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

TAXES ON RN° IVLE DUE.

Tho sixth annual meeting of the Assoeia,fion for
Promoting the Repeal of the Taxes on Knowledge
was held yesterday evening at St. Martin's-ball.
Them. wai a very large at' endance both in the body
of the ball and on the platform. _ _

Sir J. PAXTON, M.P., having talrrn the chair,
opened the proceedings by observing; that previous
to the assembling of Parliament he had hoped that
the meeting that Light would only have been a for-
mal one, te congratulate themselves on the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer having promised to repeal
that most odious of all taxes, the tax on paper.
But he grieved to 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 in his financial statement having held
out no hope that the paper tax would be repealed.
On the contrary, judging from the whole tenour
of his speech, and from what he said in relat'on 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 writing,
and on paper for packages, he added that, while he
considered the duty rather heavy on the third de-
scription of paper, he thought the tax on the other
two descriptions 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
forthehe thought that present.
HadM
have repealed the tax before now. In 1853 Mr.
right.hon. gentleman would
Gladstone
power remained in
Gladstone denounced the paper duty, and said he
should be delighted to see the day when it could be
repealed. Mr. 'lsraeli, 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 right hon. gentleman
made certain inquiries andldrew certain deductions,
which evidently showed that he possessed a very
slight acquaintance with the subject. He asked
the deputation whether they lee'ieved 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 not
get any profit on the duty paid. Upon this the
right hon. gentleman neared whether Mr. Baldwin
thought the manufacturer ought to make a profit
on the duty he 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 per 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 his paper before it
got into the market as the gas on his premises, or
any other artieleinvolved in the c of production.
But the evil did not stop there, for there must be
a profit realised by each pei son through whose
hands the paper passed from the manufacturer to
the consumer, and thus the tax was increased by
means of these several charees 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
13,500/., whereas if the duty had remained un-
repealed the co,t would have been 54,0001. If,
therefore, the tax en glass had continued the people
would never have had a Crystal Palace. The
Chancellor of the Exchequer had 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, he 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
improvement in the manufacture of 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-
stituf on of reformatories to endeavour to effect
their objects. It could not be done without first
removing that most objectionable tax. (Cheers.)
Dr. EPPS then came forward, and moved the fol-
lowing resolution :

"That the Excise on'ipaper limits its supply and en-
hances its ',price, is ruinous to the small manufacturer,
restricts the field for_the employment of capital and labour,
and thus tends to produce ps!uperism and crime; and that
the interest" of the country imperatively demands that a
less injurious mode of xa.sing 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 authors, and if on cheap publications,
particularly on newspapers, it was most injurious
to the public. If they took a daily paper weighing
14 to the pound, supposing its cit culation to be
20,000, that would give 6,260,000 copies a year,
equal to 447,1421 b, or as nearly as possible 202
tons, which, at 14/. 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 wh made
them not worth more than a penny ? If that
2,9401. was left in the hands of the proprietors they
could employ men of greater ability on their papers.
The tax was an interference with the progress of
society, and it materially retarded the manufacture.
.When the duty was reduced from 3d. to 11d. a
great increase in the manufacture of paper took
place ; but that was in some degree checked by the
additional tax of 3-10ths of a farthing imposed in
1853. The liberties of the people essentially de-
pended on Pee discussion, but there never could
be free discussion where there was not a free press,
and an entirely free press could not be enjoyed
while this obnoxious tax on paper was suffered to
exist. (Cheers.)
Dr. JOHN WATTS seconded the resolution. He
said that one evil resulting from the tax on paper
was to render the trade a complete monopoly.
Men of small capital could not embark in it. If a
similar impost were attempted to be levied on any
other branch of trade in the kingdom every indi-
vidual in that trade would be converted into a
rebel. (Cheers.) After describing the vexatious
workings of the Excise laws, and pointing out the
frauds that were practised by the sanction of the
Government in carrying
out those laws, the speaker
ely r i
n had accrued observed that by the payment being exacted within
six
when a
duepemrsaonny
got
trsionntos
werew
weeks
difficulties with the Excise, and could not pay the
actually
afteraduty at the proper time, the debt 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-.
xu.ent 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
cotton ? 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
the 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. Gladstone told the Rouse of Commons the
other night that, although 22,000,0001. of taxes had
been repealed, yet the revenue had not suffered a
single penny ; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
who did not propose to repeal this tax, must be
blind indeed to the best interests of the country.
Mr. 11. INGRAM, M.P.' supported the resolution.
He was perfectly disinterested on the question. He
admitted the evils that arose from 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 and 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
paper, might well call us outside barbarians.
(Cheers and laughter.) The paper trade was sensibly
diminishing in this country. In the United
States of America there were 750 paper mills, pro-
ducing 270,000,000 lb. of paper a year. In Eng-
land the production of paper was 166,000,000 lb.,
only 155,000,000 lb. of which were for home con-
sumption. Considering the vast quantity of paper
used. by the Government themselves, and the
amount of drawback allowed for bibles and testa-
ments, he did not believe that the tax yielded so
much as 1,000,0001. a year. The drawbacks allowed
for bibles andtestaments alone amounted to 22,351/.
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-
dustry, and the intelligence of the country. (Cheers.)
Mr. Sergeant PARRY then moved the following
resolution
"That the tax on paper is a tax on knowledge, which,
by destroying the author's fond, deteriorates cheap lite'

and chf.eks the enterprise of the best publishers.
That it ought, therefore, to be in-rrediAteiy repealed."
1, Mr. HELP seconded the resolution, tit hich was also
unanimously age eed to.
Mr. M. GIBSON, M.P. then came forward and
was received with repeated rounds of cheers. He
proposed a vote of thanks to S;r J. Pixtott 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 poser better evinced than by his appearins
that evening among them. It had ben his (Mr.
Gibson's) lot to visit various Ministers of State, and
he had conversed with them en the mischievous
operation of an Excise duty on paper. lie had gene-
rally been received courteously, and had heard no
argument in favour of the duty, but had teen 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 yews had 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 oa newspapers, and
the repeal of the duty on paper. They were sup-
ported 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 i ffecting 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 hand was taken from it. (Cheers.) The
original object of the paper duty was net 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
coneamidoonr.gatthheApneaotpulrea.
enemies
oi
fn
it)he
aecsee
days were
and order. (Cheers and laughter.) He was not
making his assertion without book; he 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 being 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 re-straining the press. At last sonic member
hinted that r crimps a tax might accomplish the
same 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 people 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
afbnit of it, A Ministry had two points to consi-
oler—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 fsr more injurious to
the State than advantageous to the revenue. He
believed the tax on paper produced mere 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 mere motley left to be spent
on other article, which made up for the repeal of
any particular duty. (Cheers.) When they heard
of pauperism and crime prevailing, and that great
efforts should be made to provide for the p'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 past down
pauperism and crime than all the preaching in the
world. (Cheers.) In advocating a cheap press it
must not be imagined they were opposed to the ex-
isting press. His argument had alw iys been that
there was room enough for both. He b-lieved 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 he crowned with
success unless they added to that achievement the
repeal of the paper duty. (Loud cheers.)
The vote of thanks was. earried by acclamation,
and, the Cha;rman having acknowledged the com-
pliment, the meeting separated.

ROYAL GENERAL THEATRICAL FUND.

Yesterday the general annual meeting of the
members of the Royal General Theatrical Fund
was hold in the saloon of the Lyceum Theatre, for
the transaction of the business of the association.

J. B. Buck st one, Esq. (lessee of the Theatre Royal,
Haymarket) presided.
A large body of the members of the theatrical
profession were present.

Mr. OULLENFORD, 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 wa,,, 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 1110 simply to
read over the expenditure, and to offer such expla-
nations as might be necessary as he went on. Ho
then read the balance-sheet, wh'cli on the credit

side showed a sum of 6871: 63. 2d. for members

subscriptions ; interest on money invested, 2611.
lls. Bd. ; profit on annual dinner, 2271. 2s. 10d. ;
balance of the Coburg fund (handed over by -Alr.
T. P. Cooke), 1611. ; and other smaller receipts,
the whole amounting to a gross sum of 1,3651.
4s. Bd. On the expenditure side the principal item
was to annuitants, 7701. 2s. 10Ad. ; sect e'ary's
salary, 401. ; and several small items ; leaving a
balance in favour of the association of 5091. Is. W.
The gross balance in hand on the 20th of February,
1856, was 8,7421. 17s. Bd. ; on the 25th February,
1857, to this was added 5091. Is. 21d. ; accounts on
the reserve fund, 2531. 14s. 101 d. ; making a total
fund inla,vour of the association of 9,5051. 13s. 9d.
The CHAIRMAN asked the number of subscribing
members ?
Mr. CIILLENFORD said that last year the number
of members was 149. Since then they had lost one
by death, and one had withdrawn, but 10 new
members had joined during the year. Their pre-
sent number was 158 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
ineligible for re-election, baying left London.
Mr. 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-
mendaion from the committee that in consequence
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
the recommendation of the committee.
Mr. CLARKE seconded the motion.
Mr. H. 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. Cullenford,
The CHAIRMAN said he bad great pleasure in
stating that the recommendation of the committee
of the 13th of January had been confirmed uuani-
mowdy by that meeting, and the gentlemen present
felt perfectly satisaed with his conduct, believing
that the advance now made would be a saving of
an increase to the fund. The meeting had expressed
many favourable opinions of him, and he hoped he
might long continue in his office.
Mr. CHLLENFORD 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 he felt confident that be did possess
their good opinion, and although some might not
be personally acquainted with him they had respect
for his professional character, and be begged to

I thank them for the kind feelings they entertained
towards him. (Cheers.)
Mr. WORRALL (of the Theatre Royal, Drury-lane)
proposed the thanks of the meeting to Mr. Arnold
for the use of the room for their meetings ;
Charles Dillon, for the use of the saloou of the
Ca-atre ; to the honorary physician, and to the
honorary solicitor.
Mr. HOLLAND seconded the motion, which was
put and =lied.
Some conversation having ensued as to the claims
of Mrs. Henry Vining on the fund, and the place
for holding the future annual dinner,
Thanks were voted to J. B. BIICKSTONE, Esq.,
f,,r presiding, and that gentleman, in reply, CDII-
- 1 them on the condition of the fund. If
it was sinking he would stick to the ship, but as it
was going gallantly over the wave, he would never
deceit his pest at the helm.
Thanks were voted to the press, and the meeting
they separated.