Times_, which had attained its position under the old duties, and the
other great newspapers then successfully conducted, were opposed to the
reduction, foreseeing the possibility of the rivalry of new and cheap
competitors.[283] An attempt was made to argue that the benefit would
not accrue to the public, since the public did not in general buy
newspapers but went to the public-house to hear them read. Such persons
would still go to the public-house, and would therefore derive no
benefit from the reduced price: the advantage would be with the
publican. On the other hand, it was anticipated that the reduction of
the duty would so cheapen the newspapers that they would be brought
within reach of all. Mr. Spring Rice said he knew that "the newspaper
was one of the great attractions to take the poor man from home to visit
the public-house; if, therefore, the adoption of this proposition tended
to keep the poor man at home, it would afford a great moral aid to the
improvement of the people."[284] The moral uplifting of the poor man was
a mighty shibboleth in those days, and one which gave a power to these
arguments.
The rates fixed by the Act of 1836 were 1d. for the first sheet, not
exceeding 2,295 superficial square inches, and a halfpenny for a second
sheet not exceeding 1,148 square inches. The existing provisions with
regard to registration and sureties were continued. They were considered
of importance, in view of the likelihood of the establishment of cheap
irresponsible papers which might be found publishing slanderous and
scurrilous, if not blasphemous, statements.
There is little doubt that the Government had in mind a wish still to
keep some restriction on the Press, and the Radicals always took that
view. The penny duty undoubtedly had the effect of preventing the issue
of really cheap newspapers.[285] Although in Parliament the Government
argued that they were entitled to the penny as a postage charge,[286] it
is unlikely that they did not realize how illogical it would be to
charge a penny stamp duty on every copy of a newspaper that was printed,
in order to secure the free transmission by post of such copies as the
publisher might wish to distribute by that means.[287] The
proportionate numbers of newspapers sent or not sent by post would not
be the same for all publications. Such a provision was therefore bound
to work unequally. Moreover, the new duty meant that it would still be
impossible to issue a newspaper at the price of one penny, and the cheap
newspaper was still barred. The duty was in fact still a restrictive
tax; and by those who were opposed to all "taxes on knowledge," of which
the newspaper duty had been considered one, the question was never
regarded as settled by this reduction.[288]
The official Whigs did not say much on the question of the restrictive
character of the duty. The Radicals were not so careful to hide the
repressive side. While not suggesting that the Government (with whom
they voted) desired the continuance of a restrictive duty, they roundly
accused the Opposition of desiring to restrain the dissemination of
intelligence, "in order to keep up their influence over a certain class
of people, and at the same time to perpetuate the ignorance which had
hitherto hung about them."[289]
After the passing of the Act with its definite postal privilege for
newspapers coming within its provisions, questions arose as to the
status with regard to transmission by post of certain publications which
were not newspapers of the ordinary type, but rather of the nature of
critical or literary reviews. The proprietors of these publications
desired to transmit by post a part of their issues. They were not,
however, prepared to pay at the letter rate by the ounce, but wished to
bring under the Stamp Act that portion of their impression which would
pass by post, and pay duty accordingly on those copies only. This course
was agreed to by the Government in 1838,[290] subject to a maximum limit
of weight per copy of 2 ounces. The privilege was at first conceded only
to periodicals, termed "class" newspapers, dealing with a particular
subject and addressed to a certain class of the community, such as, for
instance, papers relating to law, medicine, or architecture. It was
restricted to papers dealing with what might be termed the higher
intellectual subjects. These were held to form fair ground of
exemption; but other specialist papers relating to subjects less
intellectual then appeared; such as papers relating to turf news, or
reporting cases before the police courts. These papers being entirely
devoted to one subject, it became a question whether the privilege of
stamping only a part of their impression could be given them. Instead of
attempting any sort of discrimination in such cases, the Government made
one general rule that all papers devoted to the discussion of one
subject should be accorded the privilege. Thereupon a great variety of
such papers came into existence, and very soon some of them began to
include in their issues matter which could only be regarded as news of a
general character. This raised a further question: how much such general
news should be regarded as destroying the "class" character of the
publication. The Government found themselves in a difficulty. If the law
was not rigorously enforced, the papers paying the tax raised a great
outcry against the injustice to themselves; and if the law was enforced
in respect of those "class" publications which published general news,
there was a great outcry against the discrimination between the "class"
papers.[291]
The whole position in regard to these papers became unsatisfactory and
anomalous.[292] It was, in point of fact, found impossible to enforce
the law. The outbreak of the Crimean War led to a development which
reduced the whole position to absurdity. Publications were issued giving
the latest and fullest available intelligence from the seat of war.
These publications confined themselves strictly to the subject of the
war. They published nothing on any other topic; and on that ground,
although devoted entirely to the publication of news of burning
interest, they claimed to 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 (1853) had reduced the stamp duties on
newspapers,[299] and repealed the duties on advertisements. A further
Act (the Newspaper Stamp Duties Act of 1855, 18 & 19 Vict. cap. 27),
repealed the stamp duty, as such, in respect of newspapers, and provided
that periodical publications conforming to certain conditions should be
entitled to free transmission by post, if "printed within the United
Kingdom on paper stamped for denoting the rate of duty now imposed by
law on newspapers." The chief conditions were that the publication
should be issued at intervals not exceeding thirty-one days, should bear
the title and date of publication at the top of every page, and should
not be printed on or bound in pasteboard or cardboard. The maximum limit
of weight for publications not strictly newspapers, which in 1854 had
been raised to 3 ounces, was now abolished, and newspapers and all other
stamped periodical publications were made subject to the same
restrictions as to number of sheets and extent of letterpress, etc.
Concurrently with the passing of this Act, the book post rates were
reduced with the view of permitting the transmission of unstamped
newspapers at low rates of postage.[300]
Under the Act of 1855, stamp duty at the rate payable at that time under
the existing law must be paid in order to secure the privilege of free
transmission of newspapers by post. The duty was chargeable according to
the number of sheets; and in the case of some leading newspapers, such
as _The Times_ and the _Illustrated London News_, amounted to 1-1/2d.
per copy for each issue. The proprietors of these publications in 1858
approached the Post Office with the view of obtaining a reduction of the
charge for the transmission of their papers by post. This request was
submitted by the Post Office, and was met by the Government in a liberal
spirit. In view of the importance now attached by Parliament to the free
circulation of newspapers, as shown by the removal of taxation from
them, an object of scarcely inferior importance to the circulation of
letters, it was now decided that since the whole of the existing system
rested on the assumption that the free circulation of newspapers in
general was an object of importance, and one to be attained even at a
disproportionate cost to the Post Office, a line should not be drawn so
as to exclude from the lowest rate one paper, and that paper the one
with the largest circulation. Such was the result of the existing
limitation to 4 ounces of the weight of newspapers which might be
carried by the post for 1d., and the limit was therefore raised from 4
ounces to 6 ounces.
In 1866 the question was raised in the House of Commons whether the Post
Office charge could be reduced, especially in view of the fact that
railway companies were distributing newspapers at a uniform rate of
1/2d. a copy. In 1869 the question was again raised in Parliament. A
resolution was moved in favour of an inland rate of 1/2d. for 2 ounces
on printed matter, and a postage of 1/2d. on newspapers. It was urged
that the concession would be of special value in rural districts: it
would indeed "be hard to say what the effect might be in time on the
social condition of the people." In several continental countries
newspapers were already transmissible by post at very low rates. Against
the possible objection that by introducing a rate lower than the 1d.
rate they were jeopardizing its maintenance for letters, and that the
proposal might therefore lead to a general 1/2d. rate, it was argued
that so far from that being the case, the best way of ensuring the
permanence of the 1d. rate was to grant the concession asked.[301]
The Marquess of Hartington, the Postmaster-General, was unable to accept
the motion because he thought such proposals, before being assented to
by the House, should be thoroughly looked into to discover whether there
was a reasonable probability that the loss of revenue would or would not
be a permanent loss, and the Post Office should be given ample time to
consider whether the additional duties which would be thrown upon it
could be undertaken with due regard to other services, which were of
greater importance than the transmission of circulars or newspapers. The
influx of a largely increased number of circulars and newspapers would
cause serious embarrassment in the practical working of the Post Office,
and might impair the efficiency of the service in respect of letters.
The primary business of the Post Office being the "rapid and punctual
transmission of letters," such a result would give just cause for
dissatisfaction.
The Marquess of Hartington asked that the motion should not be pressed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer told the House that he had not got
[L]300,000 to give away. Mr. Gladstone also emphasized the seriousness of
the financial aspect of the proposals, and assured the House that the
Government honestly intended to investigate the question, however much
their suggestion for deferring a vote upon it might look like a pretext
for evading it altogether. But when the Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the previous question, the motion was lost by a large majority. A
main contention of the advocates of the reduction of rate was that in
many foreign countries--in France, in Belgium, in Switzerland, in the
United States--extremely low rates of postage for newspapers were in
operation, and what was possible in those countries ought to be possible
in England.
Following this vote in the House of Commons the matter was further
considered at the Post Office, and in the next session an Act was passed
providing that any newspaper conforming to certain conditions, the chief
of which were that it should be issued at intervals of not more than
seven days and should consist wholly or in great part of political or
other news or of articles relating thereto or to other current topics,
should be entitled to transmission by post at the rate of 1/2d. per copy
irrespective of weight. The privilege of retransmission was
withdrawn.[302]
The statutory basis of the newspaper post has remained unchanged since
1870, and the provisions of the Act of 1870 were included in the Post
Office Act of 1908, which contains the present authority for the
privilege. There has been some necessary interpretation by the Post
Office of the definition of a newspaper as given in the Act. The chief
points on which difficulty has arisen are (1) as to the amount of
news-matter required in a publication, and (2) as to the character of
the matter which can be accepted as news-matter. The Act provides that
the publication should consist "wholly or in great part of political or
other news or of articles relating thereto, or to other current topics."
This requirement is considered to be satisfied if as much as one-third
of the publication consists of matter accepted as news. The proportion,
when fixed, was based on an examination of the proportion of news-matter
contained in the average newspaper, and represents the actual proportion
then generally met with. There is no provision regarding the proportion
to be maintained between the size of a newspaper within the meaning of
the Act and its supplement, but, under the accepted interpretation of
the statute, a newspaper may contain a supplement of equal size, and
that supplement may consist wholly of advertisements. The result of this
is that publications containing a proportion of only one-sixth of
news-matter may pass at the newspaper rate of postage. As to the second
requirement, a strict interpretation of the regulation is not insisted
on, and, in general, articles, pictures, or drawings relating to any
matters of current or topical interest are accepted.
This lack of precision in the provisions of the Act, and the consequent
difficulty of framing or enforcing regulations restricting the privilege
within even reasonable limits, have been largely taken advantage of,
especially in recent years, by the publishers of trade and fashion
papers, with the result that publications weighing in some cases as much
as 3 pounds are sent through the post at the usual newspaper rate of a
halfpenny. Nor are the enormous weight of these papers, and the large
proportion of advertisement matter, the only objections. The news-matter
on which they rely as entitling them to the newspaper privilege is often
of the most doubtful character, consisting largely of accounts of shop
sales or of commercial exhibitions, with lengthy descriptions of the
articles displayed.
This abuse of the privilege is, however, confined to a comparatively
small proportion of the newspapers entitled to transmission at the
newspaper rate. With the fall in the price of paper, and the
improvements in printing methods and machinery, all newspapers have
tended to increase in size. But in general the increase has been small.
In 1855 the average weight of newspapers passing by post was 3.1
ounces,[303] and in 1913 it had increased to 4.1 ounces. The number of
papers entitled to the privilege which could be regarded as excessively
heavy is not more than about 50 (out of a total of some 2,200),[304] and
although practically all these papers are published in London, and are
largely distributed through the post, they do not form more than a small
proportion of the total number of packets passing by newspaper post. But
such of these publications of vast bulk and weight as are sent at the
newspaper rate derive a great advantage--an advantage measured by the
heavy loss incurred by the Post Office in respect of each such
publication.[305]
Many of the moderately heavy papers, such as the ordinary sixpenny
London newspapers, are for the most part in compliance both with the
letter and the spirit of the regulations, and their transmission at the
1/2d. rate is not, perhaps, open to serious objection. But there can be
little doubt that if the possibility of developments in the publication
of trade journals such as have occurred, had been foreseen, some
provision would have been made for the prevention of the transmission at
heavy loss to the Post Office of large numbers of publications which
are, in effect, trade catalogues. While the newspaper post involves a
very considerable loss, it affords the public a useful facility, and one
which is largely availed of for the purpose the Act of 1870 was intended
to assist, viz. the dissemination of intelligence.[306]
The rate has proved too high to secure a large postal traffic in
newspapers. The total number passing by post within the United Kingdom
in 1913 was some 200 millions, which, in days when individual daily
newspapers publish as many as a million copies of every issue, is only
an insignificant portion of the newspaper traffic of the country. It is
also only a small portion of the total postal traffic, which in the same
year amounted to some 6,000 millions. In this respect there has been a
great transformation. Under the old conditions newspapers were
distributed almost exclusively by post, and formed a large proportion of
the total number of postal packets and by far the greater bulk of all
the mails,[307] while now they form only an inconsiderable proportion
both in bulk and number. The Post Office has no monopoly of the
distribution of newspapers, and for the most part newspaper publishers
themselves provide for the distribution of by far the larger part of
their issues. In all the large towns this is the case.[308] Private
enterprise can of course compete wherever the traffic would be
profitable, and private agencies provide satisfactorily for the
distribution of the vast proportion of newspapers, it being found
practicable throughout a large part of the country to place newspapers
on sale at the published price; and in all such cases payment of
postage, which in the days of the halfpenny newspaper represents an
additional charge of 100 per cent. on the published price, is out of the
question. Only those for the more remote towns and country districts are
left to the Post Office; but the newspaper traffic by post, although
conducted at a loss, comprises so small a part of the whole postal
traffic, that the result on the finances of the Post Office is not
serious. If, however, such an unremunerative rate were applied to a
class of traffic likely to assume large proportions the result would be
financially disastrous, and this is the answer to such suggestions as
those of Mr. Wells to extend the newspaper rate to other classes of
printed matter.[309]
In 1913 the privilege of transmission at the 1/2d. rate was extended to
colonial newspapers, registered for the purpose in this country.
NOTE.--On the 1st November 1915, as part of the war increases of
postage, the rate on newspapers was altered to 1/2d. for every 6 ounces
or part of 6 ounces.
* * * * *
NEWSPAPER POST IN CANADA
No special provision for the transmission of newspapers had been made in
the Act of 1765 which first prescribed rates of postage for the Canadian
territories. Consequently, if sent in the mails, they were, in
strictness, liable to postage at the ordinary rates for letters and
packets. Those rates would generally have amounted to at least a
shilling a copy, and would therefore have prevented altogether the
distribution of newspapers by post. Postage was in practice waived,
newspapers being allowed to pass by post on payment of a small charge
quarterly to the Deputy Postmaster-General, who retained the proceeds as
a perquisite of his office. The amount was at first a mere trifle; but
in later days it formed the greater part of his emoluments. The precise
date at which this arrangement was established is uncertain. It
certainly existed in Nova Scotia in 1770, and probably commenced on the
first publication of a newspaper in Canada.[310] The rates charged were
low, and were varied from time to time at the will of the Deputy
Postmaster-General. The following, which were charged in Canada in 1840,
may, however, be regarded as typical:--
For a weekly paper 1s. 0d. currency a quarter
" " bi-weekly " 1s. 3d. " " "
" " tri-weekly " 1s. 6d. " " "
" " daily " 2s. 3d. " " "
In the Maritime Provinces the rates were somewhat lower, the charge for
a weekly paper being only 2s. 6d. a year.
These amounts were payable by the proprietor of the paper, and were
accepted only in respect of papers sent regularly. Papers mailed
casually by persons other than publishers, and denominated "transients,"
were charged 1d. currency each. The publishers thought even these
moderate charges objectionable, and the feeling against them was
increased when it became known that they rested on no legal authority,
but solely on the custom of the office and the sanction of Sir Francis
Freeling; and that the proceeds, instead of being accounted for as part
of the general Post Office revenue, were appropriated by the Deputy
Postmaster-General. They were also objected to as arbitrary and
inequitable, since papers were charged the same rate whether they were
conveyed 20 miles or 200 miles. As letters were at that time charged on
a scale of rates graduated according to distance, the application of the
principle of uniformity to the newspapers was naturally not appreciated;
and in view of the heavy charges incurred for transportation it could
not have been justified on economic grounds.