104 News-venders' Petition to Parliament.

1.

CHAPTER IV.

Examination of Parliamentary Arguments against the Abolition of Sunday Newspapers.

THE following is a copy of the Petition which has been presented to both Houses of the Legislature by the principal Newsmen of the metropolis, changing only the form of the address:

"To the Honourable the Commons of the "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire"land in Parliament assembled.

"The humble Petition of the undersigned "Dealers in, and Vendors of, Newspa66 pers in the metropolis and its vicinity, "Sheweth,

"That your Petitioners are placed in the "most painful situation by the great increase, "and extensive circulation, of Sunday Newspapers.

"That many of your Petitioners, unwilling to live by the perpetual breach of the Sabbath, and in the practice and promotion of "immorality, have made great pecuniary sacri"fices rather than engage in a traffic so incon

News-venders' Petition to Parliament.

105

"sistent with Christian principles, and so disgraceful to a Christian country; while, as to "others of the Petitioners, their circumstances unhappily forbid their rejecting so consider"able a portion of the news-business, and throwing it into the hands of others who feel "no such scruples. At the same time, it is "with the utmost reluctance that your Peti"tioners engage in an occupation which not

only necessarily prevents their attendance on "the public services of the Church, but more "than usually fatigues their bodies and minds

on that sacred day which is especially ap"pointed as a day of rest; and obliges them "to employ upon it a number of extra hands "in the distribution of the Sunday Papers.

"Your Petitioners also beg leave, in addi"tion, to state their full impression and be"lief, that the publication of Sunday Papers "has a decided tendency to injure and deprave "the public morals, not only as respects the "profanation of the day in the employment of

66

printers and newsmen, and in the temptation "thus afforded to multitudes of readers to absent themselves from public worship, and to frequent public houses, but also in consequence of many of such papers giving currency to principles which are manifestly dis"loyal, seditious, and profane, without the

106 Mr. Courtenay's Presentation of Petition.

possibility of your Petitioners exercising any "discrimination in their distribution. "Your Petitioners therefore most respect'fully and earnestly entreat your Ho"nourable House to adopt such mea"sures for the suppression of the evil "in question, as to your Honourable "House may seem most advisable."

This Petition was signed by above seventy of the most respectable individuals of the trade, whose addresses were subjoined.

It is already known to the public that the Honourable Member who, on the 26th May 1820, presented the above Address to the House of Commons (the Honourable Mr. Courtenay), greatly surprised the Petitioners, as well as all those who were in favour of the Petition, by making a speech in direct opposition to it; reminding us of Dean Swift's remark upon "the unfortunate Dr. Sheridan, "who" (says the Dean), "by mere chance-med"ley, shot his own fortune dead by a single "text." Certainly, if any speech was ever calculated to defeat the object of a Petition, it was that which was delivered when this Petition was presented; and, although no imputation of intentional hostility, much less of direct desertion, is intended to be conveyed, it cannot but be regretted that (since the senti

Remarks on Mr. Courtenay's Speech. 107

ments of the Honourable Member who undertook to deliver this Petition, had sustained a change between the moment of receiving, and of presenting, it) he did not apprize the Petitioners, or some of their numerous and respectable friends, both in and out of Parliament, that such was the fact; in which case it might have been consigned to other hands, and at least a more favourable hearing have been secured for its object. Not only, however, was a speech delivered in direct opposition to the Petition, but it was unexpectedly presented at an early period of the day, without any previous notice to that effect; in consequence of which, none of the friends of the measure were in attendance, who might either have advocated its object, or answered its opponents; and an unfavourable impression was consequently excited in the House, which did not properly belong either to the cause which was in hand, or to the object of those who espoused it *.

Only a single opponent, indeed, appeared in the House of Commons (Mr. Lambton), the principal scope of whose objections went to

* The inconvenience of a first impression being formed in haste, upon incorrect information, or insufficient premises, is well described by Addison: "It is very natural," says he,

to take for our whole lives, a light impression of a thing, "which, at first, fell into contempt with us, for want of "consideration."--Spect. No. 334.

108 Mr. Lambton's Opposition to the Petition.

what he was pleased to term the hypocrisy of the Petitioners, his observation having been, that he had "heard such hypocritical cant "with the utmost disgust." I have looked in vain for any evidence of "hypocrisy" or "cant" in this Petition, and perhaps others have done the same, with no better success: nay, it may perhaps be asserted, without the fear of contradiction, that, until it can be shewn that a desire to obey the laws of God and man, to attend divine worship, and to enjoy one day of rest in the seven, is so much hypocrisy and cant, the remark which was made upon this occasion must be considered as a gratuitous assumption, uncalled for by the occasion, and resting upon no solid foundation whatever. Without intending any thing disrespectful or offensive in any quarter, may it not be questioned whether the charge of "hypocrisy" will not more properly attach to every member of the Establishment who (notwithstanding his baptismal profession, of renouncing the world and its vanities) openly neglects the observance of the Sabbath, absents himself from public worship, lives in the neglect of the holy sacrament, and publicly derides those who are not disposed to pursue a similar course?

At all events, it becomes every one to be cautious how he ventures upon imputations of "cant" and "hypocrisy," in those cases where