The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-04-29 00:00:00

Emperita 13Fi1tia2litnt.

HOUSE OF LORDS-MONDAY,
NEWSPAPER STAMPS.

Lord LYNDHURST presented a petition from the proprietors of the
Times, the Morning Herald, the Morning Post, the Standard news-
papers, aeainst a proposed measure affecting the stamp duty on news-
papers. The petitioners, his lordship said, did not eomplain of the
reduction of • the taxes upon knowledge," but of the manner in
which the measures is to be carried into effect, which they thought
would be injurious to their interests and partial in its operations. It
was understood by the petitioners that it is intended to restrict the size
of newspapers, and that papers exceeding that size will be subject to
a higher duty. Previously to the year 1835 such a restriction did exist,
but the Earl of Ripon, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, removed
that restriction in the session of that year. The proprietors of news-
papers, supposing, that those restrictions would not again be imposed
had expended large sums of mommey in machinery. both as regarded
the mode of printing and manufacturing paper. The petitioners fur-
ther stated that the measure as proposed will be unjust and partial in
its operation. The noble and learned lord then proceeded as follows:
--"There is one morning paper (the Morning Chronicle, although not
named, is the paper alluded to by Lord Lyndhurst) which exceeds in
size about one-eighth all the other morning newspapers. Now this
paper is taken as a pattern or standard, beyond which others are not
to gO'; and although the petitioners do not say that this is done with
any improper view, yet it looks somewhat suspicious ; and this paper'
seldom or never publishes a double sheet. As I have said, it is singular,
they state, that that particular newspaper should be taken as the limit
or standard ; that is, all papers below it in size may he published with-
out any. additional increase of duty, but those above it are liable to
pay an increase. The size of that particular paper, the petitioners
say, would not answer their purpose, and consequently to lie obliged
to adopt it would prove detrimental to their interests ; besides it would
prove partial in its operation, because it would prove beneficial to one
particular newspaper, at the expense of most of the other newspapers,
of the metropolis. That paper to which I have alluded, from the cir-,
cumstance of its being selected for the standard or limit, beyond which
none can go, supports the principles of his Majesty's government.,
(Hear, hear.) Ido not say that it gives its support without any re-,
servation, because' it exercises a severe .control over them—and the'
petitioners say that, although it may have had no Influence upon the
decision, it is still liable to jealousy and suspicion. . Then they further,
state that the duty is not meant as a tax, but to cover the expenses of
the postage; and that the increase in the size of the paper is no good
ground for an increase of duty in that respect; and further, that such
a thing is a new principle to legislate upon, for, whether the sheet be
double orsinale, the expense of postage would be the same. But they
say that the postage cannot enter into your consideration in this ques-
tion, for this reason, because if the plan be adopted, it will amount to a:
prohibition of the double sheet. Now the double paper is charged to'
the vendor as a single paper only, no additional charge being made for
it, notwithstanding the vast increase of expense in getting it up. But
if the increased duty were to be made, they would not be able to charge'
I the piper the same to the reader, so that the tax upon knowledge
would not be removed but increased. (Hear.) The question of post-,
age, therefore, can' never arise, and if it be as they state, that the
daily papers must discontinue their double sheet it would be a great
injury to the revenue ; for they state that in the double paper there is
an average of six hundred advertisements, and that the duty on them
amounted to £45; and the duty on the paper (supposinf 10,00 impress
sions to he sold) was ,XI I—thus making altogether £56 duty, svhic'm
found its way into the public treasury ;—(hear, hear)—so that there
.was a great injury to.the revenue if the arrangement were carried on,
amounting, as it would, to a prohibition of the double sheet. (Hear,
hear.) But, supposing the object of the plan was ,to pay the postage,
of the additional paper, that would not be accomplished, for the dif-
ference between £4.) and £56 would be lost, thus losing more than one
penny pOstage as an equivalent. But the petitioners stated that the
question of postage never 'could come into consideration, because it
would amount to a prohibition of the double paper, the second sheet
being composed of advertisements, and thus £56 duty would be lost,
besides the duty on the 10,010 additional papers ; and the papers were
published in a double form three or four times a-week. They state
further that it is contrary to the principle which the bill professes—
which was to take off all taxes upon knowledge, whilst the deity on
advertisements were diminished one-half. These, my lords, are the
statements of the petitioners; and they appear to me so strong as to
render them worthy your lordships' consideration, and more es-
pecially the consideration of his Majesty's government."
The petition, after some observations from the Earl of Ripon and
the Marquis of Lansdowne was laid upon the table.
Some other petitions were presented, and several bills were for-
warded a stage.—Adjourned. .

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MONDAY.
GRANT TO MAYNOOTII COLLEGE.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR presented a petition from Perth. against any
further grant of the public money for the support of Maynooth College,
and gave notice that when the miscellaneous estimates came before the
House he should feel it to be his duty to take the sense of the House
upon the subject of this grant.
This petition, together with a great number of other petitions pre-
sented to the House at this sitting, were ordered to lie on the table.
riruEs—(IRELAND.
The Speaker having, on the motion of Lord Morpeth, read that por-
tion of his Majesty's speech relating to tithes in Ireland, the House
went into committee to take it into consideration—Mr. Bernal in the
chair.

Lord Aloarmi then brought forward his resolutions on the subject
of the Church of Ireland, founded o,n the consideration of the King's
speech. His lordship premised that the adjustment of the question
had become more urgent than ever. The bill which he proposed to
introduce would in some respects follow the precedent of the former
bills, by creating a rent charge, payable by the first inheritor. He
stated, however, that he did not intend to ask for any grant on account
of the arrears of tithes, or for any return of the million grant. His
lordship then proceeded to the detail of his plan. He stated the reve-
nues of tne church, after the necessary deductions, to be £459.550
a-year. There were not less than 1,250 benefices reduced for different
causes under the proposed bill, the general cause being superfluity,
proved in one way or another. But the Privy Council was to be em-
powered by the new bill to create new benefices as occasion might
require. and to extend the unions of parishes. The following was the
scale of salary to be allowed to the incumbents in the different speci-
fied cases :
" For 670 benefices containing a Protestant population varying from
50 to 500, aaalary of £2OO to each clergyman.
" For 209 benefices, with a Protestant population, varying from 500
to 1,000, a salary of £3OO.
"188 benefices, with a Protestant popUlation of from 1,000 to 3,000,
a salary of £4OO.
" 5413'0d-cc/ices, with 3,000 and upwards of Protestants, an income Of
£5OO to eaelt benefice.
"Then besides the income which was proposed to be allowed to fu-
ture incumbents, the committee of the Privy Council would be em-
powered to assign to each clergyman a certain portion of glebe land,
of not more than 30 statute acres. Taking the amount of the revenues
of the parochial clergy, at £361,938, that would leave a surplus of
£97,612. This, it would be in the recollection of the House, was a far
larger amount of surplus than they had reckoned upon last year. It
was intended that, after they should have satisfied all ecclesiastical
burdens. the remaining surplus should be paid into the Consolidated
Fund, upon which there should be a fixed charge of £50,000 a-year for
the purposes of supplying moral and religious education to the people
of Ireland." He concluded with moving his resolutions, expressed
in general terms.
Sir It. Past observed that he should not oppose the motion, the
language being general ; he should reserve his opposition until the
proposition for the alienation of the Church property came specifically
before them.

Lord Srvinsv expressed the like reason for deferring opposition.
The motion was eventually agreed to.
The Registration of Voters Bill was again considered in committee,
and was again discussed at great length, but in a very desultory man-
ner. After several clauses had been agreed to, the Chairman reported
progress, and obtained leave to sit again.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.—TcgsnAv.
Several petitions were presented to the house in favour of and
against the Irish municipal corporation bill, for the better observance
of the sabbath, and one among others, by. Lord Melbourne. from ;he
city of Cork, praying for the reduction of taxes, household suffrage,
and vote by ballot. (A laugh.)