Star.
London, England, 1826-09-02 00:00:00

REPORT ON THE STAMP OFFICE.

A Report from the Commissioners appointed to in
quire into the collection and management of the Public
Revenue has just been printed by order of the House
of Commons. It is the 14th Report of the same Com-
missioners, and relates exclusively to the Board of
Stamps in London. The principal value of their la-
bours consists in the ample details which they have
sisals of the mode of managing business in the different
branches of the Stamp Office, and the useful suggestions
which they have tendered for promoting theinterests of
the Revenue, for imposing more effectual checks on
possible abuses, for relieving the public from unneces•
wary burdens or vexatious inconveniences.
The following extract will show how fearlessly the
Commissioners proceeded to inquire into an affair that
railed to one of the members of the Board :

• In addition to the observations which have been sug-
gested by our inquiries into the manner of conducting
the business of the Registrar of Newspapers and Pam-
phlets, we have to call your Lordship's further attention
to this part of the subject, in consequence of the circum-
stance (to which we • have already adverted in our pre-
ceding Report) of the Chairman of the Bard being in-
dividually brought into contact with this branch of the
department, in his character as principal Proprietor of
one of the London Newspapers.
• buring the progresse our inquiries, we had received,
from various quarters, representations on this subject,
of such a character as to render it in our opinion incum-
bent upon us to investigate the facts to which they to
tented, not only as being important to the general admi.
nistration of the department, but also as an act of
justice to the individual who was the object of these re-
presentations. The substance of this information, at
least of that part of it which relates to the subject now
under consideration, was, that the Chairman of the
Board of Stamps was well known to be the Proprietor
of the British Press Newspaper, although other persons
were unduly, and for purposes of concealment, regis-
tered at theStampOffice as the Proprietors of that Paper,
.under the statute to which we have above referred.'

By the first section of this Act it is provided, " That
I-, a person shall, after 40 days from the passing of this
Act, print or publish, or cause to be printed or pub-
lished, any Newspaper, or other Paper containing pub-
lic news or intelligence, or serving the purpose of a
newspaper, until an affidavit or affidavits, or affirmation
or affirmations made and signed as hereinafter mention-
ed, shall be delivered to the Commissioners for managing
his Majesty's Stamp Duties, at their head office, or to
some of their Officer or Officers in the respective towns
and at the respective offices which shall be named and
appointed by the said Commissioners, for the purpose
of receiving such affidavits or affirmations (but which
shall not be required to be upon stamped paper), con
taining the several matters and things hereinafter for
that purpose specified and mentioned."
By the second and following sections it is further en-
acted, " That such affidavit or affidavits, affirmation or
affirmationso shall speci'y and set forth the real and
true names, additions, descriptions, and places of abode,
of all and every person or persons who is and are in-
tended t r be the Printer and Printers, Publisher and
Publishers of the Newspaper or other Paper mentioned
in such affidavit or affidavits, affirmation or affirmations,
and of all the Proprietors of the same ; if the number
of such proprietors, exclusive of the printer and pub-
lisher, does not exceed two, and in case the same shall
exceed such number, then of two of such proprietors,
exclusive of the printer and publisher, and also the
amount of the proportional shares of such proprietors
in the property of the newspaper or other paper, and
the true description of the house or building wherein
any such paper is ihtended to be printed, and likewise
the title of such paper.
" That in every case where the number of such pro-
prietors, exclusive of the printer and publisher, does not
exceed two, the names of two proprietors, the amount
of each of whose proportional shares in the property of
such newspaper or other paper shall not be less than the
proportional share of any other proprietor, exclusive of
the printer or publisher, shall be specified and set forth
in such affidavit or affidavits, affirmation or affirmations.
" That an affidavit or affirmation, affidavits or affir-
mations of the like import, shall be made, signed, and
given, in like manner, as often as any of the printers,
publishers, or proprietors named in such affidavits or
affirmations shall be changed, ur shall change their re-
spective places of abode, or their printing house, place,
or office, and as often as the title of the paper shall be
changed, and as often as the Commissioners for ma-
naging the stamp duties shall see reasonable cause for
requiting such affidavit or affirmation to be made, sign-
ed, and sworn or affirmed, and shall give notice that
they do require the same, such notice to be left at such
place as is mentioned in the affidavit or affirmation last
delivered, as the place at which the newspaper or other
paper to which such notice shall relate is printed.
" That every such affidavit or affirmation shall be in
writing, and signed by the person or persons making the
SAM!, and shall be taken by any one or more of the said
Commissioners, or by any r fficer specially appointed by
the said Commissioners to receive such affidavits or affir-
mations as aforesaid, which Commissioners and other
offi.ers are hereby authorized to talcs such affidavits
upon the oath of the person or persons making the same,
and such affirmations in the case of persons commonly
called Quaker,.

That if any person shall knowingly and wilfully
print or publish, or cause to be printed or published, or
knowingly or wilfully, either as a proprietor thereof
or otherwise, sell, vend, or deliver out any newspaper or
other such paper as aforesaid, such affidavit or affirma-
tion, or affidavits or affirmations, containing such mat-
ters and things as are required by this Act to be therein
contained, not having been duly signed, sworn, or
affirmed and delivered, and as often as by this Act is
requiied, or any other matter or thing required by this
Act to be done or performed according to this Act, not
having been done or performed, such person shall for-
feit and lose, for every such act done, the sum of one
1..:111Ind pounds.
" That it any person or persons making such affida-
vit or affirmation as in and by this Act is required to
be made, shall knowingly or wilfully insert or set forth
therein the name or names, addition or additions, place
er places of abode of any person as proprietor, printer,
or publisher of any newspaper, or other such paper as
aforesaid, to which such affidavit or affirmation relates,
who is not a proprietor, printer, or publisher thereof, or
shall knowingly or wilfully omit to mention in such
affidavit or affirmation the•name or names, addition or
additions, and place or places of abode of any of the
proprietors, printers, or publishers thereof, contrary to
the true meaning of this Act; or shall knowingly or
wilfu!ly in any other minuet or respect set forth in such

affislavit or affirmation any matter or thing by this Act'
required to be set forth, otherwise than according to the
truth ; or shall knowingly or wilfully omit td set forth
therein, according to the truth, any matter or thing re-
quired by this Act to be therein set forth, every person
so offending shall be liable to the pains and penalties to
which persons are liable for wilful and corrupt perjury."
The title and clauses of the Act, which we have here
inserted at length, point out with so much clearness and
precision the objects and provisions of the law which the
Commissioners of Stamps are thus specially deputed to
enforce, that we feel it to be unnecessary to offer any
explanatory observations on that subject. A reference
to this statute could not fail to increase the surprise
with which we had received information of the fact,
that the Chairman of the Board of Stamps was a con-
cealed proprietor of a public newspaper.
Independently of the objection arising from any pecu-
liar official duty which may be intrusted to him, there
are various grounds on which, in our opinion, the pro-
prietorship, or even a prominent share in the conduct of

a newspaper, mast be considered as not properly com-
patible with the situation of a head of one of the prin-
cipal Government departments. In the present case,
however, it is sufficient to ad•et t to th,:se reasons which
render such an engagement peculiarly objectionable
with reference to the special duties of the offir.e now
under consideration.

That the Commissioners of Stamps are the function-
aries specially deputed on the part of the public to carry
into effect the provisions of this Act according to their
strict and true intent (which are so clearly intimated in
the title), is sufficiently apparent from the reference
made to them in the clauses above extracted, and
more particularly from their being empowered to re-
quire new affidavits to be made as to proprietorship as
often as they shall see reasonable cause. After a con-
sideration of the nature and objects of the duty thus
imposed upon the Commissioners, it was equally appa-
rent to us, that no one of them could become privy to
any case of concealment of the real proprietor of a
newspaper, and still less that he could become a princi-•
pal agent or contriver in effecting any such concealment,
without a direct violation of that duty. Under this
impression we felt ourselves callei upon to put the
questions to Mr. Sedgwick on this subject, which are
contained in his examination of the 31st January, 1825,
annexed to our 13111 ltepoTt. By reference to ti is exami-
nation, your Lordships will see that Mr. SAgwick does
not deny the fact of his being the principal proprietor of
the British Press newspaper, and admits the accuracy
of the follooing statement as to the circumstances at-
tending that property : " that he and another Gentle-
man are the two chief proprietors, but that it has been
assigned to Mr. Haines; and under that assignment,
which is a legal title, he holding the equitable title, Mr.
Haines swears that he is the proprietor of the Paper."
In a preceding part of the examination, Mr. Sedgwick
gives the following account of this transaction : " When
I was originally connected with the British Press, 1 had
certainly every intention of parting with it. 1 never
intended to keep it ; but having embarked a property
in it, I was obliged so to do, and therefore made a con-
veyance in equity, assigning the whole of my right to
Mr. Haines; and certainly if he could take advantage
of that, I might lose the property in it."
Your Lordships will observe that this extract does not
agree with the preceding one in regard to the descrip-k
lion of the conveyance made to Mr. Haines; and we
think it right to add, that we have had reason to doubt
whether any legal assignment on a sufficient stamp was
ever executed on this occasion ; and we are the more
disposed to entertain this doubt, from the fact stated to
us on oath, that Mr. Haines is a person employed as a
reporter in the office of the Paper.
We annex in the appendix copies of the affidavit made
by Mr. Haines, dated the 7th of November, 1823, and
of three preceding affidavits. On all these occasions, ex•
cept the first, it will be seen, that the parties swearing
represent themselves to be the sole proprietors of the
Parer in question. At the time these several affidavits
were taken, Mr. Sedgwick must have been fully ap-
prised of the real state of the property to which they
related ; and we are at a loss to discover on wh.t prin-
ciple he could reconcile it, either to his sense of duty as
a Commissioner of Stamps, or to I is general feeling of
propriety, to permit affidavits so inconsistent oith the
fact to be tendered on the part of the proprietors, or to
be accepted by his colleagues, and to remain on the
files of the office.

Your Lordships will observe, that in the examination
before referred to, Mr. Sedgwick appears to consider
that the statute is sufficiently complied with by the
production of any person willing to swear to the affida-
vit, and to take udon himself the consequent responsi-
bility as proprietor. We do not 0 ink it necessary to
offer any additional reasons for our total dissent from
such an interpretation of the law, which, although the
Chairman is supported in it by the opinion of one at
least of his colleagues, we are satisfied your Lord,liips
will concur with us in rejecting as being wholly inagmis-
sible ; and more peculiarly so, when urged by one of those
Commissioners Nho ate specially charged with the exe-
cution of that law according to its lull intent and purpor t.
We are aware that cases frequently occur in which the
legal ownership of Newspapers, like that of other per-
sonal property, is cast upon persons not taking any be-
neficial interest, such as executors, ti ustees, or assignees
of bankrupts; and that on these occasions it has, in
some instances, been found difficult to fix upon the par-
ties from whom, under the provisions of the Act, the
affidavit► of ownership should be taken. It is, however,
obvious that cases of this description are wholly distin-
guishable from those in which a clivisi.in of the owner-
ship into legal and equitable titles is made for any put.
pose of concealment, and that the affidavits taken under
the circumstances of those cases cannot in any respect
be held to sanction the admi.,ion of an affidavit of
ownership by a person set up mealy for the purpose of
making it.
We annex in the Appendix the copy of a case, with a
joint opinion given by the Attorney and Solicitor-Lie-
neral, on this subject, in which the distinction above
alluded to is clearly admitted, and in which also the
conduct of the parties concerned in making the affida-
vit on the foundation of a colourable ownership only,
is adverted to in terms which shew that the persons so
swearing are considered as liable to an Indictment for
perjury, although a proceeding for the penalty under
the seventh section of the Act is recommended as a
more advisable course. Various other circumstances
respecting the connection of Mr. Sedgwick and other
parties with the British Press Newspaper have been
laid before us, to which we refrain from calling your
Lordships' attention, both because these particulars re.
late in a great measure to matters wholly of a private
character, and also because we are given to understand
that a snit is now pending in the Court of Chancery on

!the subject of the ownership •of that paper during the
period to which we have alluded.
In the observations and details into which we hive
been led on this part of our subject, we have considered
the transaction which has given rise to them wholly in
a public view, and as connected with the due adminis-
tration of that branch of the law which is under the
immediate superintendence of the Commissioners of
Stamps; and we do not doubt that your Lorchhip will
consider what we have thus submitted, as suffir lent to
justify the opinion expressed in our preceding Report,
that the proprietorship of a public Newspaper is a si-
tuation wholly incompatible with that of Chairman of
the Board of Stamps, and that by no possible contin-
genoy should the private interests and official duty of
Commissioners of Rtrvenue Boards be allowed to be
brought into collision. Jo the course of our inquiries
we ascertained the fact, that it was considered notorious
throughout the department, that the Chairman was the
proprietor of the Paper in question; and we cannot but
feel that there is strong ground for believing that this
knowledge must have had some influence on the mode
in which the several subordinate officers have executed
the various duties intrusted to them, both with respect
to the objects of ascertaining and recording the names
of the real proprietors, and a:so of enforcing the collec-
tion of the duties incurred for advertisements.