The Sun.
London, England, 1857-02-26 00:00:00

The sixth annual meeting of the Association for
Promoting the Repeal of the Taxes on Knowledge
was held yesterday evening at- St. Martin's-hall.
There. was a very large atendance both in the body
of the hall and on the platform.
Sir J. PAXTON, M. P., baying taken the chair,
opened the proceedings by observing that previous
to the assembling of Parliament he had hoped that
the meeting that eight would only have been a for-
mal one, to congratulate themselves on the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer having promised to repeal
thet most odious of all taxes, the tax on paper.
But he grieved t 3 say that he feared from what had
transpired that this would not be their last meet-
ing on the subject, the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer itt his financial statement having held
out no hope that the paper tax would be repealed.
Oss the contrary, judging from the whole tenour
of his speech, and from what he said in relation to
it, one Was induced to believe that the right hon.
gentleman was rather in favour of the tax than
otherwise ; for what did he say ? After stating
that the tax divided itself into three heads—namely,
a tax on, paper for printing, on paper for wr;ting,
and on paper for packaer s, he added that, while he
considered the duty rather heavy on the third de-
scription of paper, he thouelet the tax an the other
two deseripfons could not be said to be a tax on
knowledge, and in his opinion paper itself was a
fair subject for taxation. It was therefore quite
evident that the present Chancellor of the Exche-
quer was determined to retain the tax, at all events
for the present. Had Mr. Gladstone remained in
power he thought that right hon. gentleman would
have repealed the tax before now. In 1853 Mr.
Gladstone denounced the paper duty, and said he
should be delighted to see the day when it could be
repealed. Mr. Disraeli, • too, in 1851, when he
was not in power, spoke strongly against the tax ;
but in 1852, when he came into office, he somewhat
altered his tone. A deputation from the society
waited upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer some
little time since; when that 'tilt hon. gentleman
made certain inquiries andidrew certain deductions,
which evidently showed that he possessed a very
slight acquaintance with the subject. He asked
the deputation whether they kelieved if the duty
on paper were remitted there would be a percep-
tible change in the price of books, and on being
told there would, he asked to what extent, and
Alderman Baldwin stated that the duty enhanced
the price on the first books used at schools 30 per
cent. ; and observed that the tax fell on the manu-
facturer in the first instance, and that he did ndr
get any profit on the duty paid. Upon the; the
right hon. gentleman asked whether Mr. Baldwin
thought the manufacturer ought to make a profit
on the duty be paid ? This was rather a strange
question for a Chancellor of the Exchequer to put to
a manufacturer. Why, it had been shown over and
over again that this tax in many instances amounted
to 100 cent. on the cost of the article ; if, there-
fore, the manufacturer had to pay 100 per cent. duty
that was as much a charge upon bis paper before it
got into the market as the gas-on hs premises, or
any other articleiuvolved in the cost of productiou.
But the evil did not stop there, for there must be
a profit realised by each pe son through whose
hands the paper paused from the manufacturer to
the consumer, and thus the tax was increased by
means of these several charges of profit to perhaps
200 per cent. By way of showing how beneficially
the repeal of an Excise duty operated, the hon.
chairman referred to the manufacture of glass, in
which great improvements had been made since the
removal of the Excise restrictions, and stated that
the glass for the original Crystal Palace cost
13,5001., whereas if the duty had remained un-
repealed the cost would have been 54,0001. If,
therefore, the tax on glass had continued the people
would never have had a Crystal Palace. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer bad gone back to an
old-exploded school for his system of taxation, and
had raked up a gentleman who had wrote nearly a
century ago—Mr. Arthur Young—who said that
the best tax that could be imposed was a little tax
upon a great number of things. But after what
they had seen done by. Sir R. Peel, be thought the
fact that a Chancellor of the Exchequer of the pre-
sent day should lay down such an exploded doc-
trine was no proof that they were improving and
becoming a more enlightened governing nation.
(Cheers.) After pointing out the great mischief
which Excise restrictions wrought, by checking all
mprovement the manufacture f the article sub-
ject to duty, the chairman concluded by observing
that as long as a tax on paper remained it was idle
and a delusion upon the public for gentlemen who
advocated the education of the people and the in-
sti-nt'on of reformatories to endeavour to effect
their objects. It could not be done without first
removing that most objectionable tax. (Cheers.)
Dr. Errs then came forward, and moved the fol-
lowing resolution
"That the Excise on !paper limits its supply and en-
hances its Iprice, is ruinous to the small manufacturer,
restricts the field for the employment of capital and labour,
and thus tends to prcdrice pauperism and crime • and that
the interest of the country imperatively demands that a
less injurious mode of ra:sine money be resorted to than a
tax on so important a manufacture."
The present paper duty was lid. per lb., and 5
per cent. additional. The tax, if on books, was
most unfair to anthers, and if on cheap publications,
parlicu'arly on newspapers, it was most injurious
to the public. If they took a daily paper weighing
14 to the pound, supposing its circulation to be
20,000, that would give 6,260,000 copies a year,
equal to 447,1421 h , or as nearly as possible 202
ous, which, at 141. 14s. per ton,' gave an annual
tax of 2,9401. It was said that the penny papers
were not worth more than a penny ; but who made
them not worth more than a penny? If that
2,9401. was left in the hands of the proprietors they
could empl,,y men of greater ability on their papers.
The tax was an interference with the progress of
society, audit materially retarded the manufacture.
When the duty was reduced from 3d. to lid. a
grew, increase in the manufacture of paper took
place ; but that was in some decree checked by the
ad titional tax of 3-10ths of a farthing imposed in
1853. The liberties of the people essentially de-
pended on [free discussion, but there never could
1)e free discu.seion where there was not a free press,
and an en=itely free 1 ress could not be enjoyed
while this obnoxious tax on paper was suffered to
exist. (Cheers:)
Dr. JOHN WATTS seccncled the resolution. He
said that one CV 1 resulting from the tex on paper
was to r elder the trade a complete monopoly.
Men 'of small capital could not embark in it. If a
:ititilar impost were attempted to be levied on any
other branch of trade iu the kingdom every indi-
veinal in that trade would be converted ret.ts
re' el. (Cheers.) After describing the vexations
orkings of the Excise laws, and pointing out the
frauds that were practised by the sanction of the
Government in carrying out those law. 4, the speaker
observed that by the payment being exacted within
six weeks of er ie had accrued due many persons
were actually ruined. When a person got into
d•fficuttiee with the Excise, and could not pay the
duty at the proper time, ie &let immediately be-
came doubled. In regard to the Customs the law
was different. Merchants were allowed to keep
their goods in bond until they could sell them, be-
fore paying the duty. The policy of the Govern-
ment in exacting this duty was most mischievous ;
and for the sake of obtaining a revenue of one mil-
lion they prevented the creation of two millions of
wealth. (Cheers.) Why should not England sup-
ply the whole world with paper as well as with
cot on ? The people worked harder than those of
any other nation, and our machinery was better.
But for this tax England might just as well supply
tie world with paper as she did
with calicoes. But
the yield of paper was decreasing, while the yearly
increase of calico was immense. It was said that
the tax brought a million a year to the revenue,
but Mr. Gladst( ne told, the Howe of Commons the
other night that, although 22,000,0001. of taxes had
b en repealed, yet the revenue bad not suffered a
single penny ; and the Chancellorof the Exchequer,
who' did not propose to repeal this tax, mutt he
blind indeed to the best interests of the country,
Mr. H. INGRAM, M. P., supported the resolution.
He was perfectly disinterested on the question, He
admitted the evils that arose f;orn the paper duty.
He once was ambitious to have a large book trade
and to publish educational works, but he was ob-
liged to give up a very large trade because it was a
positive loss to him. (Cheers.) It had been said,
what benefit would the repeal of the tax be to the
consumer ?—the duty on leather was taken off, and
yet shoes aid boots were not cheaper. There was a
limit to the supply of skins; but that remark would
not apply to the production of paper. No country'
in the
world, save England, imposed a paper duty.
England stood alone. The Chinese, who invented
might well call us outside barbarians.
(deers) and laughter.) The paper trade was sensibly
Statesdiminishingo Ameirric thisthei
recowuenret7s. 0
planperthmeilty,Lpirteod.
pro-
ducing 270,000 000 b. of paper a year. In Eng-
y 155,000,00001nb. off
paper was
land the producii
Considerion 166,000,0001 b.,
whichth were for home con-
sumption.used by the g Governmente vasttil quantity of paper
amount of drawback allowed feonar bibles
ths aunts, he did not believe that
year. The
analdidtesttlaele
lowedcfrawbaaxel,yealded
maet as 1,000,000/ a
for bibles and testaments alone amounted to 22,3511.
in two years. The hon. member concluded by say
ing that he could support the resolution, because he
considered it to be a tax on the education, the in-
and the intelligenceofthe country. (Cheers.)
du
Mr.' .y
Sergeant PARRY then moved the following
resolution :

" That the tax on paper is a tax on knowledge, which,
by destroying the author's fund, deteriorates cheap lite.

'attire, and checks the enterprise of the best publishers.
That it ought, therefAre' to be immediately repealed."
Mr. HELP seconded the resolution, which wasalso
unanimously agreed to.
Mr. M. GIBSON, M. P., then came forward and
was received with repeated rounds of cheers. He
proposed a vote of thanks to Sir J. Paxton for his
kindness in presiding over the meeting. The sym-
pathies of that gentleman had always been, with the
cause of the industrial classes, and those sympathies
were never better evinced than by his appearing
that evening among them. It had been his (Mr.
Gibson's) lot to visit various Ministers of State, and
he had conversed with them on the mischievous
operation of an Excise. dutyon paper. Be had gene-
rally been received courteously, and had heard no
argument in favour of the duty, but had been bowed
out in a pleasant sort of manner. (Cheers and
laughter.) In fact, till the present Chancellor of
the Exchequer they.had not of late years bad any
Minister of State who had the baldness to avow him-
self a friend to the tax on its own merits. All the
rest had said that possibly there were objections
to the duty, but that that was not the time to deal
with so large an item of revenue. (Cheers and
laughter.) The question they had to consider was,
how were they to accomplish the repeal of the paper
duty ? It was the obvious and bounden duty of
that society not to cease from its efforts until that
duty was repealed. (Cheers.) In the commence-
ment of this agitation they proposed three princi-
pal objects—the repeal of the advertisement duty,
the repeal of the stamp duty on newspapers, and
the repeal of the duty on paper. They were sup-
porred by subscriptions for effecting these three
objects. They had succeeded in obtaining the first
two objects, and they would not be discharging the
engagement they undertook unless they persevered
in their effor s until they succeeded in effecting the
abolition of the paper duty. (Cheers.) He, for
one, co-operated with the society in the first in-
stance, because he was an advocate for a free press;
but they could not have a free press unless the ex-
ciseman s band was taken from it. (Cheers.) The
original object of the paper duty was not revenue.
The journals of Parliament proved that the inten-
tion of imposing a duty was to prevent the circula-
tion of cheap newspapers and to check the diffusion
of knowledge among the people. Printers in those
days were considere the natural enemies of peace
and order. (Cheers and laughter.) He was not
making his assertion without book; could refer
to the journals of the House of Commons as his
authority. In 1711 a message was sent by Queen
Anne, complaining of the scurrilous libels which
were )eing published against her Maj-sty's Govern-
ment, and calling upon the House of Commons to
find a remedy equal to the mischief. Well, Par-
liament talked of a censorship, and of other plans
for restraining the press. At last some member
hinted that perhaps a tax- might accomplish the
Fame end, and not bear the odious name of censor-
ship : so they agreed to impose three heavy taxes
upon the press. What they were afraid of was
cheapness and universality, lest the peop'e should
become alive to the misdoings of their Government.
(Cheers.) The Government of the present day said
that it might be desirable to relieve the country
from this tax, but the state of the revenue did not
admit of it, A Ministry had two points to consi-
der—first, how much money they were to raise,
and next how they were to raise it. It was not
enough to say that a particular mode of taxation
would give a certain amount of revenue if it could
be shown that that mode-was far more injurious to
the State than advantageous to the revenue. He
believed the tax on paper produced more pernicious
influence on society than the benefit it gave to the
Government by the money it produced. (Cheers.)
He did not know that if the duty were repealed
it would be missed. When the Excise duty on
glass was repealed it was not missed, and for a
very obvious reason—where there was a number
of different taxes one tax starved the other ; but
if they repealed a tax upon some one article of con-
sumption there was more money left to be spent
on other articles, which made up for the repeal of
any particular duty. (Cheers.) When they heard
of pauperism and crime prevailing, and that great
effortsahould be made to provide for the op:ritual
destitution of the people, and tracts should be cir-
culated, he would say that the first thing to be done
was to remove those obstacles that stood in the
way of improving the people's minds ; and when
they talked of increasing the wealth of the country
let it be diffused among the labourers of the coun-
try, and they would thereby do more to put down
pauperism and crime than all the preaching in the
world. (Cheers.) In advocating a cheap press it
must not be imagir.ed they were opposed to the ex-
i-ting press. His argument had always been that
there was room enough for both. He believed they
had accomplished a great public good so far as they
had gone by repealing the stamp and advertisement
duty, but their efforts could not be crowned with
success unless they added to that achievement the
repeal of the paper duty. (Loud cheers.)
The vote of thanks was carded by acclamation
and, the Chairman having acknowledged the com-
pliment, the meeting separated.

ROYAL OENBRAL THEATRICAL FUND,

Yesterday the general annual meeting of the
members of the Royal General Theatrical Fund
was held in the saloon of the Lyceum Theatre, for
the transaction of the business of the association.
J. B. Buckst one, Esq. (lessee of the Theatre Royal,
Haymarket) presided.
A large body of the members of the theatrical
profession were present.
Mr. CULLENFORD, the secretary, said, in com-
mencing the business of the day he would bring
before them that matter which was of the most
consequence to them, and that as to the re-
ceipts and expenditure since they had last met in
that place, and the performance of that task would
be a light and pleasing one. He had simply to
read over the expenditure, and to offer such expla-
nations as might be necessary as he went on. He
then read the balance-sheet, which on the credit
side showed a sum of 6871. 6s. 2d. for members'
subscr;ptiona ; interest on money invested, 2611.
lls. Bd. ; profit on annual dinner, 2271. 2s. 10d. ;
batince o the Coburg fund (handed over by r.
T. P. Cooke), 1611. ; and other smaller receipts,
the while amounting to a gross sum of 1,3651.
4s. Bd. On the expenditure side the principal item
was to annuitants, 770/. 2s. 10?,d. ; secretary's
salary, 401. ; and several small items ; leaving a
balance in favour of the association of 5091. Is. 2id.
The gross balance in hand on the 20th of February,
185“, wail 8,7421. 17s. Bd. ; on the 25th February,
1857, to this was added 5091. ls. 21d. ; accounts on
the reserve fund, 2531. 14s. 10id. ; making a total
fund in favour of the association 0f0,505/. 13s. 9d.
TheiCHArnmArr asked the number of subscribing
members ?
Mr. CULLENFORD said that last year the number
of members was 149. Since then they had lost one
by death, arid one had withdrawn, but 10 new
member; had joined during the year. Their pre-
sent number was 153 subscribing members.
Mr. CLARKE moved the adoption of Mr. Cullen-
ford's report, believing it to be most clear and satis-
factory.
Mr. AUSTEN LEE seconded the motion, which was
put and carried unanimously.
The CHAIRMAN congratulated the members on
the state of their funds, and their excellent and im-
proving position.
Mr. Braid, Mr. H. Lewis, Mr. T. H. Lacy, Mr.
Cullenford, Mr. Home, and Mr. Addison were re-
elected directors of the fund ; and Mr. Clarke was
elected in the place of Mr. E. F. Saville, who was
ineligiblP for re-election, having left London.

M. E. Villiers (of the Theatre Royal Hay.
market) was elected auditor in the place of Mr.
Clarke.

The next subject brought forward was a recom-
mendation from the committee that in consequenc3
of the extra duties cast upon the secretary, his
salary should be advanced from 401. - to 801. per
annum.

Mr. E. VILLIERS proposed the confirmation of
;he recommendation of thd committee.
Mr. CLARKE seconded the motion.

Mr. B. LEWIS supported the motion, and said
that Mr. Cullenford had for a period of six years
performed all the duties of secretary gratuitously.
The CHAIRMAN said that Mr, W. Bennett, of
Drury-lane Theatre, whose duties were by no means
so onerous as those of their secretary, received 1001.
a year for his services.
The motion (in the absence of Mr. Cullenford)
was put and carried unanimously, and on the en--
trance of Mr. CuPenford,
The CHAIRMAN said he had great pleasure in
stating that the recommendation of the committee
of the 13th of January had been confirmed unani-
mously by that meeting, and the gentlemen present
felt perfectly satisfied with his conduct, believing
that the advance now made would be a saving of
an increase to the fund. The meeting bad expressed
many favourable opinions of him, and he hoped he
might long continue in his office.

Mr. CIIELENFORD had to thank them not only on
that but many other occasions for their kindness,
and could only say that as he was approaching 60
years of age he could claim their annuity; but as
he possessed health and strength, he hoped to serve
them for some years to come. He would endeavour
to deserve their confidence and esteem, for without
that he should not like to hold office at all. The
chairman had told him that they had said compli-
mentary things of him which it was not his fortune
to hear ; but be felt confident that he did possess
their good opinion, and although som% might not
be personally acquainted with him they had respect hie professional character, and he begged, to

A meeting of members of Parliament who sup-
ported Mr. Locke King's motion for the extension
of the county franchise in England was held on
Tuesday at the King's Arms Hotel, New Palace-
yard, Westminster, for the purpose of hearing the
explanation of a deputation from Scotland, con-
sisting of the Rev. Dr. Begg, Baillie Grieve, and
Mr. Duncan M'Laren, on the subject of extending
to Scotland the 40s. freehold franchise of England.
Among the members present were Mr. Cobden,
Mr. Laing, Mr. Thompson, Mr. J. B. Smith, Mr.
Baxter, Mr. L. Heywood, Mr. J. Bell, Sir Joshua
Walmaley, Mr. A. Black, and Mr. G. Duncan.
There were also several well-known political refor-
mers present.
Mr. M`LauFs having taken the chair, said that
there was no franchise in Scotland similar to the
English 40s. franchise. Every voter in a Scotch
county must be either a 501. a-year occupier, or the
owner of a house or land of the valne oflo/. a-year.
This was the first grievance. The second was,
that no man having property in a city or burgh
'could vote for the county. The consequence
of this law was to throw the whole power of elect-
ing county members entirely into the bands of the
agricultural interest. All the property, both in the
counties and in the towns below the value of 101.
a-year, was wholly unrepresented. By a fic ion of
the- Scotch law everything within a borough was
held to be out of the county. The practical effect
of this was that there were not more than two
counties in Scotland the members of which were
not returned by some one or two great landowners
who were peers, and therefore members of the
Upper House of ' Parliament. This was a fraud
upon the constitution, and was felt to operate more
severely in Scotland than in England, because in
Euglaud there were. 359 borough members, while
there was less than half that number of count3r
members, whereas in Scotland the boroughs re-
turned only 23 members, while the counties
returned 30 members. In that way the Scotch
boroughs were deprived of a large proportion of
that power which the English boroughs en-
joyed. There was no justification for this diffe-
rence in the representation of the two countries.
A bill was passed last session to assimilate the mer-
cant le law of England and Scotland. If it were a
right thing to unite the commercial law, surely it
was equally a right thing to unite the political law.
These were the leading points on which the deputa-
tion desired, on behalf of Scotland, the sympathy,
of the meeting. He had not met a single English-
man who did not admit that the claim- now made
by the people of Scotland was unanswerable. In-
deed many Naembers of Parli meat were actually
ignorant of the inequality that exist el between the
electoral franchise of the two countries. As there
w waswere
rendoega
ierneenrl
aaelftel oim
obtaining l
thisbefore s
talentParliament,fer they Sco-
tland. When that was gained, and England and
Scotland were put on an equality, they could run
the race together for whatever further reforms it
might be desirable to obtain.
The Rev. Dr. BEGG observed that the electoral
rights of the two countries at one time were pre-
cisely similar. Scotland was deprived of the 40s.
franchise in 1681 for the purpose of putting
down • the political influence of the smaller Co-
venanters. The people of Scotland then fell into
a state of vassalage and degradation, and con-
tiuued in that state till the passing of the Re-
form Bill which they were glad to obtain, not-
withstanding its imperfections. Scotland cla;med
the 40s. franchise ou the broad ground of ju-tice.
Its possession would induce the working classes to
save and acquire property. The Scotch were de-
scribed as a drunken nation, and there might be
some truth'in that allegation ; but the great mass
of the people were acquisitive, and if they knew
that it was in their power to obtain the franchise
they would eschew drink and become the holders of
property. There was a time when the two great
families in the county of Lanark were at variance.
The house of Douglas fought with the house of
Hamilton, and in the struggle there was some liberty
secured ; but the Hamittons bad gone over to
Rome, and there was no opposition now. Mr. B.
Cochrane, the member for Lanark, was nominated
by two persons only, the whole mass of the county
looking on. Mr. Cochrane no more represented
the political opinions of the people than he repre-
sented the inhabitants of China. This movement
had only been about two months in existence, but
nothing had occurred in his time in Scotland which
had made such a rapid
progress, or had gained so
much - influence over the common sense of the
people.
Mr. LAWRENCE thought the claim to be so rea-
sonableuotante would object to it, but he
ion against relying on Lord
warned tthhaet
dneop
Palmerston for support, for there was no man metre
remote ir feeling and symp
than the present Prime M. athy from the Reformers
Minister. Of this any one
ocke
might be convinced who had read the noble lord's
speTehcehßeon
Rev. Dr.
mr.oßtizoGna
of
saidM r.
theL
on Lor i Palmerston as Prime Minister of the coun-
try, without knowing the line which the Govern-
ment, deputationKig waited
King
after c )nsidering the question in all its bear-
ings might take.
Mr. LAING said he was determined, at all events,
the question should be brought before Parliament,
and an appeal be made to the people of this coun-
try whether the same political rights should not be
enjoyed by. the people of Scotland as had been
already conferred on the people of England,
Mr. COBDEN said he had been.asked to`move the
following resolution :—.

" That this meeting has learned with much satisfaction
of the efforts now making in Scotland to procure the ex-
tension of the 40s.considerations franchise to that country, an exten-
sion which considerations ofjuitice and general policy, and