The Sun.
London, England, 1832-11-27 00:00:00

THE TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE.

It will hardly he believed that Ministers have not nerve
eaouch to propose the abolNon of the infamous re‘trie-
tions by which the diffu,ion of sound political knowledge
in this country is prevented. It will hardly he credited,
that Lord Althorp has doubts, not only of the propriety
of abolishing, or at least materially reducing the taxes on
knowledge, but also as to whether the public desire the
abolition. Now a better man than Lord Althorp does not
exist ; but we must take leave to say that he is not always
a wise one; and, with respect to the question before us,
i
we do not hesitate to assert that he has suffered himself
to be grossly imposed upon by two or three great mono-
polists of the London press, who im gins that it would
not be so easy for them to make a profit of 20,0001. per
annum if the trade were thrown open. It is a pity that
so honest and well-meaning a min as Lord Althorp
sshoutil he made the dupe of such deception. He ought to
reflect that with his consent, or without his consent, a
Reformed Parliament will m!ke the abolition of the taxes
on knowledge their first step; and as he cannot expect to
retain the office which he now holds much longer, as he
will soon be called to the Upper House, he should endea-
vour to leave it with honourable eclat.
Lord Althorp should bear in mind three important
facts—first, that even in this reading country there is not
one newspaper to sixty persons, whilst in America there is
one to twenty; secondly, that in proportion as news-
papers circulate, there is increase of knowledge and di-
notion of crime ; and thirdly, that by the enormous duty
on newspapers, and on the advertisements which they
contain, the publicity necessary for commerce and trade
is subject to a tax injuri,us to the interests of both.
Having these facts before him—and that they are facts,
we will show in our next by statistical details—he ought
not to pay the slightest degree of attention to the repre-
sentations of monopolists connected with the public press,
who although they can be liberal enough when the in-
terests of others are concerned, are selfish and unjust
when there is a question raised affecting their own gains.
It has been asserted, with a view to deter the Govern-
ment from any measure calculated to throw open the news-
parr trade, that a reduction of the taxes on knowledge
would be an encouragement to needy, criminal, and sedi-
tious men to deluge the country with their trash. This,
is absurd : it would be as expensive to carry on a news-
paper without tax as with it. All that can be said is that
as there would be a larger sale for papers than there is
110 w,
if the taxes were to be abolished or materially le-
&iced, enterprising men, of intellectual resources, who are
now in the back ground, would come into the field. This
would be a public benefit, and as a security against ti e
deluge of radicalism, which Ministers appear t 4 dread,
they might retain the gagging Acts for a time—we mean
the late
againstlatvrequirbinigispbhoenmdsyarainddoastleidsitiniont.he
LCeoturttheotfu E, xhcoliwe:
ci
r, repeal impost upon newspapers, and
how-
ever,
will soon
,onthe grinding
findtha t things
will
go on well without
the necessity of any gagging at all.
We will just tell Lord Althorp what it costs to produce
a newspaper, independently of the paper and stamp. The
weekly expense of a daily newspaper is from 2001. to

350/. ; that of an evening pipet from 100/. to 140/. ; of
a weekly paper from 251. to 501 Our own paper costs
the latter sum before we can throw off a single copy. Re.,
(hieing the taxation will not reduce this expense, and con-
sequently, there is no reason to dread the degradation of
the press. The difference would be in an increased sale ;
where one man reads newspapers now, ten at least would
read if the taxes are taken off, and in that proportion
I would society at large be benefited and improved.—
Merle's Literary Register.