MR. GLADSTONE ON THE PRESS.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume V, Issue 255, 21 April 1865, Page 2

MR. GLADSTONE ON THE PRESS.

Mr. Gladstone, in Ins speech at Manchester on Friday, after noticing that the agitation for the repeal of the paper duty was a very natural one, expressed his belief that the material benefits of the repeal had yet to receive a great development, and proceeded to express his gratitude to the promoters of the repeal in connection with the moral and political consequence of its effects upon the public press. Im not, ho said, going to say one word in disparagement of the public press at any period of its existence. My belief is that from the first it has been an organ of good immensely preponderating over the mischief. I mean now as it existed three, four, five generations a^o; in our time as it existed twenty years ago, it had reached to a position of remarkable prominence and utility. The great organs of the press as you well know, are conducted by some of the most accomplished minds of the country. Many of the articles written in those papers before the repeal of the paper duty were worthy of taking a place in the permanent literature of England. I well remember being in company with Sir R. Peel, not less than thirty years back, when a question was raised about the authorship of “ Junius.” Ton well remember how great a national as well as a litterary sensation was produced at the time by the publication of those letters; in point of fact, the intense 'controversy which respect to the authorship may enable us to measure the importance of those letters a* a political phenomenon of the times. But when that question was in discussion in private conversation the literary merit of the letters themselves was also brought under view, and I well recollect that Sir Robert Peel gave at once his opinion that the letters of “ Junius” were not as well written as the Times. (Cheers). It was a great thing thing to have a press in which the mind of the country was so ably and fully represented—in which public affairs and the conduct public men were so freely and incessantly canvassed and discussed. That discussion is of inestimable value to the country, and to none of more value than to public men themselves. Certainly, my own view of the working of the press is that upon the whole and for every domestic question it is nearly perfect. Not that there are no passing prejudices and errors , but that with perfect freedom of discussion, and with organs representing every section of opinion, passions, pejudices, and errors neutralise and correct one another. But with respect to foreign policy you cannot have so unmixed a resnlt, or such unmixed good, because when strong national sentiment arises with regard to some questions of foreign policy; then the tide

in this country flows one way, in a degree which is rarely the ease with respect to domestic questions, there is, undoubtedly, a great risk that the press, partaking of the national sympathies, will lose a great part of its utility as a corrector of error, and inflame the very prejudices which it is desirable to correct and to remove, (Hear, hear). As regards foreign policy, the conductors of the press themselves require the greatest moral self-com-mand and self-restraint. As regards domestic policy, it is a marvellous institution, which in its practical working as a whole comes hear to perfection ; but still it cannot be denied that twenty years ago it was not the press of the people. It could not from the price at which it was sold it could not and did not convey to the people constant and full and impartial information with respect to public affairs. It was the press of the upper classes; it answered every intellectual demand we could make. It was the press to a great degree of the middle classs. For them too it was a stisfactory institution. Butthis genial and beneficial influence which it had for the minority of the country, it exercised only in a very limited degree for the majority of the people. • The repeal of the paper duty has brought about a leieficial revolution in that respect. You know how the press of England—l believe, all things considered, the cheapest in the world —is bought by millions, or at least by hundreds of thousands, and carries into every house—if indeed, It were not found there before —but it strengthens in every house those sentiments of affectionate loyalty to the throne, of confidence in in the legislature, and profound attachment to the institutions and affectionate love for the country in which they were born, and with a higher pride and hope of England. Thus it has lead to great and worthy results. Again, I say, now every angry passion has subsided, and it is not necessary to recall a painful feeling even by incidental allusion, we must, as I think, as a people, rejoice that the press of England has been set entirely free from every legislative and every fiscal restraint—that it is as free as any portion of our institutions, and that it holds a place among them so worthy and so distinguished.