The Sun.
London, England, 1853-03-15 00:00:00

stated by the right hon. gentleman, but the British
Charge d'Affaires at Constantinople had re-
ceived a notification that the latter would not
be carried out, or, at least, no change would
be made in the ports of the Adriatic open to Bri-
tish commerce until her Majesty's Government had been
consulted in the matter. It would be unusual to produce
the papers, as they related to a matter in which this coun-
try was not directly concerned, and with the settlement
of which our ally was satisfied.
IRISH ADVERTISEMENT
kr. FRENCH wished to ask the Secretary of the
Treasury, if directions had been sent to Ireland by any
Government authority in this country, to discontinue
the expense of inserting in the Dublin newspapers the
usual notice of levees about to be held by the Lord-
Lieutenant.
Mr. WILSON said that the late Government had
issued an order to discontinue certain advertisements in
Dublin newspapers under these circumstances :—ln the
course of last year a bill for advertisements came under
the consideration of the Treasury. On the bill being
examined it was found to refer to three classes of adver-
tisements—the first published by direction of acts of
Parliament, the second advertisements relating to mat-
ters of public interest, and the third advertisements re-
lating to levees and balls. The bill amounted to
3301. 13s. Bd. Of this sum 71. 3s. 4d. were charged for
advertisements of the first class 41. 10s. 10d. for those of
the second class, and 3181. 19s. 6d. for those referring
to levees and balls. The advertisements for one levee
were in number 17, and charged 351. Vs. 2d., and for a
ball which took place immediately after they were in
number 61, charged 491. Under these circumstances,
the late Government determined on abolishing the prac-
tice of advertising the Lord-Lieutenant's balls and
levees. (Hear, hear.)
NAVAL COMMITTEE.

Capt. SCOBELL wished to ask Sir J. Graham, when
it is probable that the report of the Naval Committee, ap-
pointed by the late Board of Admiralty, will be laid on
the table of the house.
Sir J. GRAHAM hoped to be able to lay the report
on the table immediately after Easter.
COPPER COINAGE.

Mr. GLYN wished to ask the Secretary of the Trea-
sury whether any steps had been taken to secure a suffi-
cient supply of the copper coinage.
Mr. WILSON said the demand for gold and silver
was so great that the Mint could devote no attention at
present to copper coinage, but the Master of the Mint
was about to contract with private parties for the coin-
ing of five tons of copper.
P-TASGOW POST-OFFICE.

Mr. HASTIE wislied to ask Cie Scc:etary of the
Treasury, when it was intended to proceed with the erec-
tion of the new Post-office at Glasgow, for ground
was bought about three years ago, in conseq-.7e-ace of the
present building being pronourced unsuitable for the
extent of business, and in a ruinous and unsafe condition
for the inmates ?
Mr. WILSON said negotiations were now going on
for the purchase of additional ground, and when these
were closed the Post-office would be proceeded with.
COAL MINES.

Mr. SANDARS wished to ask the Secretary of State
for the Home Department, whether it is the intention of
her Majesty's Government to increase the number of in-
spectors in coal mines, or take any other steps for the
prevention of accidents therein.
Lord PALMERSTON said the whole subject of coal
mines 'was one of great difficulty and importance, and he
had not yet been able to arriN e at any decision upon it.
WA RDENSHIP OF THE CLNQUE PORTS.

Mr. HUME wished to ask the noble lord, the mem-
ber for the City of London, if the Government would
lay upon the table any papers relative to the office of
Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports?
Lord J. RUSSELL had no objection to lay such
papers on the table.
On the motion of taking the orders of the day,
Mr. NEWDEGATE complained of the way in which
the noble lord the member for the city of London con-
ducted the public business. The noble lord was taking
an unfair advantage of gentlemen on his side of the
house. He complained of the noble lord wishing to force
on the Jewish bill before the recess. (Hear, hear, from
the Opposition.) To endeavour to force on this measure
now was a tyrannical proceeding ; it was an attempt to
stifle the general feeling of the country. A measure of
such a description ought not to be brought in and read
a third time the night before the Easter recess.
Sir J. PAKINGTON considered that in general the
noble lord had studied the convenience of the house, but
in the present case he was obliged to coincide with the
hon. member for North Warwickshire.. He hoped that
the noble lord would postpone the measure.
Lord J. RUSSELL considered that the course he had
adopted was the fairest one towards the house. With
regard to the Jewish Disabilities Bill, the subject was
nearly exhausted, and he did not see any reason for post-
poning it.
Mr. CAYLEY hoped that the noble lord would post-
pone the third reading of the Canada Clergy Reserves
Bill until after the recess.
Mr. M. GIBSON would call the attention of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to the taxes upon the means
of diffusing knowledge.
UNSTAMPED PUBLICATIONS.

Mr. M. GIBSON said, this being a revenue bill, he
wished to call the attention of the house to the unsatis-
factory state of the law in reference to the tax imposed
on a certain class of newspapers. (Hear, hear.) The
Attorney-General of the late Government (Sir F. Thesi-
ger) stated, on the 6th of December last, that immediate
legislation was necessary upon that subject, and the
right hon. gentleman obtained leave to introduce a bill
with reference to it. Since that time, however, no fur-
ther proceedings had been taken on the matter. In
November, 1851, a suit for penalties against the pub-
lishers of the Household Narrative of Current Bvents was
instituted in the Court of Exchequer, which was decided
in favour of Messrs. Bradbury and Evans, and against
the Board of Inland Revenue. That board, however,
declined to acquiesce in that decision, and the law offi-
cers of the Crown were instructed to appeal to the court
of the Exchequer Chamber. Subsequently there was a
change of Government, and the law officers of Lord
Derby's Government advised the Crown that the decision
of the Court of Exchequer was contrary to law, but that
to prevent future litigation, a bill ought to be introduced
on the subject. Lord Derby's Government went out ;
this was now 1853, and this simple matter was now hung
up in suspense. (Hear, hear.) That state of things
was not only inconvenient to the parties concerned, but
was somewhat oppressive ; and he had now to ask the
Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he would promise
to use all convenient and possible speed to bring this
matter to a termination ? (Hear, hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, if
any weight was due to the opinions of the legal autho-
rities with whom he had an opportunity of conversing
on this question, it was not so simple as the right hon.
gentleman seemed to suppose. The great difficulty was,
to give relief to the parties who appeared to be entitled
to it, and at; the same time to exclude from such relief
those whose publications clearly came within the mean-
ing of the existing statute. He believed that the opi-
nion of the law officers of the Crown would be in the
possession of the Government in a day or two, and no
time should be lost in coming to a decision on the ques-
tion after that opinion had been received.
Mr. HUME would suggest, as the easiest mode of
getting rid of the difficulties connected with the subject,
that the tax should be repealed altogether. (Laughter.)
If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would permit the
publication in question to be printed without the tax,
and only charge those with the duty which were trans-
mitted through the post, the right hon. gentleman in
twelve months would receive an amount of postage
equal to that which he remitted.
Sir F. THESIGER said the case was not so free from
difficulty as the right honourable gentleman (Mr. M
Gibson) seemed to suppose. When the last Govern

went came into power there had been a decision in the
Court of Exchequer in favour of the exemption of the
duty ; but the other law officers of the Crown and him-

self were rather disposed to think that Baron Parke,
who dissented from the rest of the court, was in the

right, and that the decision of the court should be ap-
pealed against. With the View, however, to prevent future
litigation, the late Chancellor of the Exchequer was of
opinion that without any detriment to the public interests
he might introduce a bill, by which publications like
the Household Narrative might be exempt from duty;
but the difficulty was that unless they were extremely
careful in wording the bill they would exempt from duty
a great number of publications which were clearly liable
to be charged under the existing law. A bill, however,
was prepared, and he (Sir F. Thesiger) asked leave to
_

bring- it in, but it was objected to by the right hon. gen-
tleman (Mr. M. Gibson) on the ground that, being a bill
affecting the revenue to some extent, it could only be
considered in a committee of the whole house. He (Sir
F. Thesiger) did not therefore attempt to introuduce the
bill. The more he looked at this question the more he

felt it was surrounded with difficulties. The honourable

member for Montrose had certainly suggested avery
ready way of solving those difficulties, but he (Sir F.
Thesiger) should be much surprised if the Chancellor of
the Exchequer acceded to such a proposition.
Mr. COBDEN said it did really appear to him that
the house was placed in a most humiliating position.
They had three Governments bringing their ingenuity
to bear on this subject, with the view to prevent the
free diffusion of knowledge. (Hear, hear.) And under
what circumstances ? At the very time when all parties
exercising
were agreed to extend the rights of the people in the
m
toatetnla g
er of the political franchise. The house was going
e t he fr
allan franchise,
ingenuity
,and yet, t
at theo p r sameeveot
the p
time, theypeople
obtaining
political knowledge Such conduct appeared
to him to be whollyn indefensible.
Now they could not
cross-examiningews
define what
the Boardwas. He had an opportunity of
of
Inlathend Revenue, and he tried to find
what
speech at
the house an illustration.tews really was. He would give
replied thattle
Thoseit
gentlemen were asked
opening of the session
wifasthenewQsu.eeies
They
asked if the speech
they
Exchequerwere
published
said that was
interest
anybody
in opening his budget was
not news, and that it might be
without a stamp. (A laugh.) Nov,d in a newspaper
deny that there was far more public 4
ante attached to the budget of a
Ex-
chequer than to a Queen's speech? Now, as his
honourable friend (Mr. Hume) had suggested, the Now,
only
question was, whether or not the stamp should nol be
abolished altogether ? (Hear, hear.) The thing was
being practically done already, for they had some forty
publications in London, including such
papers as the
Atheneum and the Builder, all publishing news, but
which were stamped or not, just at the option of their
proprietors. Now, on considerations of revenue, he
thought this was a subject which might fairly be left to
the disposal of Mr. Rowland Hill and the Post-office ;
and if that were done—if newspayers were only subject