The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-22 00:00:00

paper, he was not opposing tne house going into com-1
mittee of supply. It was immaterial whether his resolu-
tion were carried or negatived, so fares regarded the sub-
sequent going into committee of supply, t..-d he believed,
should it he the house's pleasure to adopt the resolution,
a motion could be made immediately afterwards to go
into supply. There had been some difficulty with re•
gard "to propositions such as he bad put upon the paper.
He knew that many experienced members of this house
entertained objections to unofficial persons presuming to
propose in the terms of a motion fiscal changes or the
remission of taxes. There were those who thought that
such propositions should be left to the financial minister,
and that private members coming forward and taking
such a course as he took was not conducive to the public
welfare. He remembered, when this objection was
urged on a former occasion, that the present Chancellor
of the Exchequer held that to say that unofficial mem-
bers were to be precluded from making propositions of
this kind was a very dangerous doctrine, and one that
the house ought not to sanction. Therefore, recollect-
ing well the right hon. gentleman's feelings upon this
matter, he approached this question on the present occa-
sion with more than usual confidence. He might be
asked why he had not brought forward this question as
a substantive motion, but had preferred to connect it
with a vote of supply, and his reason was, that he
thought that the subject to which this re-olution related
Was intimately connected with the resolution about to be
moved in committee of supply, "That a sum of money
Should be voted for the purpose of promoting education
in England and Wales." He believed that the repeal
iv of this duty, which stood in the way of the diffusion of
knowledge, was a proposition for promoting education
throughout England and Wales. (Hear, hear.) If he
were to say that be had high authorities in favour of
such a motion as he now submitted, every hon. member
would feel the truth of his statement; in fact, if he were
to mention the distinguished persons who bad voted for
such a proposition he should have to detain the house too
long. He was overwhelmed with authorities. The diffi-
culty he had felt was this, that he could not get anybody
to agree to place his opinions in the form of a minute
on their journals ; to take the first step towards carry-
ing hie views into practical legislation. He knew the
Chancellor of the Exchequer to be in favour of this motion,
and the right hon. member for the University of Oxford
had, on many occasions, expressed opinions favourable
to such a proposition as was now made. In fact, he
had not found any enemy—perhaps enemy was too
strong a word—openly avowing himself to be such, to
this proposal except the right hon. gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer to the late administraLon. He
went, he thought, the length of saying that he con-
sidered the paper duty a good tax in itself, thereby im-
plying that it should be continued as a Government
branch of our revenue. He was not asking the
house to vote the repeal of the tax at this moment, or
to disturb the financial arrangements of the present year.;
he was only asking the house to contradict the pro- '
posal that the paper duty was a good source of taxa-
tion, and that its maintenance was inconsistent with the
public welfare. If he were to bring forward this motion
simply as a!financial proposal ; simply one for relieving
the community of so much taxation, and also of a mis-
chievous kind of taxation, he should have a very good
case, putting aside altogether those important educa-
tional views which were connected with the subject. He
believed he could prove by past experience tbat taxation
was one thing and revenue another, and that it was pos-
sible to repeal taxation, if done judiciously, without per-
manently injuring the public revenue. (Hear.) No
one had more lucidly explained that doctrine to the
house than the right homfgentlemau the member for
the University of Oxford, for he remembered him telling
them that Sir R. Peel, during a period of eleven years,
had repealed many taxes and had put on other taxes,
but the balance of remission of taxation amounted to
7,000,0001. per annum. But at the end of the eleven
years there was not a loss of 7,000,000/. a year, there
was a gain of 5,000,0001. a year, thus showing that by
judicious selection of taxes to be repealed, he had re-
:levet' the industry of the country from oppressive
burdens without injuring the revenue of the state—
(hear, hem)—and, indeed, in the particular matter of
the excise duties that eminent statesman repealed
at the same time about 1,000,0001. of exci-e duties, and
at the end of the pried of eleven years the revenue
irons the excise duties wits 1,500,0001. more than before.
Thus he proved iccontestibly that taxes starved one
another. And though they might be told that Arthur
Young was in favour of multiplicity of taxes, he thought
that you could get a larger revenue by a few large prin-
cipal Cutler, and that you could raise your money with
:,;he least possible injury to trade, commerce, and manu-
factures. The paper duty was a most pernicious tax in
every point of view, and from a return which he moved
for a short time ago as to the number of paper mills in
England, it appeared that during the last 20 years the
paper mills in Eegland had diminished in number from
525 to 393. He had had the honour of waiting with a de-
putation on the Earl of Darby, and when that fact was
wentioneil to the noble earl he said it was owing to the
fact of ativaeced civilisation which caused trade to be
carried on by large caeitalists, and so reduce the number
of manufacturing establishments. He spoke cf congestion
from advanced civilisation, but he (Mr. M. Gibson)
thought, with all r.spet,, that the noble earl was mis-
taken, because, if he were rg.'et, we should see the same
effmt in other tranebe= of indo,try. We did not see the
same thing in silk, cet.on, or other mills ; they e ere not
diminished. but, on the contrary, they went on con-
stantly increasing, whilst with regard to paper the manu-
facture was falling more and more into few houses ; and
the whole supply of the -United Kingdom must, if they
continued this obnoxious excise system, fall into the
hands of a few large capitalls.s. The trade required more
capital to carry on the paper manufacture than if it were
free, and this grad ua4y created tbat congestion of capitol
hich was complained of. It min-t be remembered that
the manufacture of paper was carried on in rural parts, it
was carried on beside the pure streams, and employed the
peasantry ; but if this system was continued, they. would
destroy ail those small rural paper mills, and would drive
the whole paper manufacture into the manufacturing dis-
tricts, and it would be placed in the hands of persons
who used steam instead of the pure water power of the
rura. district. The immediate object of his motion was
o show the great inconsistency of asking Parliament to
increase the vote for education when they maintained
this tax, which stood in the way of the diffusion of know-
ledge among the masses of .the people. How did the
duty press ? Not on a large book, where it might be
-aid that it was impercept.bly minute, hut on a cheap
book, for the amount of duty was large, just in propor-
tion a; the publication to which it was applied was EX-
tended in its circulation. A cheap publication, with a
large qirculation, was what they required should txet,
and that it shou'n be good, if they desired to spread
:knowledge among the great c'asses cf the community.
What was the history of the origin of the paper duty

It arose in the tine of Anne, and they would find it was
just after newspapers began to be party organs, and to
reflect on ministers of the time, and on different party
leaders. (Elear.) He remembered that Mr. HalLirn
used the words, "the vivacity of the press attracted the
notice of the Ministers of the day." A message was
hronght down from the Crown, informing the House of
Commons that the papers were too free, that they re-
flected with too much liberality on tho Ministers of the
day•and the institutions of the country, and it called on
the House of Commons to take some steps to put
down these great evil,. The bounEs replied that
they wontl endeavour to find out a remedy for
the mischif-f. And what was the remedy ? Why, it
was suggested that taxes might have all the effect that
censorship or actual licensing cf the press bad in oth-er
countries ; and for the first time tars on knowledge
were invented in comtnittee in that house for the express
and avowed purpose of restraining the newspaper press.
The taxes iwpooed were the stamp ditty, the advertise-
ment duty, and the paper du'y, the two first cf which
they had repealed. Their position was now reversed ;
they were now a'lvccotes for education. In the days
when these taxes were iippoeed there were objeclaens
roads to the diffusion of knowledge, and therefore, though
Vie Parliament of Anne might be c ,mistent in imposing
these duties, the Parliament cf Viet Aria was inoonsis.
tent to continua to retain them. (Hear.) How did the
tax affect particular publications ? He found a speech
in a public paper delivered by the Secretary for
the Colonies tno other day in Hertfordshire.
(The honouralSl.e member then read an extract from
the speech of Sir E. B. Lytton, detailing the ad-
vantages of having a pen-.y Consemitive newspaper.)
Tills conservative nrgan he hal no doubt bad a large
circulation, but if it were as large as was represented it
must pay an enormous amount of taxation. If its eir-
twation was any, hing like 50,000 a day, a•s was repine.
sented, he shouid thiok that the amount of taxation was
501. a day ; and if its circulation was 25,000, the tax
would be 25/. a day. What a deduction was that to
make from the returns of the cowervative cheap news•
cPdpoaae :Pupi rdrc,tine,odht,:tc
calrdy:vniaste
addenyPltshei be
I:ta'aeixf isntosotlaatnlrlegeee
paorfiscuaem;chwt
they
and a fraction of a farthing ;
and this de looting urns, therefore be made from the funds
of those who were conducting that paper. The effect of
that deduction was that it rendered it necessary to print
the paper on an inferior kind of material, and it rendered
the conductors cf that paper unalde to employ the best
literary talent, and in all respects prevented the paper
being male as good as it would be. If this duty were -
repealed the conductors of such a paper would not put
the 501. or 251. a day into their pockets, for there were
otter cheap papers, and they would be compelled by
cernpetition to apply the money to the improvement of
the publication. Tiae same argument applied to all cheap
ii arature.
.Too tax made &leap literature bad litera-
ture ; it stood in the way of having the best writing and
having the best mi• ds employed on cheap literature.
Wasnj udicious policy for them, when they were albw-
ine, cheap periodicals, not to ta!:e care that this cheap
ap
Lterature should be as good as it c-nild be? Could any
paltry considerations of reveilue stand in the way ofb d
tlie
moral :mprov meet and advancement of t
K great,ht w y
of the pope' of country ? Car es ni
as
of oninion that they maele bad literature ty the operation
" Ti • e prohlsm
of this most mischievous tax. He said . t
eseccially accessary to solve upon the pr neiplo that
the bent cf civilisation is to make good things cheap,
cannot he solved in England under the paper
duty. All
literature is teniling to cheapness ; taxed literature to tie
cheap must lose some portion of excel eece or involve a
io;•,. A revolution has been effected in which sound

Lterature might have hither encouragement in the
many than io the few, if the government did nct s'anl
in the w y," That put in very clear and forcible lan-
gllaze the pernicious effict of the paper duty on the
cheap literature of the country. They had some qualms
of conscience when imposing this paper duty, fir they
enacted that there should be certain exceptions'. They
cald that the Holy Scriptures should be exempted from
the Paper tax, and they also exewpted the Psalms books
and the S,otch C ,nfe.ssion of Faith, and tln they
enacted that books printed in the Latin, Greek, Orienta',
aLd Northern languages, at the Universities of Oxford,