The Sun.
London, England, 1836-08-09 00:00:00

deeply interested in the character of the public press, and
nothing could be of greater consequence to the country
than the character of that public press.—(Hear, hear.)
Some persons thought that the author of every article
ought to be known to the world. He did not now intend
to discuss that question. Much could be said on both
sides ; but these clauses afforded no more facility in this
respect than the former Bill. He would exhort their Lord-
ships not to agree to these clauses. It had been said that
the House of Lords could not make an amendment to this
Buil without infringing the privileges of the House of Com-
mons. Now these clauses had nothing to do with money.
They were clauses of police and of regulation, not relating
to the duty, but merely to matters of police and justice.
Could it be said that the House of Lords had no right to
interfere with these clauses because one part of the Bill re-
lated to money ? Every rule of Constitutional law and
every authority proved the converse of such a proposition.
( Hear.) If there were money clauses, and if it would be an
infringement of the privileges of the House of Commons to
interfere with them, the House of Commons could send up
another Bill, merely omitting these clauses, and the House
would at once pass it, or it might do that which would be
better, send up a Bill repealing the Stamp Duties alto-
gether.
To retain such machinery for the purpose of levy-
ing a duty of one penny appeared to him the most absurd
thing in the world. He would again entreat their Lord-
ships to reject these clauses. They had nothing to do with
the money provisions of the Bill ; they were mere clauses of
police, and he could not help considering them contrary to
every principle of justice, and contrary to the provisions of
the Act of 1798, and contrary to the policy of his Majesty's
Government, which, in introducing these clauses, he thought
had weakly given way to the wishes of a party in the other
House. It was upon these grounds, therefore, that he
should move the rejection of thse clauses.—( Hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR should in the first place
observe that these clauses introduced no provision unknown
to the Act of 1798. The Noble and Learned Lord per-
haps had not read the 28th clause of that Act. It was
perfectly true that by that Act the two largest proprietors
were required to register, and that was considered a suffi-
cient security to the public. But the Act did not stop
here. For, seeing that cases of injustice might arise, a
provision was introduced providing that, if any person or
persons should file any Bill for the discovery of the pro-
prietors of a newspaper, or of the editor or publisher,
in order to give effect to, or carry on, any action at
law by reason of any slanderous matter, it should not be

lawful for the defendant to plead or demur to the Bill,
but he should be compelled to make the discovery required.
Means, therefore, were provided by which any party who
considered that he had not adequate redress against the re-
gistered proprietors, could ascertain who the other proprie-
tors were. Had this, he would ask, the appearance of
tyranny ? It was not the scheme of the Act of 1798 that
a party should be still and conceal from the world that he
was the proprietor of a certain Newspaper. The scheme of
that Act was that persons should be subject to certain lia-
bilities, which certainly ought to be enforced against per-
sons placed in their situation. The Act of 1798 having
laid down the rule that only two proprietors should be re-
gistered, a return was also directed to be made of the
names of those not registered. That return was to be de-
posited in the office of the Commissioners of Stamps. Con-
sequently, by a less circuitous course, parties could get at
the names of the proprietors ; therefore, when the Noble
and Learned Lord talked of tyranny and oppression, those
observations could not have the slightest application to the
Bill of 1798. It was not so much for the purpose of de-
fending the clause as to repel the expressions of the Noble
and Learned Lord that he rose upon the present occasion.
He trusted, however, that their Lordships would not adopt
the proposition of the Noble and Learned Lord, and delay
a Bill so essential to the interests of the press, and of the
public. He, therefore, hoped that their Lordships would
not be induced to throw out a measure in which he repeated
the public, and he believed the press, were so essentially in-
terested.

Lord WYNFORD thought the House of Commons
had just as much infringed upon the privileges of the
House of Lords by introducing these clauses as the House
of Lords would infringe upon the privileges of the House
of Commons by rejecting them. The Bill was introduced
for a certain purpose, and yet the House was to be de-
prived of exercising its discretion with respect to these
clauses. The House certainly had a right to consider or
report them if it thought them opposed to sound policy
or the liberty of the press. The Noble and Learned Lord
said that these clauses had nothing oppressive in their na-
ture, because the same thing might be done by the Act of
1798. Did not the Noble and Learned Lord see the dif-
ference between the clauses and the clause of the Act of
1798 ? The Noble and Learned Lord must know that
there was a great difference between them, and if it had not
been so, the framers of this Bill would never have been so
absurd as to introduce the same clause into it. He (Lord
Wynford) would show their Lordships in a moment that
there was a very great difference.—(Cries of " Hear,
hear.") That clause which the Noble and Learned Lord
read respecting a Bill of discovery was very guarded.
The clause was introduced for the purpose of securing a
civil right. What oppression was there in that ? That an
injured man had the right to seek satisfaction for his injury
was one of the simplest principles of jurisprudence ; but
this clause went on to guard against the discovery being
used for any other purpose than to support a civil action.
This made an immense difference. The clauses objected
to would afford facilities in cases of inimical prosecutions.
He therefore should say that it would be impossible to have
the list of names set out in the manner provided in the
ninth clause. He agreed with Sheridan that such a mea-
sure as this would amount to a complete destruction of the
liberty of the press, and that it would place it entirely in
the hands of the Crown. He could not anticipate that the
present Government would do anything improper in this
respect, but then the Legislature was not to make laws
blindly, and regardless of the future ; but upon this occasion
insomuch as would tend to secure the liberty of the press.
He felt satisfied that the time would come when particular
individuals would be selected from these lists, and made the
objects of persecution. He had heard with pleasure the
Noble Viscount say that the public was interested in the
respectability of those persons who conducted the press
of the country. As his Noble and Learned Friend had
stated, to carry on a Newspaper required a great capital,
and it was necessary that there should be united in the es-
tablishment men of ability and talents, and men to assist
with the contents of their purses. What man of the latter
description, he would ask, would become connected with a
Newspaper when he knew his name would be set forth ac-
cording to the form in the Bill ? He did not wish to dis-
parage the press of the country. He knew that it was con-
ducted with much integrity : but he was quite sure, inde-
pendently of all considerations of fear of criminal prosecu-
tions, every man would object to belonging to Newspapers if
his name were to be exhibited to the public. Many persons
had objected to belonging to banking-houses because their
names would be exhibited. The public now had a security,
and why attempt to increase it ? The press was a most
powerful instrument, and nothing could be more mischievous
to the country than to prevent men of property from con-
necting themselves with it ; but if this Bill passed, the cha-
racter of the press would be degraded, and it would fall
into the hands of desperate and reckless men. Mr. Sheri-
dan said that the effect of the Bill of 1798 would be, that
if all the names were known, shares in Newspapers worth
2001. would soon not be worth 6d. He would confess that
he had hoped that the Noble Lords opposite would not
have supported these clauses, and he was never more sur-
prised than when he heard the Noble Viscount rise to sup-
port them. He (Lord Wynford) had expected the Noble
Lord to come forward and say that he had been in mistake,
that he was still a Whig of 1798, and that he would not •
patronise these clauses, but move that they be struck out.
He, however, had been deceived, but he was happy that
the task had been left to his Noble and Learned Fricusl, in
whose motion be was bound to say he most cordially con-
curred.—(Hear, hear.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR explained.

Lord LYNDHURST explained.
Viscount MELBOURNE wished it most distinctly to
be understood that this clause was not necessary for the
purpose of revenue—(Hear, hear)—but he must most
earnestly press upon their Lordships the consideration that
uy alteration in the Bill, notwithstanding the opinion of the
Noble and Luarne.d. Lord, must be fhtal to it.. But be
could assure the House that there was but one opinion on
the subject. By a reference to authorities the Noble and
Learned Lord would find ►what he stated was the fact. It
was for this verb reason, therefore, in order to induce their
Lordships to consider the subject, that he had prefaced his
motion for going into committee with a short statement of
the whole of the case, and he would conjure their Lordships
not to come to a vote under the notion that it would be
possible to repair the evil this session. The Noble and
Learned Lord said—" Bring in another Bill." That was
all very well. (Hear, hear.) But the Noble and Learned
Lord said, not only bring in another Bill, but he
said bring in a Bill to repeal the stamp duties
altogether.—(Hear, hear.) He (Viscount Melbourne)
would beg leave to ask the Noble Duke, and the
Noble Lords opposite if they joined in that recommendation ?
This was a bidding for popularity. What did the Noble
arid Learned Lord say to the Radicals who by these words
he intended to please ? The Noble and Learned Lord's
meaning was obvious. It was an attempt to beat those
opposed to him in the race of popularityi and to take ad-
►-antage of circumstances which upon the present occasion
he thought favourable to himself. But there was a great
objection to taking off the whole of the stamp duty. If
the whole of the stamp duty were taken off it would be im-
possible to transmit newspapers through the Post Office,
!Ind he would say that it was levying the tax more fairly by
allowing a duty of one penny to remain on newspapers than
by throwing it upon the Post Office, and charging a rate of
postage which did of course act with different degrees of