have been wasted in leasehold property on the faith of the monopoly. All this was disregarded-meetings were held-petitions were presented-discussions took place every where-and in a few years the system and the consequential monopoly fell before the force of truth and reason. In this the newspapers aided exceedingly. But how would it have been if these papers had all been-or nearly all been, like the public-houses, in the hands of the brewers? Would they have done their duty to the public -or to the public-houses? Would the reform in question have had fair play? Would it at this day have been carried?

It is due to some of the London Papers to state, that they have taken a most disinterested part on the question of the Stamp. These, too, are among the best conducted and the most inflexibly honest. Their services to the cause of knowledge, and truth, and liberal opinion, have been invaluable. But the rest have taken another course; and they have all endeavoured to suppress the agitation of the subject. So much so, indeed, that he who only reads these journals would never imagine how great and general an interest the subject had excited. As an instance: there were three of the greatest public meetings ever held in the metropolis-two of them attended by all, or nearly all, the metropolitan members; and there was hardly any notice taken of their proceedings in some of the daily papers. Nay, none of these made any mention of two large meetings, one in Southwark, and one at the Mechanics' Institution, farther than to state in a few lines that meetings had been held on the subject. No one, to read such accounts, could ever have conjectured that near two thousand respectable persons had attended each of these meetings. This policy of the papers certainly has had one effect-it has misled ministers and members of parliament, who necessarily take much of their information from such sources. The suppres

sive process has made the rulers of the state and lawgivers really believe that the public took little interest in the question; and accordingly the tax has been continued for another year, when a knowledge of the general eagerness for its repeal would inevitably have sealed its doom last session. That the interest has been general and intense, the almost unanimous voice of the provincial press demonstrates. Its policy coincides more nearly with its duty, and it has spoken freely and constantly out. The petitions presented to Parliament afford another test. These (as appears from the late Tabular Returns to both Houses) have been more numerous, and signed by a greater number of persons, than the petitions upon any other subjects whatever during the session-two only excepted-the Corporation Bill, and the case of the Dorchester labourers. Indeed, as one or

two of the Corporation petitions were signed by twenty or thirty thousand names, it is manifest that a far greater number of petitions must have been presented to Parliament for the repeal of the tax. That the Ministers should have taken, and most properly taken, into their attentive consideration the petitions in behalf of the Dorchester convicts, and granted a considerable mitigation of the sentence, without ever seriously attending to the Stamp petitions, seems very hard to be believed; yet is true.

Why should this Government, of all others, support a tax opposed to the diffusion of knowledge? There never was any that owed so much of its strength to free discussion. There are no friends any where of the existing Ministry, except among those who are most anxious for the spread of political information. A Ministry, too, more attached to literary pursuits has not often existed. Many of its members are themselves honourably known to the world as authors; almost all of them are understood to be men of reading habits; several of them, including both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Leader of the House of Commons, are active members of the Society for the Diffusion of Knowledge. Well may the public, therefore, wonder at the deaf ear which this liberal and literary Government seems to have turned to its representations. It can only be accounted for by supposing that the newspapers have misled them; and chiefly by suppressing all mention of the subject, and of the anxiety felt upon it. It is possible that the active exertions of a few members of Parliament few members of Parliament may have operated unfavourably. Let us hope that the support of the people will, in the interval before the next session, strengthen the hands of the Ministers, and enable them to resist all importunities, as well as encourage them to perform their duty.

There is indeed a quarter of which, on this occasion, we have a right to complain, more than perhaps of the Ministers-we mean the liberal members of the House of Commons. What could possibly induce those who have uniformly supported all propositions in behalf of knowledge and against the stamp, to withdraw a motion when they had a majority in the House, and might have carried their resolution? This is, we confess, one of the most mortifying, and to our minds, most inexplicable things which have happened in Parliament during the late session. The reasons which were assigned, are, as it appears to us, unsatisfactory. We would be understood to speak with all possible respect and regard of men whose services are invaluable to the people; but it is no mark of esteem to suppress our opinion upon an important subject. The carrying one vote against the stamp, even if it had been followed by nothing farther, would have been of infinite importance. We do not believe that the present Chancellor of the Exchequer

1

would have imitated the worst part of the old Pitt tactics, and tried to rescind that vote another day. Lord Althorp was compelled, and most reluctantly compelled, to do so on the malt tax; but that was a question of millions, and of an income tax ;-this was at the utmost one of L.200,000 beyond the disposable surplus; and even so much never could have been lost, for the advertisement duty must have greatly increased.* But suppose he had acted in this manner; that he had given notice of opposing the next vote against the stamp; and that the friends of the repeal had seen grounds for apprehending they would be defeated-What had they to do but leave the question as it then would have stood, with one vote of the House of Commons in its favour? Would it not have been time enough then, after gaining one victory, to say they would push their success no farther? Surely no person at all acquainted with the history of any one of the great questions which public opinion has carried against Governments and Parliaments, can for a moment doubt the incalculable advantage which this would have gained to the repeal. As to the argument that the Government would have been shaken by a defeat, this is, in many cases, a sound reason for abstaining from a vote; but if constantly used, it becomes one of the most fatal motives of action which can sway public men. It is bad for the ministers, for it makes them absoÎute and heedless; it is destructive to the country; for it places the fate of every question not upon its own merits, but upon a false and arbitrary issue. Since the session closed, an indication has been given of a nature not to be mistaken; and from hence we suspect that the fate of the tax in question is at length decreed, not indeed by the determination of the Government or the Parliament, but by the nature of the thing. Attempts were made during the summer to print unstamped daily papers, but these failed, as is said, from the want of due preparations. The Government then put the law in force against some of the other papers which had long been published without a stamp ; and great complaints were made both in Parliament and out of doors, of this proceeding. We confess we cannot join in these complaints; because, as long as the law exists which subjects papers to a stamp,

* The excise on paper produces L.800,000, including all kinds of paper-that is, for packing, papering rooms, &c. Taking off one half of the duty for paper for printing, would be an immense relief to literature-especially cheap literature-and would rather be a gain than a lossto the revenue; whilst the increased publication of newspapers would augment still farther this income.

those who print with the stamp have an undeniable right to all the protection which the Government can give them against those who carry on a contraband trade, and sell papers without paying the legal duty. But although no blame can be imputed to the Government for attempting to act as they are by the law bound to act, every one must see that the attempt will fail. The contraband dealer will defeat the Government, exactly as the smuggler of spirits, and many other articles of general consumption, has always done, when these articles were taxed beyond what they could bear. No sooner had a seizure been made of one printing press in London, than other presses were set to work elsewhere; and immediately unstamped papers, of course without any printer's name, were found every where in London, which had been printed in some of the great manufacturing towns, and sent for sale to the metropolis. Can the Government think of continuing this contest? It is impossible-for the contest is hopeless. The people are determined to read newspapers; and they will have them without the duty of two or three hundred per cent which the Legislature has imposed. The duty on spirits was reduced, not because the revenue could be spared, or because any man wanted to make gin cheaper, but because the smuggler beat the Government and undersold the fair dealer. The duty on political, and all other knowledge will be repealed (reducing it is out of the question), because the unstamped newsmonger is beating the Government, and underselling the dealer in stamped papers; and because the people will no more go without reading than without drinking. Every man lamented the necessity of lowering the spirit tax-every man must agree in the necessity of repealing the tax on knowledge.

It is impossible to close an article upon the press without observing upon the almost counter-revolution which France has lately undergone in this branch of her policy,-of all others the most important to a free state. We should ill discharge our duty as faithful journalists of Politics, as well as Letters, were we to hesitate in expressing the deep feeling of indignation which fills our minds upon a survey of the late transactions. There was a foul, and if you will, a diabolical plot, to assassinate the King; and there were newspapers existing at the same time. This, this positively, and nothing more, is the connexion between the plot and the press-the pretext, the flimsy pretext, for chaining the press with chains of iron, abolishing trial by jury, extinguishing all journals published by poor men, and, in fact, placing the discussion of all subjects, except perhaps mathematics and antiquities, upon a more slippery and intolerable footing than they were, in the time of an open, avowed, and candid

tyrant. Cherishing the highest respect for the able and enlightened Prince who now rules the French nation, and for his virtuous and accomplished minister, we fervently hope that they will retrace their steps ere it be too late, and give back to France the freedom which they have, under the influence of a temporary panic, been enabled, by the tame acquiescence of the unreformed Chambers, to suspend. The progress which republican principles have made in England during the last twelve months has been remarked by all accurate observers of the signs of the times—and not a foreigner who hears our conversations now, and had left us for a year or two, is insensible of the change. We verily believe that an Englishman resorting to France next year will be struck still more with the like progress, should the new laws be continued in force. We have spoken out as regards our own rulers, when they are plainly misled. We cannot suppress the truth as to those of our neighbours."

*

ART. VIII.-History of the Church from the Earliest Ages to the Reformation. By the Rev. GEORGE WADDINGTON, Vicar of Masham, and Prebendary of Chichester. Published under the superintendence of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge. Second Edition. Three volumes, 8vo. London: 1835.

MA ANY of our readers must already be acquainted with this work. It originally appeared in the Library of Useful Knowledge, where it was distinguished with no ordinary share of public approbation. The author has been encouraged to undertake a new edition; and as it is now presented to us in this revised form, it has been considered, by no mean judges, as entitled to a place among our standard works. We are by no means surprised at the reception it has met with. The author, a cler

* We had intended to offer some comments upon the conduct which several real representatives of the people in Parliament have lately pursued in the contest with the London press-members coming from various parts of the United Kingdom. If we abstain at present, it is not from any disposition to undervalue their services, but because we really consider that in the present times every thing is to be avoided which has a tendency to widen the breach between the press and the people's representatives, and to help those who, for obvious reasons, are ever trying to sow dissensions among the friends of liberal principles.