The Sun.
London, England, 1832-06-15 00:00:00

POLITICAL UNIONS.

The Marquess of LONDONDERRY begged to call
'he attention of the Noble Earl at the head of the Go-
vernment to the progress of Political Unions, and entreated
him to take some measure to suppress them. He had
!earned intelligence from the north of England, which in.
formed him of some most outrageous proceedings of these
Unions. A meeting of ooe of them had taken place at
Sunderland, at which Mr. Larkin, the friend of Dr. Head.
lain, had said that the Noble Earl was a weak instrument
in the hands of the people, and gave instructions to tha
people how to act on the coming general elec-
tion. A publication had been issued to the public
by one of the Northern Unions to the same effect,
telling them that the bustle of freedom was only
begun, and that they must require for all Parlia-
mentary candidates pledges to procure a free press,
universal suffrage, annual Parliaments, and vote by
b Mot. The favoured borough of Gateshead had already
acted upon his advice, and the Political Union of that
town had put forward a candidate who had been required
to be the mere delegate of the people. In abort, if the
progress of these Unions were not stopped, they would
take the entire Government of the country into their
hands. He trusted, therefore, that his Majesty's Minis-
tens would, before the dissolution of Parliament, devise
some measure to put them down. Mr. Pitt, with a
view to put down the friendly and corresponding societies,
of 1794 had suggested certain measures wich he recom-
mended to the attention of Government. He would now
only ask the Noble Earl whether be contemplated putting
the common law in force against these societies ; and if
that were found insufficient for the purpose, to bring in a
Bill which would put a stop to the evil of which he com-
plained.
Earl GREY said that Mr. Larkin was a friend of Dr.
Needlam's, who he was sure did not approve of the
language uttered at the meeting referred to. With re-
spect to these political unions, they knew from experience
that they were the offspring of excitement and would
disappear with the causes of excitement. Such unions
might exist with perfect safety to good government, and
at any rate no mere enactment could put them down, as
had been proved over and over again ; so that they bad the
odium of passing laws hardly consistent with the con-
stitution without effect. Mr. Pitt's propositions
were not adopted, and what took place in his time
proved the truth of his propositions. Holding these
sentiments, he could in answer to the Noble Marquess
say that no measure of the kind he spoke of was in contem-
plation. He trusted much to the good sense of the people,
and the dying away of these Unions, when this cause was
destroyed.
NORFOLK ASSIZES BILL.

This Rill went through a Committee, and third reading
on Monday next.
EXCHEQUER COURT (SCOTLAND) BILL.

On its being moved that the House roeolve itself into
Committee on ;his Bill.

The Duke of BUCCLEUGU opposed the motion, and
leprecated the abolition of the Court.
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 14.

Mr. PALMER Wag introduced, and took the oaths and
his seat as Member for the county of Berks.

Sir GEORGE MURRAY also presented a petition
from the proprietors of farming-stock in Perth, praying
for the repeal of the stamp duties on fire insurances.

Dr. LUSHINGTON presented a petition from the
Grand Jury of Londonderry against the punishment of
death in cases of forgery. Also, similar petitions from
Portarlington, Cavan, Carlow, and several other places.
Mr. LENNARD said that the feeling of the country
was very strong on the subject, so much so that he, and
he had no doubt other Hon. Members, had innumerable
petitions to present on the subject ; but owing to the
regulation which had lately been made as to the presenta-
tion of petitions, he had not been able to present them.
Mr. WILKS bore testimony to the feeling that existed
throughout the country on the subject.
Dr. LUSHINGTON presented a petition from Maiden-
head in fa% our of the Factories' Bill. Also a petition from
the inhabitant householders of St. Margaret's and St.
John's, Westminster, in favour of Reform.

Mr. BROWNLOIV presented petitions from different
parishes in Armagh in favour of Reform and against tithes.
Also a petition from the city of Armagh, praying for the
introduction of Poor Laws into Ireland. Also a petition
from the Conference Presbytery of Bangor in favour of the
new plan of Education in Ireland.

Lord MORPETH presented a petition from Dewsbury,
lamenting that the Reform Bill for Ireland did not extend
to the people of that country the benefits which the
English Reform Bill gave to the people of England, and
praying that the House would so amend the Irish Bill as
that every inhabitant of that country might enjoy the
same benefits as the people of England.
Mr. O'CONNELL was sure that a petition like the
present, coming from enlightened Englishmen, would be
received with heartfelt gratitude by the people of Ireland.
Mr. STRICKLAND congratulated the House on the
alteration of the tone of the Hon. Member for Kerry
from that which he took last night, and denied that the
people of England were indifferent to the interests of Ire-
land. The wishes of the people of this country were to
see Ireland prosperous and happy.
After some observations from Mr. BLACKNEY, the peti-
tion was read.

Dr. LUSHINGTON then presented petitions from
Thirsk and Denby, for a modification of the penal code.
After some observations from Mr. HUNT, the petitions
were ordered to be printed.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.

A message from the House of Lords brought up several
Bills, to which their Lordships had agreed ; among which
were—The Bristol Damages Compensation--the Edin.
burgh Police, the Chorlton row Improvement, &c. Their
Lordships also requested to be furnished by this House
with a copy of the report and minutes of evidence relative
to the Exchequer of Scotland Bill.

The messengers having retired, and the question, that
the request of the Lords be complied with, being car-
ried in the affirmative, they were again called in, and in.
formed that the copy of the report of the minutes of evi-
dence would be furnished to their Lordships.
Mr. O'CONNELL presented a petition from tke Mem-
bers of the National Political Union of the Working Classes,
praying for the repeal of the taxes on newspapers. The
petitioners stated, that having now the certainty of a Re-
formed Parliament, it was incumbent to repeal all taxes on
knowledge, so that all information should be obtained as
cheaply as possible.
Mr. HUNT supported the prayer of the petition, and
promised that when the Hon. Member (Mr. Bulwer)
brought forward his motion upon this subject, he would
give it his hearty support.
Lord KILLEEN presented a petition from the land-
owners of a parish in the county of Meath, praying for
an abolition of tithes or for a different appropriation of
them.

Mr. H. GRATTAN supported the prayer of the peti-
tion. Tithes were now at an end in Ireland. On Mon•
day last there was to have been a meeting in Dublin 0,
60,000 people belonging to the county of Wexford, upon
the same subject. It was impossible now to collect tithe..
in Ireland, except at the point of the bayonet. He hoped
the serious attention of English Gentlemen and of the
Government would be speedily called to this subject.
Lord KILLEEN confirmed the statement of the Hon.
Member who had just sat down. From what he ha.
learned lately he knew it would be impossible any longer
to collect tithes, and, therefore, he hoped the attention co
Government would be turned to the subject before the See-

Mr. HUNT said the Bight Hon. Secretary fors Ireland
had used the word extinction without qualification or ex-
planation, and so it had gone abroad ; it was not until af-
ierwards that an explanation was given.
Mr. WELLESLEY did not think that any Govern-
ment would entertain an idea of taking away the tithes
without considering and haring due regard for the rights
of the clergy. He knew that most of the clergy wets
anxious that tithes should be done away with, but they
were equally anxious that their rights should be re-
spected.—(Hear).

Mr. BLACKNEY said it was certainly unders!frod in
Ireland that tithes were to be wholly extinct. Be de-
tiiled at some length the evils of the present system.
The great miseries of Ireland were owing, first, to the
cursed system of tithes, and then to the oppression of the
peasantry. He was convinced there was an end t) tithes
in that country. There was great danger in the coercive
system. The people were disposed to keep the peace, but
oppression had its limits. After some further observations
from the Hun. Member, the petition was ordered to be
printed.
Mr. BEAUMONT wished to ask the Right Hon.
Gentleman below (Mr. Lamb) the Under Secretary for
the Home Department, whether Guvernment had re-
ceived authentic intelligence respecting the murder of
a Magistrate in South Shields, under most atrocious
circumstances, by two individuals belonging to some
Trades' Union in that part of the country ?
Mr. LAMB said Government had certinly received in-
formation of the melancholy nature alluded to by the Hon.
Member ; and the proper steps had thereupon immediately
been adopted.

Mr. BEAUMONT did not wish to make any particu-
lar remarks on the present occasion, but he thought it
was quite necessary some means should be adopted by that
House, to relieve the country of the evils entailed on the
industrious classes by means of these illegal combinations.
Sir H. HARDINGE hoped the Hon. Member would
take an early opportunity of bringing the subject before
the House. He had seen several letters relative to the
matter in question, and it was much to be regretted that
a Magistrate, in the discharge of his public duty, should
so atrociously have been murdered.

Sir R. PEEL had always felt upon the suliject of those
Unions, that the industrious classes were more interested
i❑ their suppression than those in the higher cl isses. The
latter had generally the means of escaping from their fury,
but the industrious classes wee necessarily exposed to in-
sult and danger, if they did not belon?, to them. They
lived by their labour, and they could not be allowed to
take their articles to the most profitable market without
being dictated to by these most illegal and hazardous com-
binations. It was, therefore, the duty of the Legislature
to interpose, and afford some protection to those who did
not wish to involve themselves in them.
TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE.

Mr. EDWARD LYTTON BULWER said, that in
tieing to move certain resolutions for the repeal of the
principal taxes on knowledge, he trusted th it his deep and
conscientious conviction of the necessity of the measure
he was about to propose, would be a sufficient excuse for
undertaking a task which, if as important as he believed
it to be, was equally above his abilities and his station in
public life : those were not light or ordinary motives
which, supporting as he did the present Administration,
could induce him to bring forward a measure, not, he
trusted, opposed, but certainly not sanctioned, by them,
and which must necessarily be of a nature that it would
setter suit their convenience to leave to their own time,
and their own discretion to determine; but the motives by
which he was actuated had been so long nursed, and were
so strongly felt, that he conscientiously believed they left
him no alternative; for when he looked round and saw
the dangerous effects of those taxes in daily operation--
when he saw the numberless pernicious and visionary pub-
lications which were circulated in defiance of laws, which
having lost the santion of public opinion (as his Majesty's
Attorney-General so justly observed some time ago), had
lost the power of being carried with prudence into effect.
When he saw, that while the cheap dangerous publication
was not checked, they suppressed the cheap reply—(Hear,
hear, hear)—for those who would reply were honest and
well-affected men, and men honest and well-affected would
net break, while they lamented, that law which at present
forbade the publication of cheap political periodicals.—
(Hear.) When he looked round, and saw the results
of that ignorance which the laws he desired to abolish
fostered and encouraged, breaking forth not only in wild
and impossible theories, bat, as the experience of a
l'ew months since had taught them, in riot, and in-
cendiarism, and crime, he felt that in this Pat liament, and
at this late period of the Session, he did but fulfil his duty
in pointing ont the evils of the present system, and the
manner in which he conceived they could be remedied—
and indeed no time was unseasonable which related to
national morals and to the waste of human life. He should
proceed at once to call the attention of the House to certain
facts, which would tend to show why it was our duty and
our policy to diffuse cheap instruction amongst the people.
and he sliould then show in what manner that instruction
was, by the existing taxes, checked and obstructed.
From an analysis carefully made of the cases of those per-
sons who were committed for acts of incendiar;sm, &c,
in 1830, and the beginning of 1831, it appears that in
Berkshire, of 13S prisoners, only 2b could write, and only
:37 could read; at Abingdon, of 30 prisoners, 6 only could
read and write; at Aylesbury, of 79 prisoners, only 30
could read and write; of 50 prisoners tried at Lewes, one
individual only could read well.—(Hear, heat.) Now
when they remembered that it was not sufficient to read,
but that to derive any advantage from that ability, there
should also be the habit of reading, how small a propor-
tion of those unfortunate men could be said to have pos-
sessed any positive instructiou. The same connexion be-
tween crime and ignorance existed in France. In 1830,
it appeared that in the French Courts of Assize there were
6962 accused persons; out of this number 4519 persons
were entirely ignorant of reading and writing, and only
129 persons, about a 57th part of the whole number, had
received a superior education. It might be said, that as
ignorance and poverty usually went together, it was in
these cases the poverty that sinned, and the ignorance was
only the accident that acccompanied the poverty ; but
this notion he could contradict from his own expe-
rience; his habits had necessarily led him to see much
of the condition of those men who followed literature as a
profession, and he would say, that this city contained in-
nemerable instances among well-informed and well-edu-
cated men, of poverty as grievous, as utter, and certainly
as bitterly felt, as any to be found among the labouring
population of Kent or Norfolk.—(Hear, hear.) Yet how
few among these men were driven into crime ! How
rarely you find such men retaliating on society the suffer-
ings they endure.—(Cheers.) The greater part of of..
fences are offences against property; but these men, ac-
customed to inqiury, are not at least led away by those
superficial and dangerous notions of the injustice of the
livisions of property, which men who are both poor and
ignorant so naturally conceive, and so frequently act upon;
the knowledge which cannot, in all cases, prevent them
from being poor, gives them at least the fortitude and the
hope which enable them to be honest. If then, it was
true, as the facts he had stated seemed to him sufficient to
prove, that there was an inseparable connexion between
crime and ignorance, it followed as a necessary conse-
quence that it was their duty to lay no shackles on the dif-
fusion of knowledge—that poverty and toil were sufficient
checks in themselves—that the results of any checks which
they, as legislators, voluntarily imposed, were to he traced,
not only in every violent and dangerous theory instilled
into the popular mind, but in every outrage the people ig-
norantly committed, and every sentence of punishment,
transportation, and death, which these outrages obliged
hens to impose.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It was then their
luty to diffuse instruction in all its modes ; yet he thought
it would be scarcely necessary for him to contend th, t
Newspapers were among the readiest and most effectu 1
instruments of diffusing that instruction. In the first
~lace, they had this great advantage, they were the most
mpular. A certain traveller said that he asked an
American why it was so rare in America to find a man
_ _

who could not read ? The American answered, " because
my man who sees a newspaper always in his neighbour's
iand, has a desire to see what pleases his neighbour, and
a ashamed not to know what forms the currentolsotwemtttiucsthoef
•Onyersation.—(clear, hear.) In fact, no man coo d have
ived in the city without observing the extraordinary appe.
ite for intelligence for passing events, which the life of
„li
ai geyih:seyis
journal
no and it
tdi tatmhheoa dnwgsi beennt
daol all
window,
sat:lir:y:6 aafirtdo,tmht
eht that you may note
even a greater crowd round a newspaper office, with the
alluring 0

B:he caricature shops. A newspaper was, in truth, almost the
only publication that the poorer classes were ever tempted
to read, and, shove all, it was the only one in which th• y
could learn thee laws, for the transgression of which igno-
rance wast no excuse.—(Hear, hear.) Thus it had het n
well remarked, that every account of a trial, every aenterc •
In Bow street, every dogma of my Lord Mayor—(A
latrel.)—had for them not only an interest and se amuse-
ment, but also a warning and a moral, A newspaper,
then, was among the most popular and effective motley
of instructing the people; and now mark the interdict
they bad laid on the newspapers. The present taxes upon
near-soarers consisted nrst of a duty of 3d. per pound
werelt on the paper, or alrout a farthing. a al. net ; next of
a duty, nominally 4d., but subject to a diet tint of 20
per cent., and thirdly, a tax of 3s. Gd. upon every ad-
vertisement. The whole duties, with the price of printing
anti the news agency, amounted 54d, for every sevenpenny
copy of a Lyndon parer. Now lit them glance rapidly at
some of the consequences of the high prices at which news-
papers sold. In the first place, owing to that price the in.
rat-re:tie:l they contained did not travel extensively among
the poor; in the second place as only the higher and the
morning orders could afford in general the luxury of these
periodicals, so it was chiefly to the tastes and interests of
those wealthier orders that these journals addressed them-
selves. They contained, it was true, much that was valu-
able, Tench that was nece•eary to the poor, hut they did
not give to them that advice, and those frequent sugees.
tines and admonitions upon matters of train, or points of
law, which would necessarily be the case were the poor
among their customary supporters. Even in mere style,
that which suits the higher orders is not familiar to the
low, r ; and thus, as in this free country, yott cannot pre-
vent men of all ranks from seeking political intelligence,
the lower orders finding themselves debarred from the
general use of these expensive papers, and finding, when
they do obt in them, that they are not often addressed in
a stye attractive to ahem, are driven almost inevitably
to those illegitimate, those dangerous productions, cheaper
in price, and adapted almost exclusively to themselves, it
was thus that the real education of the people was thrown
into the hands of the wildest, and sometimes the most
pernicious teachers; and while they were erecting new
props and buttresses to the gorgeous palace', and solemn
temples of the Constitution, they were suffering that dark
and stealthy current of opinion to creep on, which, if not
speedily checked, must sap both temple and palace in the
very midst of their labours.—(Cheers.) He should like
Hon. Members to know the real nature of publications
thus circulated ; he would not read any extracts to the
House, becatire be knew the House objected to that course;
but he denied that there was much justice in the argument,
that by so doing they should give notoriety to prblica-
tiors otherwise obscure. The fact was, that for the class to
which they were addressed they were not obscure.—( Hear)
Were Hon. Members au-are that many of these publi-
cations circulated to the amount of several thousand copies
weekly ; that their sale in several instances was larger
than the sale of the most popular legitimate papers ; that
their influence among large bodies of the working classes
was much greater? A very intelligent tnechtnic, in a ma-
nufacturing town, with whom he had occasion to corre-
spond, said, in a letter to hint, " We go to the public-house
to read the sevenpenny paper, but only for the news; it
is the cheap penny paper that the working man can take
home and read at spare moments, which he has by him to
take up, and read over and over agin, whenever he has
leisure, that thrills his opinion."—( Hear, hear.) " You
ask me," said another mechanic, " if the Penny Maga-
zine will not counteract the effect of what you call the
more violent papers? Yes, in sonic degree ; but not so
much as is supposed, because poor men, anxious to better
their condition, are always inclined to politics, and the
Peen!, .magazine does not touch upon them ; to cor-
rect had politics you must give us not only literature, but
good politics."—(Hear, hear.) Did Hon. Members know
the class of publications thus suffered to influence the ori-
niona of their fellow-countrymen ? He spoke not about
such as were aimed at mere forms of Government ; hut
were they aware that some of them struck at the root of
all property, talked of the injustice of paying rents, in.
slated upon a unanimous seizure of all the lands in the
kingdom, declared that there was no moral guilt in any
violation of law, and even advocated assassination itself !
Thus, then, it was clear, that the stamp duty did not
prevent the circulation of the most dangerous doctrines.
It gave them, on the contrary, by the interest which
the mere risk of a prosecution always begets in the
popular mind, a value, a weight, and a circula-
tion which they mild not otherwise acquire. Above all,
le, them recollect, that while these were cir culated in
thousands, the law forbade reply to them—or if, in de-
spite of fact, you call the legitimate Papers a reply to
them—then, even by your own showing, you sell the
poison for a penny, and the antidote at seven pence. His
proposition was not at present to touch the paper duty ; it
was a tax which, in the present state of the revenue,
might be fairly spared, and which, though a grievance,
did not fall nearly so heavily on the public as the two
taxes he would abolish. The first of these was the stamp
duty—the second the advertisement duty. Take away
the stamp duty and the sevenpenny paper would fall at
once to 3."1,1; but he was inclined to believe—and in this
he was borne out by many impartial practical men on the
subject—that owing to the great increase of Bile, which
the cheapness of the article would produce, to the vast
competition which the opening of the present monopoly
would create, and to the greater number of advertisements
which the abolition of the advertisement tax would pro..
duce—the newspapers would be enabled to sell at a much
lower rate than Sid. and would most probably settle into
the average of two pence each. The great point, and the
first to consider was, would the number of newspapers
published through the year increase to any very large ex-
tent ? All his arguments rested upon that point—partly
as related to the diffusion of knowledge—partly to the pro-
fits of a postage. To him it seemed a self-evident. pro-
position, and when it no longer required a vast. cambi—
a capital between 30,000/. and 40,0002.—t0 set up a
daily newspaper, when it was open to every man of lite-
rary talent with a moderate sum to attempt the speculation
there would he a vast and sudden increase of newspapers.
To him it seemed equally evident, that when newspapers
were so (-heap as to be within the reach of a'most any
titan, there would he an enormous addition to the present
number of readers—that many who hired a piper now,
would then purchase it—that many who now took one
paper would then take two—that the intelligent mechanic
vsho now in every town thronehout the country com-
plained that he could not afford to purchase a paper,
would spare at least once a week his twopence or his three-
pence from those ale-house expenses he now often incurred
for the very sake of reading or hearing read—(Hear,
hear)—the paper he could then buy—that, in
short, when a weekly paper cost only twopence, there
would scarce be in this great community a single man who
can read, who would not be able and willing to purchase
one ; but he would rt st no part of his case on proposi-
tions only—however evident the y seemed to hitn—he
would not stir a step without the support of facts. Hon.
Members had often heard of a certain contraband paper,
set up by Mr. Carpenter, called the Po:itind Letter—it
was published at fourpence; of this paper the average sale
weekly was 6,000 copies. Allele sanguine by his success,
Alr. Carpenter took out a stamp, and his paper became '7d,
What was the consequence? Why, the paper could no
longer txist ; from a sale of six thousand copies it dwin-
dled down, from the very first week, to the sale of five
hundred.—(Hear, hear.) A most important fact—for
here was a journal in all respects exactly the same, excapt
in price, but it could sell six thousand copies one week
when sold for 4d., and only five hundred the next week
when sold for '7d. There had lately been a sensible falling
off in the sale of these illegitimate papers. Why? Not
from the increased severity of the law—not from any want
of political excitement—not, surely, from any great prospe-
rity in trade, which usually deters men from any inflam-
matory speculations ; no, but because of late a great num-
ber of penny literary papers had been set up, and there
had been found to interfere with and contract the sale of the
contraband journals. Now, as literary papers, after all, were
not what the poor particularly wanted, how much more
would the sale of these illegitimate journals have been crip-
pled—had some of these innocent literary papers been inno-
cent political ones? But the great sale even of these cheap
literary papers (the Penny Magazine, for instance, is said
to sell 120,000 copies) proves how general is the desire of
the people for such periodic ils as they can afford to buy;
and how great would be the increase of political periodi-
cals were they made as cheap as his motion would make
them ? But besides these proofs that the cheapness of pe-
riodicals will '.ncalculably increase their sale, we have the
experience of other countries than it does ; in America a
newspaper sells for lid.—(Hear, hear.) What is the
result ? Why, that there is not a town in America with
10,000 inhabitants, that has not its daily paper. Com-
pare Beaton and Liverpool—Liverpool has 165,175 inha-
bitenta ; Boston had, in 1829, 70,000 inhabitants. Li.
verpool puts forth eight weekly publications ; and Boston,
with less than half the population—with about a fourth-
part of the trade of Liverpool—puts forth eighty weekly
publications ! In 1829 the nuualter of newspapers pub
irshed in the British Isles was 33,050,000 or 630,000
weekly, which is one copy for every 36th inhabitant. In
Pennaylvania, which had only in that year I,2oo,oooinha-
bitants, the rewspapers amounted to 3,000 copies weekly
—or, a newspaper to every fourth inhabitaut.—(Hear,
i ear, hear.) What was the cause for this mighty tliff.r-
--,„, The cause was plain. • The newspaper in erne
country Pali for a fourth of what itsells fur in the other.

The newspapers in America sell for 1 id., and in England
Int 7d. From all these facts (to which be c 'tilt' add in-
numerable others), they had a right to suppose, tl at it
newspapers were as cheap as they would he if his oldjeer
were carried, the number of copies would be prodigi iu•ly
increased. Thus information would circulate far more
eetensively—thne, matters connected with tr idle, science,
sod law, would become more familiar—(Hear, hear,
lu sr)—thus there wculd be a thousand opportunities for
retnevine those prejudice's among the poor which now so
often perplexed the wisdom and benevolence of legislators.
A great number of trades would have journals of their
own, a great numher of the more temperate and disinte-
res-ed fr'ends of the people would lead themselves to their
red instruction, and, by degrees, there would grow up
that community if intelligence between the Government
and the. people which it was the more necessary to effect
at a time when they were about to make the people more
powerful.—( Hear, hear.) It is thus that Ministers would
have it is their power to those lion. Gentlemen, who had
said the wrrking ciasses were too ignorant to be trusted
with the elective franchise—at the same time that they
granted the trust they would dispel the ignorance ! Mini
stern had been told they had created a monster they could
not control. No ; on the contrary, they had won the
monster to themselves; instead of making a ferocious
enemy of a eigentic and irresistible power, they had sof-
tened it by kindness, lePthern, at the same time, enligh'en
it I,y knowledge.—(Clieers.) Lord Eldon, on the 19th
of Nevemher, 1830, at the time of the agricultural insur-
rections, lied made use of these remarkable words :
" Many, very many of the agricultural insurgents were
not aware of the criminality they had been led to commit;
that there could not be an act of greater trercy to the
misled anti deluded people, than to have the nature and
provision of the criminal law expl tined. He did hope
that those learned men who were to be sent into the dis-
terhol districts, would take tl e trouble of explaining to
their deluded and mistaken fellow-countrymen, the law of
the land, and the reason of the law, and the reason why
it was for their interest and the interest of the commu-
nity at large that it should rem +in the law of the land."
In those words Lord Eldon did lint adopt his principle,
but with this difference ; when it was too late. He
made the warning go hard in band with the punishment,
and he sent the people instructors, and a Special
Commission at the same tune.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
He had one more argument for urging the immediate
adoption of his proposal— one reason for considering it a
necessary appendix to Reform—they had pa,sed the Re-
form Bill. Suppose they did not break the present mo-
nopoly of the five or six newspapers, which now concen-
trate the power of the Press, what would be the conse-
quence? Why, this? In a Reformed Parliement, would
not a Ministry too entirely depend on some one or two of
the most influential newspapers for support ? What the
close boroughs had !,con, might not the existing journals
become ? Did I.e speak against the respectability of the
present Press? No, considering the vast power they
possessed, the wonder was not that they had so often, but
so seldom abused it. Was he, then, opposed to granting
that power to the Press? Absurd ! While types and
paper existed, that power must continue. But then, it
should be a free Press, and not a monopoly. Every shade
of opinion should find its organ. Power should exist, but
that power should he a representation, not an Oligarchy.
Why exchange an oligarchy of boroughs for an oligarchy
of journals? But would he injure the interests of the ex-
isting papers—injure their sale? He thought he owed
too deep a gratitude to their services for him willingly to
do so. If the stamp duty were the pernicious tax he had
attempted to show it to he, what should they say of the
advertisement duty? Advertisements were the medium
of commercial intelligence of sale and barter. The first
principle of a Statesmen was to encourage that intelligence;
yet here they laid an interdict of 3s. 6d. on every an-
nouncement of it. In the encellent letter which the Edi-
tor of the Scotsman had addressed to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, the ill effects of this tax on our commerce
was shown by a reverence to America, in which advertis-
ing was untaxed. In one year, twelve of the daily papers
in New York had published 1,456,416 advertisements.
In the same year the four hundred papers of Great
Britain and Ireland had published 1,020,000 advertise-
ments.—(Hear.) So that there were nearly a half more
advertisements published in the twelve daily Papers of
New York, than in ad the 400 Papers of Britain and Ire
land, including the London Journals. What was the
cause of this preposterous disparity ? Was it not the
Fice ? The price of an advertisement of twenty lines, in
a London Paper, if published every day throughout the
) ear, would amount, at the year's end, to 2021. 16s. In
New York, the same advertisement, for the same period,
would be 61. 18s. Sd.—(Hear, bear.) Was not that a
sufficient cause fur the difference? Need they look fur-
ther ? Might they not cell this tax, in the words of the
Scotsman, an engine for extinguishing the business, for
obstructing and depressing all the various branches of
trade ! If such be the effect of this duty on their com-
merce, how did it affect their literature? A book must
be advertised largely in order to sell,—advertising was the
chief expense. What was the consequence? Why, that
as it costs as much to advertise a cheap book as to advertise
a dear one, the bookseller was loth to publish a cheap one.
Ile cared more about the number of p 'get; in your work
than the number of facts. You told hint of the materials
you had collected, and he asked it he could sell them for
a guinea ? This operated two ways : Ist, it degraded
literature into book-making ; 2,11 y, it was a virtual inter-
dict upon cheap knowledge. Jr. both ways the public
were irreparable losers, and all for the paltry sake of
about 157,000/. to the revenues of the wealthiest country
in the world.—(Hear, hear.) So much for the taxes
he would repeal. Ile now came to that which he
would substitute. He did not think, however, that it
would be a sufficient argument from the Noble Lord
to say the revenue would nut bear the loss of these
taxes. While there was any other conceivable source
from which revenue could be drawn, it was not the
amount of taxation under which we groaned, it was
the method of taxing—it was too much, for instance,
that we should make knnwle lge as dear as pos-
sible, and gin as cheap ; that we should choke the
sources of intelligence, and throw open the means of
intoxication. What volumes in the mere fact, that at
Manchester there were a thousand gin-shops, and not at
Manchester one daily paper.—(Hear, hear.) Squeeze,
then, new profits from the excise duties—augment the
assessed taxes, any tax was better than the one which
corrupted virtue, and the other which stifled commerce.
It was not then enough to reply that the Government
could not spare these taxes, and therefore, even if his sub-
stitute were doubtful, the doubt made not against his
main proposition. His plan was a cheap postage in the
following manner—all newspapers, poems, pamphlets,
tracts, circul as, printed publications of whatsoever de-
scription, and weighing less than two ounces, should cir-
culat, through the medium of the General Post at the rate
of one penny—if into the 2d. or 3,1. post, at one half-
penny. He would also propose that all works under five
ounces should circulate through the same channels at a low
and graduated charge. The principle of this plan had
been successfully adopted in France and America. In
Fraece they might see how little it operated as a check on
the circulation of the metropolitan papers. For if we
looked at home, we should find that from 1825 to 1829
there bad been little variation in the number of ccpies
sent from London into the country, while in France,
where the cheap postage was adopted, the number of pa-
pers sent daily by post from Paris was 25,000 copies—in
1829, it was 59,000 copies, and it was well stated by
Mr. Chadwick, a gentlet.nan connected with the Examiner
newspaper, and admirably acquainted with these matters,
that while, during those years, letters in France had in-
creased 50 per cent. newspapers had increased more than
80 per cent.—(Hear)—an important fact in answer to
those who contended that persons would be unwilling to
pay a postage, and that such a plan would operate against
the diffusion of the metropolitan papers. He bad proved
there would be a vast increase of papers if the stamp
duty were abolished. What might that increase reason-
ably he supposed to amount to? In America there was
one newspaper, weekly, to every fourth person. Suppose
one newspaper, weekly, to every eighth person in Eng-
land—he took that calculation from the reading propor-
tion of our population—the publication of weekly papers,
throughout the year, would then be one hundred and
fifty million copies—but the present total numaer of
sheets, weekly and daily, published throughout the year,
was thirty millions, so that the increase of weekly papers
• alone over all now published would be 130 million sheets
yearly. Now, the weight of daily papers of the largest
s.ze is 8811 e per 1,000 copies, which pay a duty of 3,1.
per lb. or 226. per 1,000 copies (say 205.) ; this makes
tae paper duty 1,000/. sterling for every million of sheets.
Now, we found at present that two-thirds of the London
papers went by post; suppese for one moment that this
ration continued with the increased number, the account
to the revenue would stand thus:—
Postage of weekly papers
Extra paper duty for the extra 120 million sheets ... 120,000
Total X 536666
• (Hear, hear.) But this is only for weekly papers; add
now all the daily papers—those published twice or three
tithes a week—toe pamphlets--the tracts—the prospec-
tuses—the various publications sent through the post, and
if you only calculate these at an equal sum produced by the
weekly papers, the results would be more than a tnill,on ;
trout which it you took 300,000/. to pay the expo uses of
carriage, distribution, &c. (a most extravagant calcula
1 clop) you would still leave more than the profits of the two

'I•XCS he wished to repeal? A more minute calculatico,
ould produce a far higher result. When they remem-
erect all the complicated interests, the vast trades, the nu-
merous intellectual wants of England, that the average ta-
m nt and enterprise here was equal to that in the United
Stites—capital greater, printers' labour cheaper, and that
increased appetite for intelligence would be produced
by increased freedom in our institutions, was it unrea-
sonable to suppose that the demand for raprrs might a,
length equal that in the United States ? But there, to
every ten thousand inhabitants there is a gaily paper, sell-
ing at the lowest ratio, 2,000 copies. Suppose the same
in Great Britain and Ireland, and fir a population of 24
millions, you would have 1440 millions of sheets rib-
fished yearly. Now reckoning that two-thirds of these
would be transmitted by post, the result would be four
millions sterling; add extra paper duty of 1,440,000, and
the total was 5,440,0001. And now suppose two-thirds
of the papers would not go through post ; he did not be
lime they would—suppose not one went through the
pie.'—suppose they did away with the postage altogether,
still the extra paper duty alone would be 1,410,0001., viz
inure than doub:e tl e whole of the two taxes he asked
them to repeal.—( He ir, hear.) So profitable might be
the diffusion of info'inatien. If knowledge was power. to
its possessor, its diffusion was wealth to a State. He
came to the last consideration—the method of transmission
through the post. In France the plan hail been so syste-
matically arranged, that the best way would be to borrow
their details. The main machinery was already formed ;
if extra expenses in distributing were acquired, the enor-
mous profits would cover those expenses. They might
s'e what those profits would be to Government, by ascer-
taining what they were to an individual speculator. The
average weight of the I irgest-sized daily paper is 881bs.
per 1000 copes ; say 901b'. Now, persons engaged in
transmitting luggage by the swiftest conveyance, compute
the charge at Id. per lb. every 100 miles ; this for 901bs.
would be 7s. 61., the price of carriage; but the 1000
newspapers at Id. each, would be 41. 3s. 441.—Cerainly
an ample profit to allow for the expense of distribution,
which leaves a clear profit, after all the expenses of car-
riage are paid, of 3/. 154 10:1. This was all he thought
it necassary to say sif the plan of a postage at present, for
his Resolution only went to appoint a Committee to consider
the propriety of adopting such a plan ; and farther details
were, therefore, at present unnecessary.—( Hear.) He had
been the more anxious to submit his calcul aim' on this
head to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, because at one
time it was understood that the Noble Lord contemplated
not the repeal, but the reduction of these t ixes. Now,
he would consent to a large reduction in the adver-
tisement duty (though he thought the total repeal most
desirable,) but he could conceive no reduction in the stamp
duty which would not leave in equal, if not greater force,
the obnoxious principle—the tempting premium and the
unjust prosecution. He had now nearly finished. He
had attempted to show that the stamp duty checked legi
timate knowledge (which was morality—:he morals of a
nation), but encouraged the diffusion of contraband igno-
rance; that the advertisement duty assisted our finances
only by striking at that very commerce from which our
finance, were drawn—that it crippb d at once our litera-
ture and our trade—that the time in which he called for
the repeal of these taxes was not unseasonable—that it
would be no just answer that the revenue could nit spare
their loss, and yet that he was provided with an equivalent
which would at least replace any financial deficiency.__
(Hear, hear.) Do not let us, said the Hon. Gent. in
conclusion, do not let us believe that there is anything in
the diiltision of information which is hostile to cur political
security ! At this moment, when throughout so many
nations we see the people at war with their institutions—
the world presents to us two great, may they be impressive
examples ! In Denmark, a despotism without discontent
—in America, a Republic without change. The cause is
the same n ith both, for in both the people are universally
educated. What consoles mankind for inequality in condi-
tion like the consciousness that there is no barrier at least
to equality in intelligence ? We have heard enough in
this House of the necessity of legislating for property and
intelligr nee—let us now feel the necessity of le-
gislating for poverty and ignorance ! At present we are
acquainted with the power part of our fellow-countrymen
only by their wrongs and murmurs—their misfortunes
and their crimes—let us at last open happier and wiser
channels of communication between them and us. We
!wee made a long and fruitless experiment of the gibbet and
the hulks—in 1825 we transported 283 persons, but so
vast, so rapid was our increase on this darling system of
legislation, that three years afterwards (in 1828) we tran-
ported as many as 2,419. During the last three years,
our gaols have been sufficiently filled ; we have seen enough
of the effects of human ignorance—we have shed sufficient
of human blood—is it not time to pause ?—is it not time
to consider whether, as Christians and as men, we have a
right to correct befere we attempt to instruct? Whether,
by sentencing to criminal penalties men ignorant both of
the nature of the offence they commit, and of the penal-
ties to which they are subject, we do not reduce for them
all legislation into one great ex post facto law? Is it not
time to consider whether the printer and his types may not
provide better for the peace and honour of a free State,
than the gaoler and the hangman ? Whether, in one word,
cheap knowledge may not be a better political agent than
costly punishments ? Deny my motion, you cannot deny
try facts—by these facts alone, and the attention which
they have received. I have made no inconsiderable progress
twards the attainment of that object I have so dearly at
heart.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Member then moved the
following resolutiotas :
" That it is expedient to repeal all taxes which impede the
diflbsion of knowledge.
" That it is peculiarly expedient at the present time to re-
peal the stamp duty on newspapers.
" That it is also peculiarly expedient to repeal, or to reduce,
the duty on advertisements.
" That is expedient, in order to meet the present state of
the Revenue, to appoint a Select Committee, to consider the
propriety of establishing a cheap postage on newspapers and
other publications."
Mr. O'CONNELL seconded the motion.

Lord ALTHORP complimented his Hon. Friend on the
ability which he had displayed and the manner in which
he had brought forward his facts, and oa the eloquence
with which he had enforced thetn,—(Cheers.) In a great
part of Lis observations he entirely concurred, and he
could not deny that the diffusion of knowledge would pro-
duce many of those beneficial effects to which his Hon.
Friend had alluded. SHI, though his lion. Friend
averred, that even if the revenue were to sutler by taking
pro•
yheosef
ithe measure; taxes,
wouldtsoro
)lent not alter
d place
poffriett h
admittedthatis opinion'it I.ovnoutlh e
although he was not in a position to deny some of the
the argument in a more questionable point of view. Now,
grounds brought forward by his Hon. Friend, yet he must
say that he considered many of them much exaggerated.
Ile was not going to answer his lion. Friend. He could
not say that the stamps upon newspapers ought not to be
reduced, for it would he in the recollection of tl.e House
that lie himself had entertained a similar proposition. But
under existing circumstances, and at the conclusion of a
Session, he was not justified in consenting to the investi-
gation of a question which was of the greatest possible
importance, and the result of which would affect the
whole population of the country. Though he ad-
mitted the fact, that the Stamp Duty did not prevent
the circulation of mischievous publications, yet he
thought it would require touch more consideration
than he had yet given the subject, to satisfy him that
the circulation of these bad publications was capable of
being counteracted by the circulation of cheap and useful
ones. He trusted that, on investigation, he might find it
to be the case; but he was not prepared at that time to
go into the investigation sought for by his tlion. Friend ;
theteby pledging himself and the House to adopt such a
proposition. With regard to what had been stated, of
the relative difference between the price of advertisements
in America and in this country—his lion. Friend stating
that in America the expense of a daily advertisement
throughout the year was 61. 18s., whilst in England it
would be 2021. I6l.—his Hon. Friend did not appear to
take into consideration that the duty formed but a small
portion of that sum, that the duty amounted to 601. only.
Bulwer made some remark which did not reach the
Gallery.] Well, ire might not be quite correct in the
amount, but that was about the sum, and his Hon. Friend,
therefore, exaggerated very much, when be calculated the
abolition of the duty would place the price of advertising
here on a level with that in America. Though he did
not deny that some advantages would accrue, he thought
those advantages had been very much exaggerated. His
Hon. Friend proposed to substitute a postage on publica-
tions. That was not going upon a proper principle, it
would be taxing the distant parts of the country in
order to relieve the metropolis. And as the metropolis
possessed greater facilities of acquiring knowledge
already than the country towns, he did not see how
such a tix accorded with the object which his Hon.
Friend professed in his motion. The present means of
conveyance would be by no means sufficient, not merely
for such an increase as his lion. Friend anticipated, but
even for any considerable increase. Much inconvenience
had, indeed, been felt already fry the Post Office whets any
extraordinary editions of newspapers bad been issued. On
these grounds, therefore, feeling very great doubt as to the
correctness of the conclusions to which his Hon. Friend
had come--thinking that such a queetion was batter in-
vestigated in the closet than in that House, and thinking
also that this was not the most fitting sitne, be could not
acquiesce in the proposition. The Hon. Gentleman had,
it appeared, altered his motion; had be persisted in mov-

n;.l for a Committee of the whole AMIV, he sh old have
hail no difficulty in negativing it ; but he had now drop-
ped that and moved his first proposition, that all taxes
\vbich impeded the diffusion of knowledge were inimical to
the best interests of the people. This was a proposition
which he could not deny ; hut as no practical good could
result from its affirmation, he should meet it by moving
tho previous questimn.
The SPEAKER then put the question, on which

Mr. O'CONNELL rose, but would not detain the
House after the speech of his Hon. Friend who brought
forrard this motion, hut he wished to reply to the obser-
vafpus of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the :id-
vertis ,ment duty. He said the repeal of that duty would
only strike off 601. out of the 2021. But did the Noble Lord
forget that in fixing the price of advertisements the news •
paper proprietor charged for interest upon his capital, and
did he also forget that the price was considerably aug-
mented by the monopoly which existed ? Even now dif-
ferent papers charged different prices, and if the monopoly
wtre to be abolished, snore competition would arise, and
the public would have advertisements cheaper. The re-
duction would operate two ways—directly by making it
cheaper to the amount of the tax t ken off, awl indirectly
by promoting competition. The argument of his Hon.
Friend on the subject of postage was unanswerable, par-
ticularly after the examp'e of France, where it had ben
tried with so much success. The effect which it would
have on public morals was most important. It was im-
possible to stop the sale of these cheap and obnoxious
publications by fiscal laws ; and the success with which
th. y were broken, the sympathy excited in favour of the
off nders, and the assistance which they received, only
g,,ve encouragement to others to pursue the same course.
Not less than forty persons had been captured by the police
within the last fortnight for selling these works. Law
could not check this ; the only effectual check would be
the diffusion of sound and cheap knowledge. He should
give his cordial support to the motion.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said the proposed
measure was undefined—it was too magnificent—it was
illimitable, and could not be reduced into practice. He
did not think the knowledge disseminated by the press
was of the most philosophic or useful character. The
press wis a very extensive and valuable right of property,
and he was not much disposed to see the capitals of the
owners of established newspapers so materially injured as
they would necessarily he, if the Honourable Member's
motion were carried. It would he quite ruinous to those
who had embarked a large capital in these, investments.
The substitution of the postage had been well exposed by
the Noble Lord (Althorp.) It would he taxing the rural
districts for the benefit of Cie metropolis. Ile did not
think, that if the Honourable Gentle tan's plan were car-
ried into effect, his object would be accomplished, and the
less the House interfered ill such matters, unless they
would come forward with some distinct legislative enact-
ment, the better.

Sir M. W. RIDLEY supported the previous question.
Mr. WARBURTON considered that his Hon. Friend
had nude out a prima facie case for a Select Committee.
Mr. STRUTT said that the working classes were look-
ing with intense interest and anxiety to the decision of
the House on this question. The law, as it now stood,
was injurious to the rich as well as to the poor, because it
kept ti e poor in ignorance of the principles of good go-
vernment, and he really could not avoid thinking there
was gross inconsistency in persisting in that system of ex-
elusion at the present morn. nt, when they were conferring
on the poorer classes so large an addition of political power.
He thought that it was the duty of the House to increase
the instruction of the poorer classes by every means in
their power ; and he hoped, therefore, although the Hon.
Member's present motion might be rejec,ed, that the sub-
ject would engage the attention of the House at an early
period of the ensuing Session.
Mr. ROBINSON concurred with the Hon. Member for
St. Ives (Mr. Bulwer) on the propriety and advantage of
the me inure he suggested ; but in his opinion, as the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had shown his rejection of
the proposition on the ground of mere expediency, it
would be better to leave it so, rather than by pressing the
matter to a division, to pledge the Houe, as it were, to a
positive rejection of the principle. Taxation of all kinds
most be remnode•lled in the new Parliament, and the taxes
on knowledge would then he placed on their proper basis.
Mr. JOHN CAMPBELL was favourable to the repeal
of the taxes on knowledge.
Mr. HUNT was anxious also for the removal of the
restrictions on knowledge, in order that that the news-
paper press might be stripped of its monopoly. If the
motion was pressed to a division, he should certainly vote
in favour of it.

After a few words from Colonel EvAlrs, which were not
heard in the gallery,

Mr. BULWER replied. He said he had faken several
notes in answer to remarks that had been made ; but in
consequence of the turn the debate had taken, he would
net detain the House with more than two or three obser-
vations. He was surprised that the Hon. and Learned
Member of Borouglibridge had been the only Member who
had opposed the motion, on the ground of injuring the ex-
isting papers. What ! he whose vivid eloquence had so
often thundered anathemas on the licentious, the revolu-
tionary Press, now wand up as i s advocate ! Impossible !
The Hon. and Learned Member could not be serious.
But, in fact, his motion would not injure the existing
Papers ; for it left them their capital and their ability ;
and he was quite sure the Times and Herald, to which
the Hon. and Learned Member alluded, would not suffer
in their pecuniary interests by the removal of the taxes, al-
though, from the industry and competition of other papers
their influence might certainly be diminished. In con-
curring (and bow could be avoid ii ?) with the unanimous
feeling of all his HMIs Friends, whom he knew to be us
cordially as himself attached to the principle of his motion
he wi.hed it to be distinctly understood that the
Nob e Lord agreed with the principles of his nation
—that the time only was in fault—that his facts had been
unanswered—and that it was universally allowed that his
motion bad, even in present defeat, or rather delay, con-
siderably advanced the principles he had advocated. For
the sake of the question itself, and that no vote might
appear against it on the ground of the season, which
hereafter would be given to the principle, lie y ielded to
the universal sense of the House and withdrew his motion,
pledging himself to it in the next Parliament, should it be
his fortune to have a seat in it.
The motion was then withdrawn.
BOROUGH OF STAINIFORD.

In amtver to aquestion from Mr. TENNYSON.
Lord John RUSSELL understood that flesh informa-
tion was on its way relative to the boundaries of Stamford ;
and, under such circumstances, the Government could
have no desire to press a decision with respect to that bo-
rough.
ADMISSION TO THE INNS OF COURT.

Mr. D. W. HARVEY, in moving for leave to bring in
a Bill to empower the Judges of the Court of King's Bench
to issue a mandamus to the Treasurers of the several Inns
of Court, and to frame ordinances to regulate the admission
..1 persons claiming to become .Members of such Inns or to
be caled to the Bar, said, that he should set out with two
principles, which he apprehended would be recognised
without hesitation. The one was that principle admitted
by writers of every party, that there was no wrong in this
country without a remedy; or in other words, that there
was no right without its vindication ; and the second was,
that no punishment, how ever small, could he inflicted, un-
less it was the result of a trial before the Peers of the ac-
cused, under the sanction of responsible judges, and regula-
lated by the known and accredited laws of the realm. One
of the most cheering consolations to the struggling people
of this country was that there was no station of life, how-
ever honourable, which was not open to the lowest mem-
ber of the community, who could render himself worthy
of filling it. With the exception of the crown, which,
for wise purposes, was placed beyond the reach of ambi-
tion, there was no post of profit or influence unattainable.
But of all the eminent stations of lite, those con-
nected with the law were above all the people's
patrimony.—(l-[ear.) In some of the public professions,
success might be unconnected with merit. The mitre
might fall on the heads of those whose only clains were
those of family or ancestry. The crosier might be placed
in unworthy hands by political intrigue. But there was
no instance of a man who bad risen to eminence without
having distinguished himself by the powers of his mind;
and in most cases without having vanquished obstacles of
the most serious kind. But would the House believe
what he was about to state, namely—that the bar of
England—that high road to profit and honour—was made
a monopoly? If any Hon Gentleman opposite were to
present himself to-morrow morning for admission to the
bar, he could nut demand that admission. He might
have the highest pretensions—he might have the most un-
equivocal certificates to his character, but he would be
ordered to call again ; and when be did call again, a
verbal communication would be made to him, that his ap•
plication was rejected. Why ? No reason was ever
assigned. On applying to the Benchers, stating the
severity of the case, and applying again for admission, he
would receive a letter from the Secretary, telling hint that
his letter had been read, and that his request could not be
complied with. Against that decisi in the individual had
no redress. \Vas that an imaginary case ? On the con-
trary, he would refer to a case already in the reports.
The Hop. Gentleman here detailed the case of Wooler
against the Benchers of Limeo'n's lon. Ile had thus made
out his proposition, that the bar of England was eloseu
to every candidate, unless be was a student of one of the

feer Inns to which he applied fur admission. All who
[new Mr. Wooler must be aware of his peculiar fitness
for the profession; and, indeed, during the case which hr
lad just mentioned, the Lord Chief Justice of the Court
ef King's Bench had acknowledged his ability. Rejected
by the Benchers, Mr. Wool,r, feclieg as an Englishman
his right, and as a man his opacity, applied to tle
Court of King's Bench for a mandamus to the Bench-
ers to assign their reason thr the rejection, and supported
the motion in a manner which abundantly testified his
quedfication. The lion. Gentleman here read from the
Term Reports the judgment given by the Judges seria-
tim ; . the substance of which was, that the Court had no
power to direct the Benchers to admit, and of course could
not compel them to assign the reasons of their refusal to
admit. Now, in what caees ought the power of that
House to be enforced ? In all cases in which a sulii•ct
was denied his rights, and had no other redress. Were
these Gattons and Old Sartuns of the profession to be per-
petuated ? Were institutions, merely because they were
old, to be respected ? Were the Benchers, however
learned and respectable, to stand at the gates of jurispru-
dence, and say who should enter and who not ? If they
were to hear such doctrine from a reforming Attorney-
General, at least let the people know the fact. Respecting
young men, of whom nothing was known, some inquiry
might he necessary ; but what could be said, when in
the case of a man like Horne Tooke, of whom it was
known Thurlow had trembled, the arm of power
ungenerously interposed, and on the plea that he had
been in orders forty years before, such a m in was declared
to be unfit for a barrister ? He, who of all men was the
best prepared for the profession, was not admitted into it
on the ground that clerical purity was an objection, and
that whoever had been once clothed with the ecclesias-
tical, must for ever forget the legal character. How could
any one know what selfish and ungenerous feelings had
been at work in the case of Mr. Wooler ? No one who
hid ever heard him speak, and had marked the quickness
and subtlety of his mind, but must acknowledge his pe-
culiar fitness for the profession ; and was such a man to be
stifled by a set of cloistered benchers ? Here was the citizen
of a free state denied the means of access to the highest
honours of that state. His (Mr. Harvey's) remedy was that
Mr. Wooler had sought in vain, and what the Judges told
• him it was not in their power to grant, a mandamus. Was
this any novel proposition? A writ of mandamus was as
ancient as the Constitution. There was no object so vast
as to elude its grasp, no interest so small as to apply in
vain for its protection. Let the House consider the injury
that might be done to the character of the rejected. If a
Bencher of Lincoln's Inn were present, be would ask why
Mr. Wooler hail been rejected ; but no answer would he
given. A malignant world was left to form malignant
conjectures on the subject. Although no express statement
was made, yet to those conjectures those who had inflicted
the injury might nod assent. Nor were those who were
engaged in the profession of the law wholly exempt front
mercenary feelings. It might leirpen that those wtio
were thus to pronounce on the future fortunes of an indi-
vidual, had children or dependents whom they wished to
provide for in the colonies, and were anxious not to in-
crease the number of those who might share in such ap-
pointments. He proposed two things. First, that when
a person applied to be admitted t student in any of the
four Inns of Court, and was refused, he should be entiled
to obtain a mandamus from the Court of King's Bench,
calling upon the Treasurer, or some other officer of
the Inn, to state the grounds of his rejection. Let him
him not be misunderstood. He did not me in that any per-
son applying for admission should lie admitted by complying
with the rules and ordinances of the institution. It must not
be supposed, however, that the Inns of Court were the pecu-
liar seats of learning. Nothing could be Si) ludicrous as the
course prescribed to students in them. The student must
remain on the books for five years ; and by keeping twelve
Terms, spread over those five years, and eating two dinners
a week in each Term, he was considered sufficiently
initiated in the laws of the country to be admitted a. a
Barrister, to argue points of law, and to give grave opi-
nions upon cases ? His object, he had observed, was two-
fold. The first he had already described. The second
was, that when a person who had become a student sub-
sequently asked to he cilled to the Bar, and was refused,
he should be entitled to apply for a mandamus calling on
the Benchers to state the reasons of his rejection. This
he considered the more important proposition of the two.
For if, in the first place, a young man was intercepted in
his progress, and refused admittance as a student, he
might direct his attention to other pursuits, and thank
God that he was saved from an association with persons of
such narrow minds. He would mention to the Heuse
case of hardship, to the accuracy of which he would
pledge himself, and all the details of which he was pre-
pared to prove. In 1813, an individual, then in practice
as a solicitor, applied to be admitted into the Inner
Temple. He was told that before be could be admitted
he must bring credentials from two respectable persons,
both as to his knowledge of law and as to his character.
Those credentials were produced, and he was admitted.
Until 1818 he took no further steps. But the circum-
stance of a portion of his fellow-citizens appreciating him
in a manner that rendered it desirable that he should
be called to the Bar, induced him to apply to be ad-
mitted to the second stage. He was told that he must
bind himself to conform to certain rules, and pay 1001.
Those things he did, and was allowed to enter upon the
severe study of eating dinners in Term time. At the end
of three years, having complied with every thing required
of him, he applied to be admitted as a barrister. And
here he legged to observe that the miserable monopolists
in question would not admit a man who was practising as
an attorney, probably because his knowledge of law
might render him an unpleasant competitor. He must,
therefore, forget all that knowledge. He must apply
to the Court of King's Bench two years before he wished
to he called to the bar to have his name craned from the
Rolls of that Court. The person in question did so
apply ; and that at a time when his pratice as an attorney
was worth net less than 2,500/. a year, with every pro-
spect of augmentation. Here, therefore, was a premium
paid of 5,000/. flaying in all things perfected his title,
he applied to be called, and was rejected. He complained
that there was nu appeal, except to the fifteen Judges as
visitors. The individual to whom he had alluded made
that appeal, and he was accordingly called on to make a
defence to an undefended action,—a mere question of
rrieum and tuum—on which a Jury had given a verdict ;
and the Judges confirmed the decree of the Benchers, and
refused to call him. But upon what grounds ?—on the
ground that there was no agreement—in favour of which
there really was stronger evidence than that upon which
Christianity itself rested. The Hon. Member next pro-
ceeded to contend that nobody who was unfit to be a bar-
rister should be a Member of that House ; and stated that
the individual in question would place his case in the
hands of any six Members, and it their unanimous de-
cision were not in his favour, he would be ready to vacate
his seat. He also related how the individual had been re-
stored to the Roll of Attorneys on application to the
King's Bench.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, as a Bencher, and now
Treasurer of Lincoln's-Inn, felt much indisposed to enter
upon the questions raised by the Hon. Member. He
stated he would stand on the question, if it WM proper or
not to introduce the innovation now proposed. He
did not deny that a mandamus was a great writ for the
benefit of the people, but he doubted whether the Hon.
Member bad stated the law correctly. He denied that no
right existed upon the part of any body to exclude a Mem-
ber, without establishing that there were charges against
him which admitted of a direct inquiry and a direct proof.
There were some points of the Hon. Member's speech too,
to which he found it very difficult to reply, but he thought
they rethertmade against his arguments. He admitted,
that perhaps there might be too much readiness on the
part of the Benchers and the Courts in admitting men as
students of the Inns of Court and attorneys, without due
inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) But this was not the question
they had to consider simply whether there was now any
improper exclusion of students in the first place ; and, se-
condly, whether these students should or should not he ad-
mitted to the bar, at the oiscretion of the Benchers, sub-
ject to an appeal to the Judges. Now there was an in-
quiry, and he contended there ought to be an inquiry, to
ascertain whether the applicant was fit to associate with
gentlemen—( Hear, hear, hear).—whether be held a fair
reputation in the world—and whether his character and
conversation were such as to afford good security that he
would conduct himself as a man of principle and honour
towards those who might intrust him with their affairs.
The Hon. Member contended that no man should be re-
might be,
c:p madeseeocciilet;
fused, except upon facts which
Member of
subject of a mandamus. But he apiiiietetaha,eri the
bosom of every Gentleman preasGent
._
oars hear.)
possible to agree to this
the subject of S
things which could not be made putt,
which
charge to be tried by a Jury, w • should, nevertheless,
moreover, that the right enjoyed by the
Nobody could be blind to trremPfaCstittmhi'l; there were many
Benchers bad been exercised with singular wildness. It
was difficult to find even three cases. And as to the mo-
tives attributed to the Benchers, when it was said they
incapacitate
eGa peanctilteamteena. maFnroirmowt thee"Hmoinn.g
excluded a man on account of his great abilities, because
they leered his competition with their sons and nephews,
it was really too ridiculous. He could not, indeed, trust
himself with :speaking on this subject, lest he might WA
language which he could nut choose bat regret. fh,
right of exclusion too was enjoyed by all profeesiuns as well
t

y the lakv ; the Crmlieers—at the Univer ities--the
dical profession—the clerical. The Bishop might re-
-1,1,c to ordain, and he was responsible to none 'or his de-
ci ion ; he hid only to st rte that he had made the inquiry
an I was sa.ti•fied. He was not called upon to state the
fic•s on which he had decided. In alluding to the case of
Mr. Wooler, he stated that it was in kindness the
Matchers had refused to admit him a student ; had they
'home so, and suffered him to waste his five years, and then
ref use to call him to the B tr, he would have had just cause
complaint. Believing that there were circumstances
w'iich rendered it improper to call him, the Benchers were
ri _ht in declaring their objection at once. The other ease
—that of the Hon. Member himself—was forced upon
him (the Attorney-General) by the Hon. Gentleman's
making it the chief ground for calling fin- the Bill he pro-
premed: He would, therefore, advert to it, although unveil-
liegly, hut would first rematk, that, in speaking of the case
imf Mr. Wooler, the Hon. Member had neglected to state
that Mr. W. was known as the author of a publication
coiled the _Black Dwarf, which the general majority of the
Watchers sincerely believed to be influnmatory and abo-
minable. The Hon. Member had said he wished there
wis a Bencher of Lincoln's-inn present. He (the Attor-
ney-General) was a Bencher, and he was present on the
occasion alluded to by the Hon. Member. 'Mr. Wooler
had produced a high degree of excitement by his political
W it;ngs, and it was just after he had done so, and while
tl.at excitement existed, that he wanted to be called to the
Btr ; and considering that he had, in his writings, as-
serted doctrines that many men thought most dangerous
to the peace and h tppiness of society, it was very possible
it night be considered by such persons that he was not a
fit man to be admitted into an honourable profession, and
to associate with the members of the Bar. Still, how-
ever, though the writings of Mr. Wooler, in a political
publication, had been such as to exclude him, that fact,
in that particular case, must not be confounded with any
supposed rule, that the publication of political writings
would he a cause of rejection. Whether the opinion was
we I founded or not, be would not say ; but he could as-
sure them that the opinion was sincerely entertained by
the majority of those who rejected Mr. Wooler's applica-
tion, that he had published a tnost atrocious lit,el. If the
mandamus had issued, the Benchers would have been jus-
tified in making that return, and the Court could hardly
have failed to admit its validity. He came now to the
other else; and he must say, though he was compelled
to observe upon it, he did so with great pain. In that
case, an action of slander had been brought by the indi-
vi luol who bad been refused admission to the Bar, against
the Benchers of the Inner Temple. The subject of the
action was a statement that the individual in question,
being himself au attorney, bad stolen a paper from
another attorney's office. The attorney who had made
the statement justified it, and pleaded that it was
true, the c use was tried, and the Jury found that
tie defendant had made out his plea, and that the
charge was true. It was said, that another point re-
ferred to was a mere question of meum and tuum.
Why, that question involved the possession of all the gro-
pe: ty in the country ; nay more—it involved the question,
are you, or are you not an honest man ?" That ques-
tion was tried in an action upon a contract, where the point
was-whether an individual haul sold property for a client,
and got a profit on it himself; or whether he had, in the
first instance, purchased the property, and afterwards re-
sold it, and so was fairly entitled to the profit he had made.
It was said that that was a mere undefined case of contract.
It might be so. He would not speak positively about it;
but his impression was, that it had been afterwards dis-
cussed on a motion for a new trial. Of this, however, he
was certain, that time whole matter had been brought before
the Judges, who hail confirmed the decision of the Benchers.
He (the Attorney-General) and the present Lord Chan-
cellor, had been charged with duty of defending that
individual. He assured the House that they did their best
in his defence, and had spoken with a strong disposition to
persuade themselves that he was wrongly charged, and
that even if the charge had some foundation, he might
afterwards become a respectable member of society. He
kemew that it was now asserted that the true ri ason for
the rejection was the attack made by that individual on
the practice of the Exchequer. That was not the case.
He himself (the Attorney-General) had assisted in that
House in making that attack, and the change that
took place in consequence was almost the only legal Re-
form he remembered that haul been the consequence of a
public complaint. He could not for a moment entertain
the belief that the Benchers or the Judges had been in the
least degree actuated in their conduct by the motive thus
attributed to them. He objected to this motion, because
it was unnecessary, since there must be a power of in-
qeiry. Time power now in existence had always been ex-
ercised in the most lenient and indulgent manner; and be
thought the House ought not to interfere, since, though it
liad existed so long, so few complaints had been made
against it, and there was so mach reason to believe that it
bad generally been exercised with moderation towards in-
dividuals, and with benefit to the public. He asserted
that the free access to the Bar was not closed by these
111,24118 ; that it was open to all the world ; that any man
might enter at any one of the Inns of Court; and that the
o dy thing demanded of h.m was, that he should possess a
fair character as his title to admission.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, that they ought not to allow
any body of men the power of capriciously disposing of
the fortunes of individuals. There was one superstition
sill remaining in England—it was the veneration for the
Judges. How it existed he knew not, for all English his-
tory showed their characters to Lave been most deeply
stained. Who were they that justified the levying of ship
money, and who were they th it sacrificed the lives of
numbers of innocent men on the accusation of Titus
Oates? In both cites the Judges. It was they who put
into the hands of that ruffian the dagger of the law to
assassinate men by charging them with impossible crimes,
end the Attorney- General of that day praised th,m as
loudly as did the Attorney-General of this. For what
was it that we were indebted to the Judges of this day ?
Iliad Lord Tenterden offered them an admirable specimen
of a firm supporter of civil and religious freedom, or had
he shown himself anxious to put an end to the corruption
and bribery—aye, and the perjury—that prevailed at elec-
tions by reforming the House of Gammons? The Hon.
Aletnber might be defeated here, and now, but the subject
would ulti'n itely triumph, and the Legislature would de-
clare that there should no longer be a tribunal which, like
the Inquisition, conducted its investigations in darkness,
and, like it, condemned a man unheard. Why, what had not
these secret tribunals attempted? At one time they had
p .ssed an order that Gentlemen who had reported
debates in Parliament should not be admitted to the
Bar ; and but for the eloquent exertions of a man
whose honourable labours had enrolled his name
in the annals of humanity, but for Mr. Stephen's
speech, in the cave of Mr. Farquharson, that rule would
probably not have been put an end to. But while the
system remain d as it was, that rule might be renewed to-
morrow. Where was the necessity for this sort of caution
with regard to the bar ? It was not employed with regard
to attorneys, who really possessed more of the confidence
of the public; and it could not protect the publics fur
unless a barrister enjoyed those advantaged' that would
'sin him the confidence of the public, he would not be
employed by them. The rules were not the same in this
ind in the sister country, for in Ireland an attorney might
practise us an attorney till the day before he was called to
the bar, wbile bete he must give up bit practice five
years before he was called to the bar. But then it wto
said that, but fur these regulations, men might las admitted
who were not fit to associate with the members of the bar.
The bar did not need that protect;on—they could protect
themselves ; they would not associate with a man merely'
because he wore a bar wig and a bar gown, and the j°-
vestigation into his fitness was only a pretence—it was
only made just where it ought not. It was admitted that
Mr. Woofer was a min of respectability_that be was
mail of talant ; yet he was rejected by a set of gentlemen
will had assembled in a private parlour, because tiny
thought he had been guilty of publishing a political libel.
Fie was afterwards tried hsfore a jury for that libel, alia •
acquitted. —( Hear.) That was monstrous. That case alone
was sufficient to show that this motion ought to be granted'
Surely the law of libel was strong enough ; yet the j°l
had acquitted Mr. Wool, r, but the Benchers found hind
4uilry ; and it was astonishing to hear a patriotic, re,
forming Attorney-General say, that such a system oug";
to go on. But far this shameful rejection, Mr. Wool'
might now have been a successful lawyer, occupying a die,
tinguished scat in that House. It was to be hoped t4,s,
the House would say the system ought to he abolishe° '
that a in ,nriamus in every such case be granted
that the return to the niandannia should state the cireoir;
stances fully, and should be traversable; so th it it rived
iie brought helms , who would again acquit, as '.,
the case Ol Mr. Woofer, the individual thus iniiiiroperl
;,
ch irged.—(llear.) The evil of this country wa.,
the Judges had an undefined power, over everything t"-
was law.
Mr. J. CAMPBELL contended that the power
sessed by the Benchers was necessary for the well being
the Bar ; and if the Benchers misconducted thetnseirttele
there was an appeal to the Judges, who had done sv°o
good in disentangling the property of the country.
respect to the case of Mr. Wooler, if it had been correttb,
stated by the Eton. Member for Colchester, he thong •
chat the Benchers had decided improperly.
Mr. HUNT complained of the monopoly of the Beningi
is, and supported the motion. For instance, 014'1 to
lie two Baronets who represented Westminster, wishe"