The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-17 00:00:00

THE INDIA BENCH.

- --- ---
Mr. SADLEIR gave notice that on this day fortnight
he would make a motion with respect to the exclusion of
members of the Irish bar from the judicial bench in India.

INCOME-TAX.
Colonel DUNNE moved for certain returns of income-
tax arising from securities and possessions in Ireland,
which were agreed to.
MILITARY KNIGHTS OF WINDSOR.
Colonel SALWEY gave notice that on this day fort-
night he would move the appointment of a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the claims of the Military Knights
of Windsor.

POOR-LAW.
Mr. HATCHELL stated, in reply to a question from
Colonel Blacken, that the Poor-law Commissioners,
had no power to award salaries to assistant poor-law
guardians, nor had they any power to pay them out of
the rates. They were in the position of ex officio or re-
presentative guardians, and were not entit'ed to any
salary.
TAXES ON KNOWLEDGE.

Mr. LUSHINGTON presented a petition from print-
ers and others in London and Westminster, in favour of
Mr. M. Gibson's motion for a repeal of the taxes on
paper and advertisements, and for the repeal of the
newspaper stamp duty.
Mr. LABOUCHERE presented a petition from
Exeter to the same effect.
Mr. COBDEN presented similar petitions from Scar-
borough and several places in Lincolnshire.
Mr. M. GIBSON rose, after presenting several peti-
tions to the same effect from the metropolis and other
parts of the country, to move the following resolutions:—
Whereas all taxes which directly impede the diffusion of
knowledge are highly injurious to the public interests,
and are most impolitic sources of revenue, this House is
of opinion, Ist, Thai such financial arrangements ought to
be made as will enable Parliament to repeal the excise
duty on paper; 2d, that it is expedient to abolish the
stamp duties now payable on newspapers in Great Bri-
tain and Ireland; 3d, that it is expedient to abolish the
toaabeo upon
at
duties now payable on advertisements in Great Bri-
tain and
Ireland; 4th, and that the customs
rtiog r
right
ehte w
a make
enteringk duty on foreign books ought to be repealed.
Be
ft,eowts toe
preliminary
eliitr meritstoin
atorbfyethe b
observations,
rsvetai. ct
iuholnea
sr
, thought i resolu-
tionsn
it
or-
der to explain to the House why he had thought it con-
sistent with his views to make this motion in its pre-
sent firm of separate resolutions; also to explain to the
House the way in which he wished the motion to be put,
and also to explain how he could reconcile it with his

sense of public duty to move for a rather large reduction
of taxation after the financial arrangements of the year
has been concluded. With regard to the last of these
points, he wished to say, that if a Member of Parliament
were to wait previous to asking the House to express an
opinion upon the policy of particular taxes until there
was a clear surplus, and no way pointed out of applying
that surplus, he very much doubted whether he would
ever have an opportunity of submitting such a motion to
the House.—(Hear.) Why, at all times Government
managed to spend as mach as it could get.—(A laugh.)
The expenditure was always up to the revenue, and if
they were to wait until there was a surplus before
making a motion on the policy of taxation, an independent
Member would scarcely have as opportunity presented
to him for the purpose. Now, in 1842, the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth entered on power
with a large deficiency, but that did not deter him from
dealing with taxation as a matter of policy, or from
making such arrangements as enabled him to repeal
taxes, without injuring the revenue, which rested
upon the springs of industry and retarded the
operations of trade and manufactures.—(dear, hear.)
And, therefore, he said as a matter of priuciple they
were entitled, without reference to the mere fact of there
being a surplus, to raise the question of taxation as part
of the national policy with as much right as if they
were seeking the opinion of the House as to any
particular contemplated tax.—(Hear, hear.) He did not
ask any gentleman to do anything rash, or to interfere
indiscriminately with the public finances. It had been
hinted that a new school of repudiation was springing
up amongst them, but he was not of that school; he only
desired the House to consider whether they could not
raise the revenue of the country in such a way as should
be likely the least to depress any important branch
of trade or manufactures.—(Hoar, hear, and cheers.)
He did not wish Hon. Members to adopt all the resolu-
tions if they could not do so consistently with their
own opinions; they would be put separately, and those
who could not vote fur the repeal of the duty on paper
might feel at liberty to support the resolution for the
repeal of the newspaper stamp duty.—(Hear, hear.)
Now, the resolution which stood first had reference to
the duty on paper, which, when they deducted the duty
paid on the paper consumed in the offices of the
State, yielded something like 750,0001. per annum.
If they considered the duty on paper simply in refe-
rence to its effects on an important manufacture, ho
thought they would find a convincing case for taking its
review into an early consideration. Without going into
the more immediate object of his motion, namely, the
effect of this duty in impeding the diffusion of know-
ledge, he would call the attention of the House to its
effect on the paper manufacture itself, upon the "em-
ployment of labour, and upon some other considerations
of a commercial character not immediately connected
with the diffusion of knowledge. Now, ho held it to be
fatal to the tax, if they could not protect by any device
the honest trader against the fraudulent cue. What a
Monstrous thing it was, if true, that the Excise had always
failed to protect to any considerable extent the honest
manufacturer from those that evaded the duty, that they
should continue a tax of this description. That was an
argument of itself fatal to the tax. A list was pub-
fished last year of the number of manufacturers who
had been fined, and some of them imprisoned, by the
Excise for carrying on a systematic violation of the Ex-
cise-laws. But, in order to protect the honest manufac-
turer from the fraudulent one, what did they do ?
They had recourse to a system of vexatious inter •
ference, and of constant prying and meddling
with all the affairs of the manufacturer of
paper; and they were obliged to do this to an extent that
ho
.hardly thought was true of any country, even of
Algiers. Now with regard to the employment of
labour, and he would just ask any of the Gentlemen
opposite, interested as they were in the employment of
labour in the rural districts, t) consider how
materially the prosperity of the paper manu-
facturer was connected with the full employ-
ment of labour in many of the agricultural
districts. The manufacture of paper was perhaps the
only rural manufacture which they had. The paper -mills
were spread over the whole country. They Iv, re fund
perhaps in almost every county in the United Kingdom.
They employed a large amount of labour, and if it was
the tendency, as he believed it was, of these laws to lessen
the number of paper manufacturers, asd to limit the
production of paper, then he said, in producing those
results, it lessened the employment of labour in those rural
districts and increased the rates therein, and it became a
legitimate question with Gentlemen opposite how far they
would interest themselves in the abolition of those duties.
There was no article of an equal value which employed
a larger number of labourers than the manufacture of
paper. Mr. Crompton, a gentleman of great experience
in these matters, had made a calculation that a reduc-
tion in the duty would afford employment to
no less than forty thousand persons, men,
women, and clildren, in London alone. That gentleman
also stated that a newspaper which purchased stamps to
the amount of 3,0001. gave employment to 15,000/. worth
of labour; and what more important consideration could
there be than this, especially at a time like the present,
when multitudes were leaving their country for want of
employment? He was speaking in presence of those who
could correct him if he were wrong, that all our colonies
were getting their paper from France and Germany
in preference to this country. where the manufacturers
could not supply paper at a sufficiently cheap price.
It was true that they were allowed a drawback, but that
was more than overbalanced by the extortions of the
Excise. The drawbacks he believed continued the same,
they appeared to bo stationary matters.—(e. laugh.) But
he would now take the effects of this taxation
in its most important shape, that of preventing the diffu-
sion of useful knowledge among the people. Ile could
not state this in stronger terms than it bad been stated
by Messrs. Chambers, of Edinburgh. In a petition pre-
sented by them to the House, they Meted that
they had been prevented by no other cause
than these duties from continuing various periodi-
cal works calculated to diffuse useful knowledge among
the people. They had also been obliged to abandon a
publication which had a circulation of 80,000 weekly by
the mere consideration of the Excise duties. The '
duties alone would have been sufficient to have
ensured them a considerable profit. The paper
formed the leading item in the expences.
But he had another statement of a similar nature from
Mr. Charles Knight. He supposed they had seen a very
able pamphlet which had issued from tho pen of that
gentleman, entitled "The Struggles of a Book against
Excessive Taxation," in which he gave a history of the
struggles of the Penny Cyclopedia against the fatal
effects of the heavy ditty on paper. What did
they think this little book—(Laughter)—which was in-
tended exclusively for the working and poorer classes,
contributed to the revenue of the country? It paid in
hard cash for paper duty no less a sum than 16,5001.—
(Hear, hear.) What an enormous sum was this to
exact as a fine from a man before he was at
liberty to spread through this vast country the
inestimable blessings of cheap literature, which, in the
words of Sir Henry Parnell, n formed the raw material
of all social improvement among the great masses of the
working people of this country." In fact the fiscal re-
strictions on paper did far more to hinder education than
the educational grants of the Government did to promote
it. He would quote another fact from the pamphlet
of Mr. Knight. He stated that in the course of twenty
years he had paid 80,000/, for copyrights and literary
labour, but before he could give the world the benefit of
that purchase he was compelled to pay the Government
as much as 50,000/. for the duty on paper. Here
was - a tax on capital, here was a pressure on
the industry cf a talented man,' which had no
parallel in any tariff or excise duty; bur he would take
another weapon. The proprietor of the Poor Man's
Guardian told him that before he ra;cl for labour of
any kind he was obliged to pay the Excise-office
100,000/. per annum. And it was absurd to say
that the duty thus imposed could be got back from
the consumer, for the poorer classes were unable
to give any but a very small sum for a publication, and
unless a proprietor sold a very large number of copies
his speculation would not succeed. The publishers of
more expensive works suffered in the same ratio. If a per-
son published a work, and had a thousand copies printed,
he bad to pay duty upon all, although he might only sell
100 or 200, and the remainder found their way to the
butterman or cheesemonger. The Commissioners of
Excise had inquired into the subject, and they
was in-
flictedi they saidt
was their opinion that " a great injustm
upon the publisher of a book
.by the making
him pay duty on a greater number of copies than he sold.
He had stated why he thought the duty on paper pecu-
liarly prejudicial to the progress of knowledge, while a
great many objections might be urged against it upon
indeed
had ground that it obstructed trade. Numerous
had been the Committees which had recommended its
abolition on that ground, while the Excise Commission
had contemplated its repeal, if it did not recommend its
repeal.—(Rear, hear.) Had the
Right
Hon. Baronet
the Member for Tamworth remained in office it would
have been repealed long since. That Right Hon.
Baronet abolished the duty on leather and glass, and it
was quite evident that he contemplated paper next.
With these observations he would ask the House to adopt
this resolution as an expression of its opi▪
nion that the
paper duty ought not to form one of the perpetual
sources of raising the public revenue. He came now
to the next resolution, namely the one relating
to the stamp on newspapers. Ile believed he might be
permitted to consider this not entirely as a question of
revenue. He remembered, when this questi▪
on was before
the Parliament some years ago, the Noble Lord then at
the head of the Government expressed a hope that no
man would think him capable for a moment of putting
this question upon so narrow a foundation as that'
of revenue. The Noble Lord viewed it simply in
reference to its effect upon the habits and feelings of the
people, and it was in that spirit he proposed to
deal with it now. Now, the newspaper stamp
paid something like 350,000/. per annum to
the Exchequer. Some Gentleman might fancy
that newspapers enjoyed some postal privileges, and he
begged to tell those Gentlemen that ho proposed to
leave that part of the matter just as it stood
now. Those who wanted to send their paper by
post should be compelled still to pay the penny stamp,
but let not those who did not use the post-office be
compelled to pay with those who did. This was no new
principle, for it had already been adopted by the
House, and he held in his hand a return which
showed that there were fifty-three periodicals published
in London which had stamped editions for those
who wished to forward them by post, and
unstamped ones for those who did not.—(Hear, hear.)
He would take the case of Punch, the Atheneum, or the
Builder, and he would ask if there was any reason, if they
were allowed to be unstamped, when they did not go by
post, why they should not allow the Daily News to be un-
stamped when it did not go by post? Perhaps the House
would say these were not newspapers. Teen he wanted
to know what right they had to allow them to
go by post if they were not newspapers ?
If that system was so anomalous with respect to the
postage part of it, he did not think they could maintain
it.' He thought the thing must break down. It had gone
to such au extent that he believed if he were to stamp a