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]