This rule is a model specimen of what very clever men united in a large committee can assent to. The first and last sentences of the oracular writing pronounce that— Prices must not be affixed to any article exhibited for the judgment of the public, _even though_ there should be _no other reason_ for exhibiting it than its price. The intervening sentence reveals to us that even Commissioners may in some cases be themselves unable to judge without a knowledge of the price—that it may perchance be so important that they must take evidence upon it. Yet, with a very flattering deference to the sagacity of the public, they seem to think _it_ can, without that information, form as good an opinion as their own. It may be remarked that the permission to ask of the attendant the price of an article, on which much stress has been laid, depends on several contingencies, namely:—that every article has an attendant;—that he is at all times at his post;—and also that he _knows_ its price. It is admitted that the Commissioners wish “to give each exhibitor the _benefit_ to be derived by him from the knowledge [of price] on the part of the public,” and also that the public cannot judge without that information, and yet, with singular inconsistency, they forbid the simplest and most natural mode of accomplishing this object, placing in fact an impediment in the way of their own wishes. The only argument which is urged in favour of this rule, occurs in the reply to the Prussian application, in which it is stated, “after the maturest consideration on the part of Her Majesty’s Commissioners,” they feel “that by allowing the affixing the actual price to the articles themselves, they should be making themselves responsible for the accuracy of those prices in all instances.” This singular timidity in fact involves the Commissioners in far larger responsibility, since according to their own argument they admit that they are “_responsible_” for any statement they “_allow_” the exhibitors to make; it follows, therefore, that any statement they _command_ the exhibitors to attach to the articles exposed must be still more firmly _guaranteed_ by the Commissioners. But they have very rightly ordered that every article shall have attached to it a statement of the _reason_ for which it is exhibited. Consequently _they guarantee the statements made by exhibitors_. If, therefore, a piece of calico is exhibited entirely for the sake of the _permanence_ of the beautiful colour with which it is dyed, the beauty it is true may be evident to the eye, but the merit will consist wholly in the _permanence_. If this is stated by the exhibitor, the Commissioners themselves are responsible for its truth.