The Sun.
London, England, 1835-07-14 00:00:00

(COAL MAR?
Per Ton. -. a. d
Adair's.
Bradley Main
Stanhop, Railway
Holvezell lB (l!
Ditto Reins
Ditto Splint
Ord's Redhugh pi d
Pontcn, Windsor l7 6
Russell's High Main
Tanfield
Willington l9 6
Wyl am
Walls End Bell, Robson .k Co lB 6
Wills End Carr and C.
Walls End Killiinworth
Ships arrived since

KEL—July 13.
• Per Ton. s. (1.
Walls End Pearv!h l6 6
Walls'End Perkins IS 9
Wal;s End !leant) - 2l 0
Walls En.t Larnbt.,n
Walls En.l Eussel's He ton 2l 0
Walls End Stewart s
Walls End Tees
Wa is End WelLngton . l7 9
Walls Ens! West lietton 10 6
Howard's Netherton Main 16 6
Holnie's Main l6 6
Stone Coal Milord Vein 2ti 0
Merthyr
Llatwlly
--ztlkstone Wilson „.......„ l7 0
last market day, 70

MEETINGS OF CREDITORS AT THE COUR'',
BASINGHALL-STREET, TO-MORROW. •

Mom the London Gazette.) It M.
J. Watton, surgeon, Upper Bedford. ace 1 at 12
G. SteatiberB, merchant, Coleman..strect
13. White, printer, Reading, Berkshire
J. Goodwin, innkeeper, Battle, SusseX

NEWSPAPER STAMP DUTIES.-It is 110 W Openly
announced that a daily Morning Paper is to be produced on
unstamped paper, and it is also rumoured that two Evening
Journals are about to be brought out 'in the same manner.
This is only as it should be. So long as the unstamped
press
confined itself to weekly publication, the conductors of the
daily Papers were content to remain passive observers,--but‘
now that their own interest is invaded, we find them clamoring
for protection. So much the better, because the question be-.
tween the Press and the Government must be the wore speedily
brought to issue. It will be seen whether the conductors of the,
weekly Press have complained with or without cause, during the
last two years, that they have been largely contributing to the
Revenue,whilst the Government, who were in the receipt of that
revenue, neglecting the performance of its bounden duty, per-
mitted the law to be evaded with impunity, and allowed the
proprietors of the weekly stamped Press to sustain an un-
equal rivalry with the contraband trader. What do we demand
from the Government to which we arc not fairly entitled ? We
don't press for prosecutions or for penalties against the pr I-
prietors or vendors of unstamped papers. No such thing t
would be no benefit to us that A. B. or C. D., the publisher
or the vendor, should be fined or confined for offending against
the law. But so long as that law is in existence, we have a
right to call upon the Government to enforce its provisions.
If there be no means, by virtue of this law, to afford protection
to the fair trader, it should be repealed altogether. To this
proposition, we understand, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
has given a decided negative. Be it so. Our course is clear.
Should we, or any other journalist, having large property. at
stake, be compelled to evade a law which is to us only an im-
plement of oppression—an unjust, because an unequal and in-
operative, law—inoperative for any beneficial purpose—should
we be induced to print on unstamped paper, we ask, could the
King's Attorney-General, on behalf of the Stamp-office,
upon us for penalties, with anything like-the semblance of
justice ? The Chancellor of the Exchequer may refuse to take
Or the duty, bui we may refuse to pay it ; and in that refusal
we wotild.ba rally justi.;ed, when Abe til4t
duty is operative only against those who comply with its pro-
visions.—Sunday :Ones. call