The Sun.
London, England, 1851-12-02 00:00:00

THE SU

considered (determination, four of the Judges of the
realm pronounced the views entertained by each of
them individually, in reprd to the periodical issue of
a monthly publication called the: Household Nar-
rative. It is well- known to the generality, that the
paper here mentioned is nothing less than an epitome
of the most noticeable events of the hour, compiled
from the columns of the public newspaper: and printed
as a politico .miscellaneous supplement to Household
Words—Household Words being itself one of the
most distinguished examples of cheap and popular
literature that has appeared within our generation.
Another reflection has caused the reading classes of
the community to watch with peculiar interest the
progress of the action now very happily terminated, a
reflection no less qualified to arouse their sympathies
than the fact of this Household Narrative being the
property ankin some sort also the effusion of one of
the most illustrious writers of the age. Anything

affecting the personal interests of CHARLES DICKENS
would not fail to affect also the interests of his con-

temporaries : more particularly when, as in the present
instance, the matter under consideration was a right
spreading out in all imaginable directions through the
intricate webwork of periodical literature. Hence
the curiosity with which every step in these.proceedings
has been noticed and the satisfaction with which their

close has been observed in consequence of the deci-
sion being given in favcur of the printers, and
through them in favour of the proprietor, of the

Household IVarrative.
Three of the eminent authorities who adjudicated
upon the case referred to, pronounced a judgment ad-
verse to the plaintiff, while one alone expressed opi-
nions opposed to the interests of the defendant.
Against the latter was Baron PARKE, against the
former Baron MARTIN, Baron PLATT, and the Lord
Chief Justice POLLOCK. Their judgments command
on all hands the most careful scrutiny, and in addi-
tion to this, the most respectful consideration. Their
sagacious intellects are not more conspicuous than is
their calm and imperturbable conscientiousness. The
multitude will, therefore, listen to the words
which, yesterday, fell from the lips of these
four just Judges with the sentiments due to
each and all of them in the venerable office they
adorn. Their judgments in the instance under no-
tice were pronounced upon the question as to whether
a publication called Household Narrative is subject to
the newspaper duty imposed by the statute 6th and
7th Wiliieari IV., c. 76—a question rendered more
interesting, if not more intricate, by the circumstance
of the paper just mentioned consisting entirely of the
materials of public intelligence. It is worthy of re-
mark that in the order of legislation upon this some-
what difficult subject, the statute 10th of Anne, c.
s. 101, was the fiat Which ever imposed a duty upon
newspapers. Upon the expiration of this initial sta-
tute, others framed in a similar manner continued the
impost up en papers containing public news,
intelligence, or occurrences which, within a
certain specified period, should be printed
for general distribution. The two statutes
completing the series here particularized
were—the one already spoken of and the 55th Geo.
c. 185, which was its immediate predecessor. It
was, therefore, upon soma supposed right accorded
by this final Act, 6th and 7th Will. IV., c. 76, that
the ATTORNEY-GENERAL commenced the proceedings
which only terminated yesterday, in the name and on
behalf cf her MAJESTY'S Government. Notwith-
standing the confident expectations of that Govern-
ment of a favourable decision, they have been defeated
is their intentions, entirely and decisively defeated by
the judgments delivered, after mature consideration,
by Baron MARTIN, by Baron PLATT, and by the Lord
Chief Justice Ponnoca..
According to the opinion expressed by Baron
PARKE, the whole question turns in reality on the
exact meaning of the first and third clauses of the
schedule annexed to the statute 6:h and 7th Will.
IV., c. 76—Schedule A imposing a duty
on any " paper containing public news,
intelligence, or occurrences printed in any
part of the United Kingdom, to be dispersed and
made public"—repeating, in fact, verbatim et:literatim
the definition of a newspaper as given in the Act
10th Anne, c. 19, s. 101, and continued through va-
rious subsequent statutes inclusively of the 44th
Geo. 111., c. 98, and 55th George 111., 185, for the
consolidation of the stamp duties. Maintaining very
resolutely that the clause above-mentioned, and that
coming immediately afterwards, clearly pointed out
the meaning of the final statute affecting newspapers,
so as to bring the Household Narrative of CHARLES
DICKENS within the category requiring a stamp for
the purpose of legalizing its publication, Baron
PARKE insisted that, in obedience to the written law
of the land, the decision of the Court ought to be
given deciding against the defendant. Not so, how-
ever, was the tendency of the judgment pronounced
by his Learned Brothers in the Court of
Exchequer. What said Baron MARTIN to-
wards the close of his judgment? He said
that, in his opinion, the 4th section of the 60th
Geo. 111., and Ist Geo. IV., pointed out a distinction
intended by the Legislature to be made between
papers published at an interval of twenty-six days,
and papers published at a greater interval—enacting
that " pamphlets and papers containing public news,
intelligence, or occurrences, printed for sale and pub-
lished periodically at intervals exceeding twenty-six
days, and not exceeding two sheets, and published for
sale at a less price than twopence, should be pub-
lished on the first day of every calendar month, or
within two days before or after that day, and at no
other time;" and any person publishing such pam-
phlets or papers at any other time was subjected to a
penalty of 201. sterling. " Now," said Baron MAR -
TIN, " the: Household Narrative falls precisely within
the above description, and if the question of its lia-
bility to stamp duty had arisen before the statute 6th
and 7th Will. IV., c. 76 was passed, I should have
thought that it was net subject to duty within the
55th Geo. 111. and the 60th Geo. 111. and Ist
Geo. IV., but was subject to the regulations contained
in the 4th section above mentioned." Equally decisive
was the opinion expressed immediately afterwards by
Baron PLATT, who observed that unquestionably,
looking at the schedule annexed to the final statute
6th and 7th William IV., c. 76, there might be some
room for doubt—" but," said he, " that doubt is
dispelled on a revision of the several previous
statutes on the subject, and the language and
course of former legislation." Finally came
the lucid and luminous judgment pronounced
upon this most interesting question by the
Lord Chief Baron Ponnocs.. "It appears to me,"
said his Lordship, after quoting the fourth section
already specified, " that this is a legislative recogni-
tion that a paper published at greater intervals than
twenty-six days has not the character of a newspaper,
that it may be a chronicle of events bringing up its
narrative to a very recent period, and I think, as the
Household Narrative is published at intervale exceed-
ing twenty-six days, it would be difficult with that
statute before us to say that it was liable to duty
under that Act. If it was not then, for the reason
already given, it is not now. A reference to some
other publications may illustrate this. If Mr.
MACAULAY were to-morrow to publish a continuation
of his history up to last Saturday, its news would be
as recent as that of any Sunday papers; but in the
opinion of every one it would not require a
stamp. So the Annual Registers, if published in the
first week of the new year, are not in the
nature of newspapers." After these very remarkable
words—words conclusiveto our thinking in testimony
of the legality of the Household Narrative as an un-
atamped publication, it cannot but be admitted by all
unprejudiced
and dispassionate observers that the
proceedings
highest
in the case the " Attorney-General v.
Bradbury and Ens' '
terminated yesterday in a
manner in the
proceedings, now that ihe yhave closed in favour of
degree satisfactory. Those
,we feel satisfied, the first de-
cisive blow against ht
oese detestable and pernicious
Acts imposing
the defendant, constitute
dots upon knowledge.

We are rejoiced to find that our brethren of the
Scottish Press are taking up the agitation which we
commenced for the Parliamentary enfranchisemente
of the Scottish Universities. Nothing can be more
unjust than to refuse to confer Parliamentary repre_
sentatives on those Universities in which academical
instruction of the very highest order is imparted, at
a moderate expense to the students, and which are
open to all mankind, without distinction of creed, of
country, or of race (for to the honour of the Scottish
Universities, be it remembered, that the students there
are not, as at Oxford and Cambridge, called on to sub-