the early considera-
tion of Parliament. (Hear, hear.) He understood the
learned Attorney-General to agree so far with the words
of the motion as not to deny that the subject demanded
the consideration of the house,, and that the laws on the
subject had been in some cases unequally enforced—
[" Hear, hear." from the Attorney-Generali— but the
learned gentleman denied that such laws were ill-defined.
(Hear, hear.) Well, then, he could understand exactly
the position which the hon. and learned gentleman intended
to take. In following the arguments of his right hon,
friend who introduced this motion to the house, it should
, be observed that .t had not been in any way insinuated
that the Board of Inland Revenue had been voluntarily
unfair or partial in their dealing with the operation of the
laws over which they had control, so as to charge one man
to the exclusion of another; but what was complained of
was, that these laws had been unequally enforced, and,
that they were so, even the hon. and learned gentlemen
themselves had not attempted to deny. (Hear, hear.) He
firally believed that the Attorney-General iu his own mind
telt that no attempt which could be made would be ef-
fectual to prevent these laws from being unequally en-
forced; and if it should be said that every paper that
came within the reach of these laws should be taxed, he
did not believe that such laws would stand a year. (Hear,
hear.) He hoped it would not be supposed for one mo-
ment that the object of his right hon. friend in bringing
this motion before the house was that such papers as Cie
At engine, the Builder, the Racing Times, or even Mr.
Novello's publications, should be stamped; for he felt as-
sured that nothing was further from the wishes and inten-
tions of that right hon. gentleman, who had on so many
occasions expressed and proved himself an enemy to
the system of stamps altogether—(" Hear," from Mr. Gib-
sou)—but what was objected to was that the law shouldbe
so worked as to touch some and let others off free, particu-
larly in such cases whore it was supposed the public might
he offended and the stamp duties imperilled. He had no
doubt that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer were in his
place he would tell them that these stamp duties, regarded
in a fiscal light, were of little or no importance ; and he
could easily understand that the amount of suc duties
was not the mainspring of their retention, which, pro-
balsly, was chiefly owing to the desire of keeping down
the publication of cheap political periodicals, calculated
to be dangerous in their tendency and widely disseminated
among the people. (Hear.) Notwithstanding what the
learned Attorney-General had said, there was no doubt
but that the Board of Inland Revenue had been for years
allowing a body of news to be published throughout this
kingdom, contrary to the statutes on the subject—(hear,
hear)—and that hundreds of thousands of pounds which
ought to have been paid had been remitted in the way of
stamps with reference to this or that publication, which
the Government might have considered not objec ionable,
or perhaps useful. (" Hear," and "No.") Why, if a
Man in Manchester issue a newspaper, he must pay Id. on
every copy he sent out, while another man in the Strand
was permitted to publish the Racing Times without a
stamp, and not only remain unprosecuted by Government,
but actually let off altogether. He had no objection to
the unstamped publication of the Racing Times, or any
other paper, and merely mentioned such an example to
show the injustice and inequality of the tax. (Hear.)
Government, no doubt, acted in this way, not because
they were unwilling to receive all they could get from this
tax, but because they found it wise to give up some of the
tax in order to be able to retain any of it. He hoped
that his right bon. friend would not be met on this
occasion in a spirit of such restricted liberality as the
recommendation of the hon. and learned gentlemen seemed
to infer, but, on the contrary, that Government would
imitate the example of Sir Robert Peel and other great
statesmen on similar emergencies, and do away with
such cumbrous machinery of legislation, which was not
only ineffective, but unmanageable. (Cheers.) What, he
would ask, was to be the operation of the statute on the
proceedings of the electric telegraph companies ? When
hon. memers left the house some of them went to the Re-
form, some to the Carlton, and some, perhaps, to that club
which a distinguished individual sail he had never heard
of—(a laugh)—and each would find written up in the hall
of his duo an account of the proceedings in the house.
(Hear.) He himself, before coming down, had so read a
report of part of the speech of his right hon. friend who
had made this motion. Well, every line of every para-
graph so published was a violation of the law. And so—
not at the interval of a month, a week, a day, or even an
hour, but every five minutes through the evening—fresh
news from that house was being published all over London.
It was prii.ted, and it was sent down into the country and
printed there, and he should like to know from the Attor-
ney-General whether it was his intention co put a stop to
this wonderful operation of the electric telegraph ? Were
great public companies, who hid expended immense sums
in their undertakings, to be insulted, attacked, worried.
nay, perhaps destroyed, by the Board of Inland Revenue ?
( Hear.) The Attorney-General knew very well there was
no fear of it; and even if there were, the Attorney-Gene-
ral was not the man to be the instrument of such doings
He could not think that the hon, and learned gentleman
would ever -lend himself to du anything which could lessen
the instruction of the people, or could diminish the length
and breadth and number of the channels by which the
publication of political information was spread through all
parts of the kingdom. (Hear.) Then, again, with regard
to the financial part of the question. Not long ago he had
read in a Scotch paper that the Chancellor of the Exche•
quer, in receiving a deputation from some place in Scot-
land, praying fora grant for the establishment of some pub-
lic institution, though he did not promise the grant, had
stated very distinctly that he did not wish to he understood
that, because the oountry was at war, everything connected
with art and science and public instruction was thereby
to be thrown aside, even though it did cost something to
the Exchequer. That was a sentiment which did honour
to the Chancellor of the Exchequer ; but in this case
he would have the right hon. gentleman to understand
that he was not asked to abandon the 400,0001. which the
penny stamp produced. At present it was supposed by
persons connected with the post-office, that about as many
papers went through the post-office as were published—
that was, supposing 100,000,000 newspapers to be published,
100,000.b00 went through the post-office, some of course
never going through it all, and some very frequently; and
the question, therefore, to be ascertained was, supposing
the stamp duty were abolished, and a postage of ld. im-
posed for every newspaper which entered the box of the
post-office as a substitute, what would be the number of
newspapers which would go through the post-office as
compared with the number which now went through?
For it was evident that if the number continued the same,
the Exchequer would get quite as much money as it did
now. The letters which had been read in the course
of the discussion, containing applications from all parts
of the country o the Board of Inland Revenue, as
to whether such and such papers were or were not
liable to the tax, would give the house some idea
of the pressure which that board brought to bear
upon the disposition to publish throughoutjthe country,
and of the number of newspapers actually strangled
by the stamp. There were 75 boroughs in the United
Kingdom returning members to Parliament, in not one of
which was there a newspaper—(hear)—a thing which would
scarcely be believed if told in England of any other coun-
try. He would assume that for every newspaper pub•
lished in the United Kingdom now, there would be ten
published if there was no newspaper stamp ; and if they
went to the colonies or to the United States, he thought
everybody who knew anything of the condition of affairs
there would sallow that he was not overstating the case.
If, then, instead of 100,000,000 papers there were
1,000,000,000 published, was it not fair to assume that
at least one in ten of these would still pass through the
post, and, if the postage duty was equal to the present
stamp, it was clear that the sum of money which the Ex-
chequer would receive would be just about equal to that
which the stamp duty produced. The Excise duties would

fall off to that amount, but the postage revenue would
immediately increase ; the paper duty would increase—
(hear)—and at the same time the facility of intercourse

among all classes of the people would lead to the spread of
trade, the increase of consumption, and the general im-
provement of the revenue. (Hear, hear.) But there was
a strong argument to be drawn against the tax from the
siza of the newspapers. Now here wore three newspapers
of the largest size—The Times, with its supplement ; a
,paper published in the colony of Victoria, called the Mel-
-oourne Argu3, with its supplement, about the same sizo as
the
Timeß ; and the "r^ •'• ''"!' rbOr
(~`" ' i
Times without a supplement. [Here the hon. member,
suiting the action to the word, unfolded the three papers
mentioned, which
being cut into single shoots, and the

sheets tacked together lengthwise, formed each a long roll,
which fell over the seat before, and extended far into the
floor of the house.) The Times paid Id. stamp for each
copy, but the Melbourne Argus paid no stamp at ad. The
population of Victoria was not much more than that of
Manchester and Salford together, yet the Melbourne Argus
printed 11,000 copies every morning, and so great was the
demand, that not having the said admirable machinery at
its command as was possessed by the Times, the proprie-
tors had been obliged to issue a notice that the price would
be doubled to every subscriber after such and such a day.
The price of the Times was sd. to the public, the price of
the Melbourne Argus was lideand every workman in New
York could buy the New York Tribune every morning for.
1(1. It was just as good a newspaper as the Times. Per-
haps all its leaders were not written with the same ability
which distinguished that part of the Times—but it had
pilot boats which went far out into the Atlantic to meet
the packets, it had telegraphic despatches from every part
of thi union, it had correspondents in all the chef cities of
Europe, and—a thief; which would scarcely be deemed pro-
bable of a paper sold for id.—it employed a staff not
much short, he believed, of 303 persons. There was a
paper in New York which sold for a h ,lfpenny—the New
York Sun—the copyright of which sold not long ago for
50,0001., and he believed that the copyright of the New
York papers was at this moment worth double the copy-
right of all toe papers in London with the exception of the
Times. (Hear.) The reason of that was that the trade
there was free like every other trade, and it prospered in
consequence; while here, on the contrary, it was ham-
pered by the fetters of the Board of Inland Revenue.
Look, for instance, at the Daily News—a paper which was
said to have sink 100,0001., and yet how small was its'cir-
culation, and by the late returns that was diminishing.
There was the Morning Chronicle, too, a paper that every
day addressed a still more select audience. Take all the
London papers, with the exception of the Times and a
few of the cl-eap-priced weekly papers, which appealed
to a somewhat different clew, and which were at
very much less expense—all were suffering from the
restricted trade. Here was an unfortunate paper which the
Board of -Inland Revenue had strangled out of its little in-
nocent life. (A laugh.) [The hon. member here produced a
single sheet somewhat of the size of the Spectator.] It was
called the Potteries Free Press; or Weekly Narrative of Cur-
rent Events, and purported to be published without a stamp
in conformity with the regulation of the Stamp-office, as
sanctioned by them in the publication of the Athenteum,
Builder, Punch, Racing Times, &sc. The proprietor thought
he was acting according to law, but the Board of Inland
Revenue very seen toll him a different tale, and he was
brought. to a sudden stop, when, but for that interference,
he would have had a sale of 10,000 copies; and the house,
which was horrified at the ignorance of the people, which
voted 260,0001. for education, which appointed public in-
spectors of schools, was content to maintain a law which
enacted that this little paper should not travel among the
industrious artisans of thedistrict, and do its part towards
the instruction of the people. Then again, there was the
case of the West Sussex Advertiser, or South Coast Journal,
published by Mr. Mitchell, a gentleman who lived in a dis-
trict of the country in which there were 100,000 inhabi-
tants, which returned eight or nine members to Parlia-
men-, and which, nevertheless, had not one single paper to
enlighten it. Mr. Mitchell attempted to improve this state
of things, be published this paper unstamped at N., but the
Board of Inland Revenue interfe-ed with him too ; he re-
ceived one of their polite letters, and he was obliged to pay
5/. penalty for what he had done, and to put the Id. stamp
on the corner of his paper. Now there were three little vil-
laoes in that district, in which 41 copies of this newspaper,
at Id., were sold—three villages in which three papers had
never regularly and permanently circulated before—but no
sooner was the stamp imposed, and the price consequently
changed to 2d. instead of Id., than 37 persons out of the 41
discontinued the paper. Mr. Mitchell had written a most
admirable letter to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the
subject, which he defied the right hon. gentleman to read,
and remain unconvinced. Now, he would ask this house,
whether they would obstinately continue to tax this paper
—a paper which was suitable to the small towns and vil-
lages, suited, too, to the capacity and time for reading, as
well as the pockets of the labouring classes—whether they
would consent that the Chancellor of the Esehequer should
permanently place a tax of ld. on this small sheet, end the
same tax on the largesheot of the Times. It was contrary to
common sense, contrary to every principle sanctioned by
the house, and be therefore advised the Attorney-General
not to waste his legal acuteness in cobbling up this law,
which he roust know never could be fairly and equally-
worked out. He would rather advise him and the Solici-
tor-General to set about persuading the Government that
the thing was a blunder altogether. (Hear, hear.) It was
ell very well fur the time of Queen Anne. It must be re
membered that they hail two civil wars within a few years
after the law was passed, and they had men in both houses
f Parliament sworn against the reigning dynasty. Bat
there Mere no disputes now about the dynasty or the over-
throwing of institutions, on the contrary, there was not
a country in the world where the people were more united
generaly on all great political principles, more disposed to
put confidence in the Legislature, or more sine-:rely desir-
ous of working together for the prosperity of the whole
community. The report of the Royal Cominissioners sent
to the New York Exilibition had been referred to in the
course of the discussion, and he should like greatly to call
the attention of the house to the last paragraph of Mr.
Whitworth's report. This was it :
•‘ It rarely Lapps, s that a workman who possesses pecu-
liar skill iu his craft is disqualified to take the responsible
position of superintendent by the want of education and
general knowledge, as is frequently the case in this country.
In every State in the Union, and particularly in the north,
education is, by means of the common schools, placed
within the reach of each individual, and all classes avail
themselves of the opportunities afforded. The desire of
knowledge so early implanted is greatly increased, while the
facilities for diffusing it are amply provided through the
instrumentality of au almost universal press. No taxation
of. auy kind has been suffered to interfere with the free
development of this powerful agent for promoting the
intelligence of the people, and the consequence is, that
where the humblest labourer can indulge in the luxury of
his daily paper, everybody reads, and thought and intelli-
gence penetrate through the lowest grades of society.
The benefits which thus result from a liberal system of
education and a cheap press to the working classes Of the
United States can hardly be over-estimated in a national
point of view ; but it is to the co-operation of both that they
must undoubtedly be ascribed."
He understood there were many things in Mr. Whitworth's
report which had startled manufacturers and men of science
in this country. (Hear, hear.) He had shown that in cer-
tain departments there was an increasing skill and know-
ledge, which threatened not only to rival, but to excel any-
thing existing in this country. (Hear.) It must be borne
in mind that we were close to the United States. Every
week, everything that was known here was known there,
and every workman there had the same power as the mem-
ber of Congress to read all that was published in the public
papers, while the very opposite was the case here. Passing
by a publichouse here, they would see the newspaper folded
over the bar, as a temptation for the workman to come in
from the street to read it. The right to have it in his own
home and at his own hearth was denied him here ; and the
effect of the law was to drive him to the alehouse if he ac-
tually wished to read a newspaper. The working classes
could not see the newspaper in these places without im-
bibing a certain, or rather an uncertain, quantity of gin
and water. That was the effect of the newspaper stamp
in this country ; but it was not so in the United States.
If we distrusted our population so much that we would
not trust them with political knowledge, we were hypo-
crites to the last degree if we spoke of the ignorance and
depravity of our countrymen. (Cheers.) Judging from
the persons in his own employ, he should say that the
newspaper was as enticing and alluring to the working
classes as to hon. members. It was read by them with as
much eagerness, and they came to conclusions as reason-
able, as members of that house. When they could get
newspapers at their own homes they abstained from public-
houses, and, by reading a variety of journals, they got rid
of those false politico-economical views which were too
prevalent among the Iworking classes. As a matter of
finance, he believed the revenue would not suffer from
the repeal of this duty, while upon the higher grounds 01
morality and education the time had come when this duty
ought to be abolished as a stamp duty and changed to a
postage duty. The house would set free hundreds of news
papers in a single 3 ear throughout the country, and they
would do more to promote t ,OSO objects which they pro•
fessed in speeches and blue-books to care for than they
could do by any machinery that human ingenuity count
contrive, or that the power of the executive Governmem
could enforce. (Loud cheers.)
Lord PAIXERSTON—Sir, I think it is a rule deserv-
ing to be followed, when different persons concur on some
points and have a difference on others, that it is for th,
mutual advantage of all that they should endeavour to con

fine their action to those points on which they agree, an,

avoid, if it be not neoessary, entering into collision upot
those points on which they differ. Now, sir, on the gene.

. .
• -
ral scope of the resolution proposed by my right hon

friend (Mr. M. Gibson), I apprehend that the house wil

have seen from what has passed in this debate that there
is no fundamental difference of opinion. It is admitted
that the law in question requires to be considered, and

that it is a fit subject for revision, but the resolution of m.

rig t hon. friend contains assertions not bearing neces
sarily on the points he has in view, and on which a dif•

ference of opinion has been stated. My right hon. friend's

resolution asserts that the law is ill-defined.

Tha,

is a question of legal opinion on which a difference has

been stated, and I apprehend that it is hardly necessary
for the purposes of my right hon. friend to insist upon the
assent of Parliament to that statement. The resolution of
my right hon. friend also asserts that the law has been un
equally enforced. Now, in the sense in which, by his
speech, he has interpreted that part of the resolution, the
assertion is perfectly right and undeniable. (Hear.) There
has been an unequal enforcement of the law, but anybody
not cognisant of the details connected with the execution
of the law, and who simply reads the resolution, would
infer that the resolution means to imply that the law has
been enforced with partiality, with favour, and with in-
tentional injustice. That I apprehend is disclaimed. (Cries
of " Hear, hear.") Well, but surely that is no good rea-
son for adhering to words which are liable to an interpre-
tation that is not meant. I should therefore submit to my
right hon. friend, that he will accomplish his purpose, and
render his resolution free from objections that might be
urged to it, if he will so far alter it as to content himself
with the assertion, that " the laws in reference to the
periodical press and newspaper stamp demand the early
coo sideration of Parliament, with the view (going further
perhaps than the right hon. gentleman) to their revision."
I should submit to him that such a resolution would

answer his purpose, and it will not render the Board of
Inland Revenue liable to a Parliamentary imputation,
which he does not wish to inflict, while it steers clear of
the debateable question as to whether the law is ill-defined
a matter of legal opinion which we are not called upon to
decide. The speech of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bright)
was chiefly directed to matters which aro not involved
in the resolution, and which my right hon. friend
studiously abstained from entering upon. The hon.
gentleman, following his own opinion, in language often
well expressed, has argued at great length for the repeal
of the stamp duty. But that is not the object of this
resolution, andmy right hon. friend stated that he did not
moan to apply the resolution to that point, and that it
would not be fair to have done so in the absence of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Therefore I do not enter
upon a discussion on that subject ; all I say is, that I
entirely so far concur with the hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Manchester that I think it must be an object of
desire to everybody, and that it would be a great public
advantage, to afford to the lower classes all those means of
general instruction that can well be brought within their
reach. (Cheers.) The abrogation of this peculiar stamp is
is only a matter of financiarconsideration, and it can only
be maintained as a matter of finance. (Hoar.) Undoubtodly
everybody will admit, that the larger we open the field of
general instruction, OD; fir:Lwr fouri(littion,; xvhich
the order, the 10y.11,y, and the good conduct of the lower
classes will rest. (Cheers.) On that subject I will not
enter, as it is brought forward 'separately and distinctly.

The present question refers to the resolution of my right
hon. friend, and I really ask him, whether he does not
think that the resolution I suggest will perhaps better
answer his purpose than that which he has proposed ?
(Divide, divide !")
Mr. M. GIBSON said—l really do not exactly see why
there should be this great objection to the resolution I have
proposed. (Hear.) I well considered that resolution be-
fore I submitted it to the house, and knowing the great
adroitness of the noble lord—l beg his pardon for the ex-
pression—(hear, hear, and a laugh)—and his experience in
the conduct of these parliamentary affairs, I confess that I
feel some reluctance to give it up, and to assent to the
words which he has suggested to me. (Hear.) If he agrees
with what I have said, why not take our resolution? (Hear.)
If he disagrees with what I have said, that seems to me to
be a ground for making an appeal to the house. (bean) I
heard the word " revision." Now, Ido not want to bind
myself to what is called " revision. (Hear, hear.) My
position is this. I complain of certain laws as ill-defined
and unequally enforced, and I call upon the Government
of the country to take their own course, but to come to
us with some mode or other of meeting the evils which I
complain of. (Hear, hear.) When they submit their
remedy, I shall be prepared to give my opinion either in
favour of or against it, but I decline, for one, to be a party
to revising this particular law, because I am in favour of
repeal. (Hear.) All I ask the house to do now is, not
to vote in favour of repeal, but to go so far with me as to
say the law is ill-defined and unequally enforced, and that
it is the duty of the Government to submit to the house
some plan or other of meeting those evils. (Hear, hear.)
I throw the responsibility upon the Government. The
noble lord now asks me to share that responsibility by
talking about " revising." My wish, however, is to leave
it to the Government to decide whether they will revise or
whether they will repeal ; and on these grounds I will be
no party to the alteration which the noble lord has pro-
posed. (Hear bear, " divide, divide.")
Lord PALMERSTON—I wish to ask my right hon.
friend whether I clearly understand that his resolution as
he proposes it is not meant to imply any censure, any ac-
cusation of unfairness, or partiality against the Board of
Inland Revenue. (Hear, hear.) If that is clearly under-
stood, I do not think the difference of wording is a matter
of any great importance. (Hear.)
Mr. M. GIBSON—I thought that, in my opening re-
marks,
I had distinctly guarded myself against being mis-
understood upon the subject. (Hear, hear.) I bring no
charge whatever against the Chairman of the Board of In-
land Revenue'or his officers. (Hear, hear) I attack the
system, which I say is calculated to cast unmerited odium
upon them. (Hear, hear.)
The amendment was then by leave withdrawn, and the
original resolution unanimously agreed to amid loud cheers.
RIGHTS OF NEUTRALS.

Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE, who had given notice of his
intention to call the attention of the house to the admis ion
during the present war by the Government of the principle,
hitherto repudiated, that free bottoms make free goods,
postponed the discussion to a future day, in consequence
of an intimation which he had received from the First
Lord of the Admiralty, who thought it better he should
put his proposition in a more specific form. He therefore
gave notice now of the motion which he intended to pro-
pose, and which invited the opinion of the house upon then
change which had been made.
THE CIVIL SERVICE.

Mr. VINCENT SCULLY announced the withdrawal of
the motion of which he had given notice on this subject.
CORN AVERAGES (IRELAND)—TITHE-RENT
CHARGE (IRELAND).
Mr. BLAND moved for leave to bring in two bills, the
one having for its object to establish " a better and more
general mode of taking the average price of corn and other
agricultural produce in Ireland," and the other " to pro-
vide for the annual variation of the rent charge in lieu of
tithes in Ireland, with reference to the averages of the then
next preceding seven years." The honourable gentleman
briefly explained the present state of the law upon these
subjects, and the inconvenience resulting from it, and
stated that the object of the proposed measures was to
assimilate it to the existing law of England.
Sir J. YOUNG said, with reference to the first bill—
that which proposed to provide a better mode of taking the
corn averages in Ireland—he had no objection to offer to
its introduction. On the contrary, he thought it so ne !e4-
sary that some measure of that kind should be introduced
that he had hip. self ordered a bill to be prepared.
Mr. FRENCH hoped the right hon. baronet, whose con-
sent to the bringing in of this bill he had heard with plea-
sure, would order his own bill to be laid upon the table at
the same time.
After a few words from Mr. THORNELY, leave was
given to bring in the bill.
With reference to the bill for the variation of the tithe
rent charge,
Sir J. YOUNG— admitting the force of the hon. gentle.
man s observations—would not object to its introduction,
hut thought it right to express his apprehension that great
difficulty would be found iu dealing with the subject. The
tithe compositions in Ireland were (as we understood the
right hon. gentlemen) on a different basis, and hail been
arrived at by a different process from that which had been
gone through in Engl ►nd ; and ho was afraid that if they
attempted to legislate without having all the data clear',
before them, justice would not be done.
After some further conversation, leave was given to bring
in th, bill.
DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY BY MARRIED WOMEN.
Mr. MALINS rose to move for leave to bring in a bill,
which, he said, was one of great public importance, and cal-
culated, he thought, to make a material improvement in the
laws of this country. The house was aware that by the old
law relating to the property of married women no married
woman could alienate any property in reversion, except
by an expensive process of fine or recovery, which threw
great difficulties in the way. But in 1553, in consequence
of a report made by the Real Property Commission, a great
improvement was effected in the law, so far as concerned
real property, by which a married woman having a rever-
sion in property, of which she was expectant on the death
of another, could go before a judge or a Master in Chan-
cery, and there, by a simple deed, make as complete
an alienation of the reversionary property as if she
were unmarried. But that law did not apply to personal
property, so that if she had 1,0001. or 2,000/., of which she
was expectant on the death of a friend or parent, be the
exigencies of her family what they might, she could not
alienate her reversion except at the merest nominal price.
Even if she concurred with her husband in its alienation,
still the law held that that concurrence was not binding
upon her, being under coverture ; so that if she survived
her husband, she could, after all, claim the property as
her own. The law was intended to protect the married
woman ; but its operation was to render the reversion
luring her husband's lifetime absolutely valueless. Now,
he wished to remedy this state of things, by proposing
that a married woman should have the same power to deal
with personal property in reversion which the law already
gave her to deal with real property. There was one other
object which he wished to effect. At present, when a
married woman came into possession of property, it was
the rule of the Court of Chancery that she was entitled to
what was called a settlement of equity, which was gene-
rally held to amount to one-half of the property. The
practice of the Court of Chancery was, that a married
woman should appear before a judge or Master in Chancery,
who examined her in private as to her wish to have this
settlement made, or whether she waived her right. He
(Mr. Malins) had had a good deal of experience in this
matter, but he never knew a married woman claim her
equity of settlement except in one instance, and that was
under a misapprehension. He proposed to provide that,
without personal appearance before the court, which was
always expensive, and often inconvenient, a married woman
might be at liberty by a simple deed to waive her right to
equity of settlement.
Mr. LOCKE KING seconded the motion. He con-
4dered this a step in the right direction, and he hoped it
.vould prove the earnest of a much larger measure of law
reform.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL concurred in the con-
leinnation of the present state of the law, as described by
is hon. and learned friend, and which originated in a
lecision of the Court of Chancery, pronounced about 70
years ago a decision which proceeded on a mere fallacy,
sat which had been repeated by one judge after another
till it had been. established as a rinciple. The effect of
,his decision was, that though a woman might be entitled
o 50,0001. in reversion, still the possible claim, in the
went of her husband's death, se ditniuished its value that
it would hardly sell for 201. The whole case was quite at
variance with the general principle of law which pre-
,erved, as far as possible, an analogy with respect to real
end personal property. Without pledging himself, there-
fore, to all the details of the bill, he hail no objection to
its introduction.
The motion was then agreed to, and the bill was ordered
to be brought in.

PREROGATIVE COURT.
Mr. HUME moved for the appointment of a select com-
nittee to inquire into and reoort upon the state of the
°resent public registry of the Prerogative Court, use l as a
testamentary office, and whe. her a better office can be esta-
blished for the keeping and preservation of wills. The re-
port on this subject, which was lai I that day upon the
table of the house, declared that the custody of testamentary
locuments of great importance was at present most unsa-
,isfactory, and that the number of places in which such
instruments were deposited rendered it most difficult and
apensive, and in many cases impracticable to make the
lecessary searches when dealing with the property of de-
ceased persons. In regard to Doctors'-commons, the room
appropriated to these documents was very narrow and in-
convenient. He saw from 15 to 16 persons on one occasion
referring to wills in a passage where there was scarcely room
'or individuals to pass each other. In 1833 Dr. Nicholl re-
ported upon the necessity of having a better building appro-
priated to this subject. Nothing could be more satisfactory
than the arrangement made by Major Graham, the Regis-
trar-General of Births, Deaths, and Marriages in Somerset
House. As Doctors'-commons was but leasehold property,
and as the interest would expire in 1857, the building, with
all the wills therein, would fall into the hands of the pro-
prietor, if something be not immediately done in removing
those documents to some other place. The hon. member
concluded by makinghis motion.
The question having been put,
or
of
fedd e
ri
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that the question was
one of paramount importance. It was one that had
engaged the attention of successive governments. He now
hoped that we were on the eve of seeing something done to
reano mvt ebndegye a
n thesoplacew evil.
as
so onlydeposit
ot
poofirnwetgi regretted
at
thete
adjoining
gt hr ea
at t thethmtpi
convenienceol
anc place
al
of
great statistical information, which was in immediate con-
nection with the subject of wills, and ti. hich was so
admirably arranged by the intelligent officer to whom the
hon. member had alluded. If such a plan could be effected
it would prove of the greatest possible advantage not only
to the lawyers, but to every class of persons conne_ted
with property.
Mr. HADFIELD thanked the hon. member for Montrose
for bringing forward this subject. It was now high time
for them to consider how those wills were to be finally
disposed of.
Mr. MALINS said that the second reading of the Testa-
mentary Jurisdiction Bill was fixed for the 29th instant,
and that, among other subjects, that relating to the cus
tody of wills would then come under the consideration of
the house It was extremely inconvenient, therefore, that
when a discussion upon that question was about to take
place in a few days, the Government should accede
to such a proposition as that which had just been
male by the hon. member for Montrose. He might
also observe, that for the last two centuries wills were
accessible in the most easy and ready manner to all who
might wish to see them. In fact, in those cases wh ,re the
names of the parties and the date at which the will was
made were known, the instrument might be procured in
ten minutes at a charge of only ls. A commission had also
investigated the subject, and under those circumstances
ho trusted the hon. and learned gentleman the Solicitor-
General would be induced to pause before he assented to
the appointment of the committee.
•nJ.,
After a, few observations from Mr. I reply, tne
roo.:,ion was agreed to.

INDUSTRIAL AND PROVIDENT SOCIETIES BILL.
Thin bill was read a ovoid time.