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

_
ttt
np
ig
• obs A
tbe_dir
von,
cow
pr PI

cone time 220,000, enabled us to sell so costly a
work very
eale. I am now referring to what would be more cheaply
Produced and have a much m ore limited circulation ; hut it
could only be done where teere is no stamp, Taat makes it
quite impossible; and all our lans so far failed that we could
hot diffuse the knowledge where it was most wanted. Our
books were read, and they did great service, and still do, be-
aides having brought down the price of all books. But, like
mechanics' institutions, we have not yet got low enough in
B°cietY ; 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 haveh
bot more helps and, from their social habits, more excite-
int than`the people in the country. The lowering of the
Statilp from 4d. to id. I really can hardly regard as a benefit
at all, if it was a sacrifirm 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
R ecee pounds a-year, to whom this was but of little import-
ance. It did not enable us to help general education at all.'
Ikrow
what, he asked, had been the consequence of the re-
. duction-of the stamp duty? Had our press been deterio-
ated -by it? Mr. Walter, the father of
the present member
for IC°ttinghein, had made a speech in that house upon the
suject, in which there was a vast deal of valuable matter,
hut be said he feared the reduction of the stamp dui .y to
8° I"W a late as a penny. Well, but had not the Times
Iw9tressed under the reduction' Had the Times been
„Wined 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 mueli larger proper-
-4;
"ell of circulation than it did in those days, and afforded
an illustration of what folly it was to attribute the success
duty net to.the operation of any particular tax or
•,,!. It was not protection that had improved the Times.
w hat had aised it to -its present high position was the
great
eucapital, the great skill, and the,great enterprise which
Thu
be. en
thate in tbe conduct of that great oran.
wellS it wa t had attained the confidence of the public slid its Present large and extended circulation. (Hear.) It
ads
not the protection afforded by the high rate of the
81,ba,rn. P duties of former times that had done it, nor did he
"'neve that the removal of that stamp duty would have
V' other effect than to allow cheap papers to circulate in
4e.lds into
which at this moment no newspapers entered,
'en.thout in the slightest degree injuring the portion of those -
riblipapers which had already established theirhold upon the
tllrwe confidence. It was supposed that the stamp left upon
:PaPers was an equivalent forthe postal privileges which
the" enjoyed; but remember that the tax was not upon
Publication, but upon a, certain. indefinable thing
sewed
tie news and intelligence. ' but if the stamp upon
make were said to be an equivalent for the post, he would
papers this Propositbm :—Let the existing established news-
e,7reremain as they were, and, if they would stamp ever',
]iris f their impression, let them retain the postal pnvi-
tr,,,'jlich they now possessed with the power of repeated
tatty n- through the post. If it were true that the
sitoeSeewas ale advantage, they would retain the equivalent
ho lo7„7 by the Post-office, and if they did there would be
woleq„,weattever to the revenue. 'The penny publications
Zoteelnt-e:iet:tutoe Prevented coMmunicating news, and if the
be c use the post they must pay for it. They would,
take pit upon those terms. They said, Ar-
gee3;„`;nr estabr hed pr as you please ; but do not
enPP°nB- -'BllPerabi isobstacles to the insertion of news in a
4cY Publication:' 'Of' what did that news consist ?
threruings in the courts of justice, in the police courts,. in
Wien what of Parliament, or in the sanitary world, showing
the.- WaR itecessary, to be done in order to preserve
pure took
health and Promote theirphysical-tomforts. (Hear.)
tree possible that laws conld be obeyed if the Legisla-
fome steps to prevent their being known. If this in-
publiatiml were not permitted to be circulated in penny
whom ea,t,imls, it was impossible it could reach those classes
bekl.),_." was most; desirable that it should reach. Work-
Ifir,7,ritrers did not read the Times, or the Morning
aeg,eee, or the Morning Post; but because those news-
not suit that class, that was no reason why he
C. 3" are should step in and prevent them having their
es at all. He gave the established press, therefore, the
exceedat of th position. They would in no way be
they
adopted the option which was offered to
taoena'; but if they refused that option, what was there
ws:e simple than for this- country to take the course which
ec—„,eadopted
ceder in
certai the United States,
roand permit printed
-w•er up to a n weight to go though the Post-office
a certain stamp ? Let those who used the Post-office
t for it, but let them not connect the Post-office with
totrne
Printing of news, because there was not the slightest
ction between the two things. The Times went free
Post up to 4oz. ; but the penny publication unstamped
et•i;.", Permitted to go by post 'if it paid according to its
ht, and was precisely upon the same footing as a
letter.
At present, if a Times newspaper under 4oz. in
ntglet were sent to Liverpool, it went free ; but if he sent
Warraly Herald hich weighed 20z., it was chae 4d.
;I: Was said, "You can stamp it." That was trued but
euat involved. the stamping of 200,000 copies, and the
enterina in ri scuts to e extent o 1600., which
able
.111? Pulli-s-hthers e
)f. small publication f
might not be
to accomplish. aie th
Under the treaty with the United
States a penny publication might be sent to thatcouanwtryay,
and might go to the remotest part of it, 3,000 miles
from New York for ld. • lint if it were posted in London
to to Greenwi 'ch it would be charged 4d. And this was
hat was called the postal privilege for the diffusion 'of
lootowledge ! (Hear, hear.) He contended that it was no
vilege at all. It was true that, by a Treasury minute,
't was declared that if a person registered a publication
and called it a newspaper, and so on, it might have allr.
these postal privileges, just as if it were a newspaper.
PThis was a very improper TreaSury minute to come from
ersons professing to be guardians of the public revenue,
the fact was that it eiposed the revenue to extensive
11'4'14. He would give the house an instance of how. it
°Perated. A Mr. Savory printed a trade circular which
V:ained a number of drawings of candlesticks, snuffer-
tjlP, candelabra &c„ with the view of circulating them
geClngh the
country as advertisements ; and, in order to
the benefit of the post, what did he do ? He wont to
?"41 of walend Revenue, and made a declaration that
, ereniar aear-and, a newspaper, which. it was not—(hear,
Worth 4001. having made that declaration, he swore he evis
delete. ne over and above the sum necessary to pay his
each, bindi feltind two securities to the extent of 403/.
Penalpzettlaaulotaiezbn: enernselves to be forthcoming to pay ally
ties
'me Al,ight incur if ill his circular of. snuffer-trays
alit
should be guilty of publishing any
118 or sedt• •
pane all thi lous libel. (Laughter.) And, having
1)61', and 8' Mr. Savory was entitled to some stampedi
Net ; be, to have his stamped circulars carried free )3, t
any at%4,4tt, unfortunately as the stamp was inside, and not
hadPartek; Post-office* 'authorities never knew whethere
lay tulet timer Paper Paper had got a stamp or not, because they
tea ue Other t'a open them. If they did, they would
I'd of %ails • consequently, if a man wei!t• to the
reeoW,B•PaPer IL,a,nd Revenue and stated that something wa._ e
not"red 2‘,1,1,?ugh it was not—. and entered into
positioneuisaacee and sureties, he would put himself
eve
Bay
that
defraud the revenue—he. (Mr. Gibson) did
tents he he would do so intentionally—butieeattioanlel
rough ti•Wolild be entitled to send
oats
_caelse he `,l° Post without
r • he
'Light • did not need to take much stamped pape
paying any pgtpeuat all, be-
he Print ne 48
Many as he chose on unstamped. paper, sand
,ussible go just as freely as the other, it being im-
eWhethe„ot examine the different printed papers to see
qtrid ,e'suey were stamped or not. (Herr, hear.) He
e belie gteatt to say that these frauds were extensive.
1.-ved that there was so mach honest feeling among
fratirls'nlell generally, that they would not willingly thisnP he allY branch of th puler revenue. (Laughter.) But
as eti‘:'ould say, that it becameie those who set themselves
feerseaedil e guardians of the public revenue, and who such.pro-
ee extreme care that the position of the national
to the' should not be affected that they would never agree
llest reduction proposed Itt e:eke-e independent
cinheleetnaber%rn t behoved them, he said, to devise some less
hear.)Y 114eaUs for the protection of the
.revenue. (Hear,
coPies of was shown before the committee ,that
.all theareinea
_fe particular publication were on one occasion
ex-
copies"' the Post-office, and that no fewer than 5,000
dregs fee without a stamp. But there was no re-
was
o.:tr, itnhis ; beCause, having no news, the publication
point of law,liable to the stamp, and nothing
efarl. he done but to throw them all aside without for-
adeng them, because the parties to whom they were
rouneissed would of course refuse to receive them when they
who rK)stage charged upon them, and nobody could tell
pei tie;(l. Put them into the post; Penh, was allowed to be
waa no(ithwitntghout a stamp, as -well as with one, and there
to prevent an' unstamped copfof Punch being
ant by the post free of charge, for there was nobody to
exalnine it, and it would go just the same as a stamped
of Publication
This mixing up of stamped and unstamped copies
a.‘l,3lll.3lications, therefore, was a most clumsy expedient, sod ought not to be allowed to continue. • (Hear, hear.) v.e would recommend a plainer system, viz., that which
" suggested by Mr. Walter, when the question was dis-
h that house some years' ago. Mr. Walter said :
te"
Plf you want to levy a postage on newspapers, do it at •
eue ost-office, and then you will not be involved in all the
"ifllculties 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."
Ile (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.
lie believed if they were 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 there by 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
w
the state of the law? Was it creditable to the house
to have a statute which they could not enforce? Olear
He maintained that there was a perfect knowledge on the'
Part of the authorities that they coul not enforce the law
in its integrity. If they carried out the strict meaning of
the words of that act, t
that was not liable toh duty.e here
ewae hardly any publication
the What were the words of
the act with respect to securities, for instance?—
rinaftte o after 3 O
publish d a ys
" And be it further enacted, that frm
after the passing of this act, no perso n eshaallnpd
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 publishediron
for less than 6d., until he shall have appeared before a
of the Exchequer, or one of 'his Majesty's justices of the peace,
and enter into recognisanees, himself in 4001., and two other
Persons in 4001. each, binding themselves to pay such fines
and Penalties as may be imposed upon convict ion 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?
Ile 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 in
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
recognisances unless in the case of papers containing news,
°l* 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
!Lvowed purpose of libelling piivate character, of question-
!lig the truths of Christianity, or bringing discredit upon
910 Sovereign or the throne, without being asked to outer
'lite any securities whatever—for, as had been said, no one
Was ever asked to do so unless he gave news which, it was
e"Y to avoid doing, according to the interpretation put
V the word by the authorities, or unless he declared
do 4t hiB publication was a newspaper, which he need not
Novelleunlegs he found it convenient for that purpose. Mr.
of the Musical Times, might sell that publication
'i‘.tl2lotit a stamp. He (Mr. Gibson) was a member of the
i,ety of Arts, of which Prince Albert was president, and
voate3ociety was allowed to publish an unstamped journal,
though it gave what people called id not
16 _,_what the Board of Inland Revenue considered to be
°we." The society abstained from commenting on any

matters of church or 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 libelling 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
was 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 Govern nent 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, b?cause 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-
grace to the Legislature ! (Hear.) He used advisedly the
word " disgrace," because if they put down 3tir, 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 ;
becanse 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? No.
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 one step hd.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 vms one, entitled
Burniston's Northern Luminary, respecthig 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, &c.,

" J. TIMM,
" Solicitor of Inland Revenue.

" Mr. J. Burniston, printer, &c., Knaresborough."
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. Timm 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,
London, 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, &c.,
" J. Timm,

" 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 iss"'ng the tract referred to. We
have nothing in " Hansard's ...!,truction 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
obligo by stating where the information can be obtiined. • We
have for many years (in' common with our brethren of the
profession) printed report's and tracts onpassing subjects, and
cannot therefore perceive • wherein we have offended.—We
are, &c., 44 MArrusws, BROTHERS.

" 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 be any
paper containing public news, intelligence, or occurrences;
printed in any part of the United Kingdom, to be dispeised
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,
_ _

" J. TIMM, U
" Solicitor of Inland Revenue:
"Messrs. Mathews, printers, 44, Broad-quay, Bristal.

So that the board did not attempt to enforce the penalties
which they had threatened. But what were 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
friend the Attorney-General would make clear to the house.
(Hear. hear.) There was, therefore, what was called the
one subject principle. If persons stuck to one subject they
were safe ; but not if they meddled with miscellaneous sub-
jects. He begged to remind the house, however, that there
was not such a word as "miscellaneous" inthe 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, he had 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 vase 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
de sire for the promotion of education and the diffusion of
knowledge, and from a wish to put an end to an anomalous
that, therefore, state of press laws,which he was sure no one could witness
might votewfeouri
without regret, e must remind hon. gentlemen that sepa-
ratedivisions would be taken upon each resolution, and
give them those who could not support them all,
thought their
the house one or more of them. He only asked that
that not reject all three resolutions, but would
timed r cheers,) 1 i e e )irnportance entitled them. (Loud and con-
favourable consideration to which he
messengerrs: from the House of Lords appeared at the
wit
table to request that their lordships might be furnished
h a copy of the evidence taken before the Clitheroe elec-
eir lordships.]
dtieonneecobme menimttmeet,inaineadteitdwtael suil)rdered that a copy of the evi-
Mr. EW in
ART said that,
qt be the motion of his
vain en necessary that he should
rightfriend, it would
tes upon the attention of
had
speech.
trespass for more than a few
completely the house, for his right hon. fri
eivbearteti semen t duty,
hausted the subject in his most adenall
must be etahre
ex-
hear.) He thought the result of threa Id)
because
d be final, if not the speedy, repeal of thne
consi-
dered eventually of the stamp dut on
ported the motion of his right on. friend mainly He sup-
he believed that the abolition of these dutiesa.wiaoli
fa-
vourable to the cause of knowledge and order,
dered that it would be vain to found schools, to establish
libraries, or to take other means for extending informationash
to the people, if they did not encourage among them a know-
ledge ledge of the current literature of the day, and these taxes
were not taxes upon the accumulated stores of knowledge,
but upon what might be called the current coin and cirert-
latine. medium of instruction. This was the very kind of
knowledge which it should be the anxious duty of a Legis-
lature to circulate thoroughly among the masses of the
people. He 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
kinds of education—one given them by others, and another
given them by themselves. Now, he would ask, 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 inapAlse 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.
He 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 in 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 overturned 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 he 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
modern 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 at,count of the
continuance of a war; and, as he believed, there was an
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 swef..7 away these ex-
crescences on our constitution. He 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 duty ought to be re.
pealed."

The 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
subjeote 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,
of course, matters upon which the office he had the honour
to hold gave him no special authority to speak. The com-
paratively limited question on which the right hon.
gentleman had bestowed considerable notice—namely, that
which grew out of the prosecution in the case of Bradbury
and Evans—was one to which he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) ought, perhaps, in the first instance, to advert.
He fully acceded. with respect to that question, to the
opinion expressed in one of the resolutions before the house
—" That the law reative to taxes on newspapers, and other
regulations affeaing 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 the 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 ninny members of 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. E wart), 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, Bear)—and he was quite certain that
nothing would either be said or done on the part of the
Government to lead to a contrary result. Ho 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
e' house to pass thesresolutions. He had protested before—
and he must now repeat the protest—against condemning
taxes which the house was not prepared 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
Chancellors of the Exchequer as to the mode in which the
revenue of the country was to be raised. The right hon.
gentleman accused' Chancellors of the Exchequer of a
great want of discrimination between the different modes
of raising the revenue. If that, then, was the 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 need not adopt all his
resolutions, but, as they were proposed all together, he
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) thought he was justified
in concluding that the right hon. gentleman wished the
house to adopt them all. ZYell, did the right honourable
gentleman, who condemned Chancellor's 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 ; had he pointed out a wise mode ?
(Hear, hear.) [Mr. Gibson observed that he had men-
tioned postage. j Yes, certainly the right honourable
gentleman had pointed out that a charge might be laid
upon newspapers sent by post, 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, he was sorry that he differed from his
right hon. friend upon a question of arithmetic. The right
hon. gentleman had said they might assume that for each
additional advertisement eight additional letters would
pass throagh the Post-office, and he computed that if
5,000,000 additional advertisements were gained by aban-
doning the duty, an additional 40,000,000 of letters would
pass through the post, which would yield a revenue of
166,0001. The right hon. gentleman told them that the
advertisement duty only yielded about the same amount,
170,000/. or 180,0001., and that therefore the loss of revenue
would at most be very trifling. Now, he (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) wanted to know whether 166,0001. de-
rived from the postage of letters would really be a substitute
for 166,000/. derived from a duty on advertisements ?
Unless he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had greatly
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 right hon. gentleman, instead of
yielding 166,0001., would only produce about 55,0001. The
right hon. gentleman proposed that the house should con-
sent to abandon a revenue amounting to 1,400,0001. a-year.
If he proposed to abandon it, he (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, but 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 the
object which the right hon. gentleman had in view. (Hear.)
ec',
reasons to make us wish to get
With respect to the paper duty, he woald fully grant, that
large us
was the
eerretvaeinuulyeitdewraiveeacl dfurotym that source, he
abundant
should be delighted to see the day when we could dispense
w"
a duty laid merely
it. (Hear.) The rig ht hon. gentleman must recol-
lt that
oferior upon the paper used rifodr whichof
literaryt ht
wasre wpner
or:
t
pro-
ductions, but a d
pressing upon the coarser description
of paper used for
he should be as happy purposes ; but no doubt the paper
duty had the effect ely
mental
most objectionable tax upon liter-
ature and upon
effort and productions, and there-
foreas
duty,t ri
eg h
wouldt ho n
fullygrant gentleman
when the day Caine that
at we could find a substitute for it
or dispense with it. (Hear, hear.)
In the same way with
that at present the charge imposed by bit was a very heavy
and onerous charge—(hear)—but the right hon. gentleman
respect to the advertisement.
would recollect that after all we mut be content in these