314 
THE COTTAGE GARDENER. 
[February ‘20. 
The second essay, and there are hut two, is An account of some ex- I 
periments tending in improve the culture of Lucerne, and, like the other i 
essay, is as distinguished for its sound practical information, as for its : 
fund of good reasoning, and ot anecdote. No one can read it without 
interest, and no one desiring to cultivate Lucerne, can read it without I 
profit. It is true, that he may he in error when recommending it to he 
raised "in a nursery-bed, and the seedlings to he then transplanted in 
rows, hut there is abundance of good information applicable to all modes 
of cultivating it, and we are not sure that he is wrong in the mode he 
advocates. But we must conclude, and it shall he with an extract of Mr. 
Harte’s poetical description of the Lucerne, or Alfulsa, hay harvest in 
Spain. 
“ Th’ impatient mower, with an aspect hlythe, 
Surveys the sainfoin-fields, and whets his scythe. 
Y'noisa, Agnes, Beatrix prepare 
To turn til’ alfalsa swarths with anxious care : 
(No more for Moorish sarabands they call, 
Their castanets bang idle on the wall): 
Alfalsa, whose luxuriant herbage feeds 
The lab’ring ox, mild sheep, and fiery steeds ; 
Which cv’ry summer—cv’ry thirtieth morn— 
Is six times reproduc’d, and six times shorn.” 
Meteorology of the Week. —At Chiswick, from observations during I 
the last twenty-four years, the average highest and lowest temperatures j 
of the above days are 4/° and 31°, respectively. The greatest heat, 64°, 
was on the 25th in 1816; and lowest cold, 21°, was on the same day in 
181". Rain fell during 8S days of the period, and 80 days were fine. 
; Eschewing, as we do, an interference, even the most 
distant, with political topics, yet we shall venture to add 
our voice in favour of a repeal of the duty on paper; 
and we are the more hopeful that this repeal will be 
; accomplished, because it is a glaring anomaly, that whilst 
: the government have facilitated the diffusion of litera- 
| ture, by the postage reductions, and by permitting books 
to be sent in the mail bags for sixpence from the Laud’s 
End to the Orkneys, yet, by retaining the duty upon 
paper, they check the production of that literature, which 
they have thus given the means of diffusing. No work 
can be diffused among the mass of our population unless 
it is very cheap; and no work is sufficiently cheap for 
circulation among that mass, if its price exceeds two¬ 
pence ; and it is upon this class of publications that the 
duty on paper presses most injuriously. In our own 
case, the money received for the sale of 32,000 copies is 
annually taken by government for the paper duty. Now 
we do not complain of this, because we took it into our 
calculation of outlay when establishing The Cottage 
Gardener. We knew that we should have to pay that 
paper duty, and this being so, we knew we could only 
afford to pay so much for literary assistance, and we 
could only afford to give so many pages. The reading 
public, therefore, are the sufferers; for they would have 
a larger number of pages for their money, and a greater 
number of mindsengaged in their service, if the duty on 
paper was removed. 
The mischief, however, does not stop here; for Messrs. 
I Knight, Chambers, and others, will coincide with us in 
! stating, that the sale of a cheap periodical increases in 
proportion to the number of its pages and the excellence 
of their contents. The duty on paper, we have shown, 
1 ‘educes both these, and consequently lessens the sale. 
I The results from this are, that thousands of workpeople— 
I paper-makers, printers, folders, stitchers, and others, are 
kept out of employ. That this is no imaginary picture, 
i but the actual results produced by the paper duty, we 
have this unimpeachable testimony from Mr. Knight 
and Mr. Chambers :— 
Mr. Knight says:—“I have announced a ‘Supplement’ or 
; ‘ Companion ’ to ‘ The National Cyclopaedia,’ which will consist 
of a Series of Treatises on Scientific, Industrial, and Social 
Progress. To produce this work as it ought to be produced, 
I must endeavour to procure the assistance of the best 
minds in the country—of the most eminent professors in 
every department of knowledge. Assume that this work 
will in quantity be equal to a third of ‘The National Cyclo¬ 
pedia,’ or four volumes,—I cannot secure such assistance 
under an expenditure of 2,000/. In that case I must sell at 
least 25,000 copies to cover my outlay. Such a risk ‘ must 
give us pause.’ I have deferred the commencement of this 
important book until I see if the Government contemplate a 
repeal of the Paper Duty in the next session of Parliament; 
for if I print 25,000 copies of this book, I shall use 0,400 
reams of paper, weighing 20 Hi. and paying a duty of 2s. 7 %rl. 
per ream, increased by the duty upon the covers, whether 
paper or milled board, to 2s. Oil. a ream. Here then is a 
burden of 880/. imposed upon this undertaking. Remove 
the burden of the 880/., and I should have little hesitation in 
carrying out my idea. My risk in the greatest original 
expenditure, the copyright, would be reduced to 300/. per 
volume, instead of being 500/. per volume. But suppose I 
should hold it my interest to go further,—not to put the 
saved tax directly into my pocket, but to make my book more 
valuable, and therefore more extensive in demand, by adding 
the 880/. to my original estimate of the sum to be paid for 
copyright—by paying 700/. per volume instead of 500/. 
The inevitable improvement and consequent popularity of 
my book might diminish my risk to a greater degree than 
the saving of the amount of the Tax. If I would have the 
very highest assistance, I must show my sense of its worth 
by the most liberal payment. The Paper Duty adds nothing 
to the value of my book. The readers cannot receive any 
benefit from this large item of expenditure. But if I am 
relieved from the Paper Duty, I have a fund in reserve 
which will enable me to ask the highest in scientific know¬ 
ledge and in literary accomplishment for their invaluable 
aid. If Sir John Herschel w'ould receive what Sir Charles 
Wood might be pleased to remit to me, my project would be 
comparatively safe. The fund out of which I could produce 
an unequalled book, by an extraordinary payment to the 
highest class of authors—the fund by which I could benefit 
my countrymen as much as by any educational grant—is in 
the hands of Parliament. Will Parliament let me wisely use 
it for the pubic advantage,—or will it continue to demand it 
as a small item to swell the Excise, in the same return with 
the impost upon gin ? ” 
“The ‘Miscellany of Tracts,”’ observed Mr. Chambers, 
“ was closed as non-remunerative with a steady sale of i 
80,000; while it was calculated that this work, up to the end 
of last year, had paid 0,220/. of duty. Now, had not this I 
money been taken by the Government, we might have been | 
advised to continue the work. There was a business stopped 
which distributed 18,000/. a-year in the employment of 
labour and the profits of retail trade,—there was an organ I 
of intelligence and morality for the people of this country 
closed by the Government, as effectually as if they had sent 
the police to break the presses. To illustrate this matter 
further, we have since set a-going a similar work, but at 
three-halfpence a sheet, and on somewhat more ambitious 
principle as to the grade of subjects and style of treatment. 
Driven from the penny field by the Paper Duty, we try that 
of three-halfpence. But of this series of sheets the sale is ! 
under one-half of the former. The higher price appears to 
be the chief cause why the sale is thus restricted. As the 
profit is but small, this work may have to be given up also.” i 
These are facts admitting of no dispute; and as similar 
arguments did prevail to obtain more light to our plants, 
by a repeal of the duty on glass, and are prevailing to 
obtain more light to our dwellings, by a repeal of the tax 
on windows; so do we anticipate that they will prevail 
in obtaining the abolition of that duty which operates 
equally prejudicially by diminishing the light that is 
diffused by our cheap literature. 
