be exempt from the newspaper duty in common
with all other "class" newspapers.[293]

In the Session of 1854 the House of Commons passed a Resolution,
although it was opposed by the Government, affirming that the laws in
reference to the periodical press and newspaper stamp were "ill-defined
and unequally enforced," and that the subject demanded the early
consideration of Parliament. The Government gave the matter their
attention. Mr. Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, prepared a
plan which was embodied, with modifications, in a Bill introduced in the
following Session by his successor. This Bill provided for the abolition
of the duty except on such copies as it might be desired to send by
post. The proposal was welcomed as the abolition of the last of the
taxes on knowledge, and a liberation of the Press.[294] The only serious
opposition to the Bill was made on the ground that in the exceptional
circumstances of the time--the nation being engaged in a war--the loss
of revenue could be ill-afforded; and that the withdrawal of the duty
would lower the moral character of the Press, and open the way for
seditious and blasphemous publications and for unrestrained libellous
attacks on the Government, on public authorities, and private
individuals.[295] The Government justified their proposals on the
ground that the administration of the existing law had become
exceedingly difficult, and that the resolution of the previous session
condemning the ambiguity of the existing law and the unsatisfactory
character of its administration left them little choice in the
matter.[296]

An amendment to the Bill of 1855, proposing the reduction of the stamp
duty to 1/2d., which was in effect providing for the transmission of
newspapers by post at the uniform rate of 1/2d., was opposed by the
Government. There was no desire to make the postage of newspapers a
source of revenue. On this point there was general agreement. At the
same time there was no disposition to carry newspapers at less than
cost. Sir Rowland Hill, in the course of his evidence before the
Committee of 1851, had said that the Post Office could profitably carry
newspapers at a penny,[297] and that it was unlikely that they could be
carried profitably for a halfpenny. Members of the Government and other
members of the House were convinced that a halfpenny rate would involve
a loss, and they opposed the amendment on that ground.[298]

The Act 16 & 17 Vict. cap. 63