The Sun.
London, England, 1852-04-28 00:00:00

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.

A. Ritchie, J. Mackay, and J. E. Germ4iae, Bristol,
timber merchants (so fur as regards J. Mackey)—A.
Ritchie and J. Mackay, Liverpool, timber merchants—
J. Mackay, H. Mackay, A. F. Mackay, and D. Mackay,
Liverpool, coal proprietors (so far as regards J. Mackay)
—T. B. Hayward and A B. Hay ward, Liverpool,
drapers—J. White, R. White, and A. White, Kings-
land, drapers (so far as regards R. White)—
R. Atkinson and W. Procter. Leeds, joiners and,
builders—J. Wilson and J. Smith, Albion-place, King's-
cross, furniture denlers—T. Swarbriek, R. Popple, and
C. Poppies, Groves, Kingston-upon-Hull, cottun-spin-
ners—J. Owen, W. Matthews, and G. Poulson, Liver-
pool, tobacco manufacturers—G. P. Harding, J. Dando,
Goodes, and S. G nodes, Hatton-garden, manufactu-
rers of the patent spiral fastenings for buttons, studs,
pine, brooches, &c. (so far as regards G. P. Harding
and J. Dando)—R. L. Curtis and E. C. Curtin, Strat-
ford, builders—G. Marriott and E. M. Marriott, Mel-
ton Mowbray, drapers—C. Crispe and R. Elliott, Tun-
bridge Wells, linendrapers—W. Roberts and J. J.
Thomas. Oawestry, solicitors—G. Bennett, W. Bennett,
and E. Sinkins, Kingsbridgo, Devonshire, painters—W.
Whitehead and W. Anderson, Limchouse, tailors and
drapers—R. Bradley and T. Bradley, Liverpool, licensed
victuallers—J. Parkinson and H. H. Green, Kingston-
upon-Hall, shipbuilders—R. Longdon, F. Longdon, and
R. Longdon, jun., Derby, silk hosiers—Mary Dashper
and W. R. Dallyn, Torquay, linendrapers.
INSOLVENT PETITIONERS.
J. Snow, Tranmere, Bebbington, Cheshire, grocer.
W. C. Ellis, Great Poungland, Norfolk, farmer.
A. J. Dibuale, Hessie, Yorkshire, letter carrier.
J. Watkins, Pontypridd, Glamorganshire, shoemaker.
S. J. Dart, Cardiff, Glamorganshire, retailer of beer.
J. P. Townsend, Cardiff, Glamorganshire, draper.
N. Bradley, Cardiff, (3 lamorganshire, chemist.
J. Fry, Brinkworth, Wiltshire, butcher.
D. Reed, Speldburst, Kent, laud measurer.
R. Hewitt, Mears Ashby, Northamptonshire.
J. Moore, Hexharo, Northumberland, market gardener.
J. Webster, Louth, Lincolnshire, butcher.
J. Hunt, Pentmwynydd, Trevithin, Monmouthshire,
flannel manufacturer.
G M. Cowley, Nottingham, solicitor.

.T. Hudson, Margate, grocer.
G. Raymond, Dover, Lieutenant in the Royal Nary.
T. 1.41. Dreaper, West Derby, Lancashire, corn merchant.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 27.

ADULTERATION OF COFFEE WITH CHICORY.

Lord TORRINGTON rose to present a peti-
tion, complaining of the operation of the Treasury
minute of August, 1810, with respect to the sale of
coffee mixed with chicory. The Noble Lord said the
subject wits looked upon with great interest by the
coffee merchants, and he hoped that the answer which
would be given to-night would in a great measure allay
their anxiety. All that the petitioner a desired was that
instead of the Treasury minute of 1840, now complained
of, the regulatiou of the trade might be, with some alight
alteration, that of 1832, when chicory was permitted to
be sold separately by grocers as chicory, but notices were
issued at the same time that the legal penalties would
be rigidly enforced if discovered mixed with coffee. In
1840 it appeared that in consequence of memorials from
the grocers and dealers in chicory, and also from the
circumstance of exceeding high rates then ruling for
coffee, together with the disruption of our commercial
relations with China advancing the price of tea,
an order was issued from the Treasury to the
Excise Board, authorising the admixture of chicory with
coffee, a duty being maintained on the former of 201. per
ton on the kiln-dried, and Gd. per lb. on the powdered
root, when imported from abroad. The petitioners did
not seek to destroy the consumption of chicory, or to
impose any additional duty on it, their chief object was
to get rid of the demoralising effects of the present
system, by which the'lmperial Government sanctioned
the selling of a spurious article for the true one, making
honesty in the retailer almost impossible. The peti-
tioners feared that the industrious classes, now the chief
consumers of coffee in England, would cease to use it,
finding that it: underwent daily deterioration, and thus
would be lost the best part of the English market and to
the English mechanic and labourer a pleasant, wholesome,
and iuvigorating beverage. If this were the case it was to
be feared that the consumption of ardent spirits would be
increased. The Noble Earl concluded his speech by
calling their Lordships' attention to a memorial lying
on the table from the inhabitants of Ceylon to the
Right Hun. tbo Secretary of State for the Colonies, re-
lative to the adulteration of coffee with chicory.
The Duke of MONTROSE supported the prayer of
the petition just presented, having a similar petition to
present himself from certain merchants and planters, as
also from a large rnimher of the general inhabitants of
Ceylon, They stated that the colony was labouring
under very great depression in consequence of the
1847 the
tdhuet duty
revenuepreviously
had
amount of feuds invested in the growth of coffee, as
well as the great reduction that had taken place in the
chargedprice of
uponthat article,it.
G ra :es
decreased on the article of coffee; adulteration remained
and the complaints continued as strong as ever. But the
question did not alone confine itself to the adulteration
ea cs t
bearing which
oven chicory itself was largely adulterated; and he,
therefore, should contend that, under the circumstances,
allaylssoincien
of coffee; for the grocers and traders complained that
the existence of the Treasury minute was injurious to
the revenue.—(Hear. hear.) .
The Earl of DERBY said—l am not disposed to
thyeeusrtroLnogreds.t
the case of the fair trader, or on the
revenue, or on
interests of the colonial planters and merchants; or,
been underratebro brought
cit
hh
te
underimportance
o our notice,
ot, ifc et,heei tshhehrj
classes of the community who are consumers of
coffee, and who while they are parties least able to
above all, as bearing on the interests of the poorer
in a former session Parliament, that
claims
I can by no mans accede to the position
protect tjacci9eiltvXuraarbele tehoonsseidwerhaotiohnavreA
ships. Chancellor cf the '
laid down by the late
of Exchequer in
another plane,
• 0 of caveat entptee is applicable to all these
the doctrine to the
and that so long as the revenue does not suffer it
cases,form no part of the duty of the Government to guard
portion of the public against fraudulent dealers, or
any Pt' anno.tion against which
from elves.l—u el - Ithey ought to protect
theint I do not at ad adopt that doctrine. I
think, on the cuntrary, it is the duty of the Government,
with regard to this as with regard to other articles, to
do all that in them lies to protect the public from fraud,
while they do not at the saute time interfere with the
mixture of articles which tiro not in themselves delete-
• if the public should think fit to. •
Inoue,. use them. With
regard to chicory, I believe there is no allegation on the
part of anyone that it is an article injurious to health.
, many persons contend that it improves the flavour of
coffee. many persons prefer coffee mixed with chicory
and if they do co there can be no reason why . they'
should not drink the untaxed beverage, rather than the
taxed one. I have always thought, however, that the
Act to which the Noble Viscount had referred, the Act
of the 43d George 111., e. 129, was an Act which went
a very long way In the direction which it took, because,
as it appears to me, it not only prohibited any fraudulent
mixtures, but it prohibited under any circumstances any
mixture whatever, and more with a view, I think, to
revenue than to any other consideration. It pro-
hibited the avowed use of articles not purporting to be
coffee, but mere substitutes for coffee. My Noble Friend
opposite (the Earl of Ripon, we believe), who many
years ego held the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer,
must recollect that that Act was introduced mainly for
the purpose of meeting what was in great vogue at that
time—the late Mr. Hunt's roasted corn—which never
pretended to be coffee. It was chiefly, therefore, I be-
lieve, with regard to the revenue that the Act was in-
troduced. I think the Noble Viscount was hardly quite
correct in his statement of the progress of the consump-
tion of chicory, or of the extent to which he referred the
diminution in the consumption of coffee to the operation
of rho Treasury minute of the year 1840, because from
that year to the year 1846 the consumption, so far from
diminishing, had a good deal increased. It amounted to
28,000,0001h5., I think, in the year 1842, and in the
and
fol-
lowing years it increased to 32,0003,0000, ihso ,
..001h3
34,000,0001 W; in the year 1846 it was
that time it
After 6 'OO
and in 1847 it was 37,000,0001b5.
declined to 34,000,0001b5. and 32 00 ,
000Ihs., and in the
year 1850 it was only 31,000,0001hcc30. But there was an
g
to the latest
increaeo in the year 1850; and
according
sth of April, 1851,
accounts, it appears that from
to the sth of April, 1852, there
very
large increase
was
principally to be
in tile consumption of coffee,which
diminution in the duty last
attributed, no doabt, to the 1
3f. nn foreign coffee,
and from ed. to
,_ i ,
year—a colonial coil,e. The effect of
from 4d. to Oil. on , .
tiit reduction of duty has been an increase iti the con-
sump:ion to a very considerable extent, the consumption
amounted to 34,500,0001b5.• and
last year having not
ofthat increase took'
1 200 000 lbs.
less than , ,
1 c-ffee
lonia e •• It is undoubtedly true, however, that with
the amount of coffee consumed, there is a large admix-
tare of chicory and of other kubstancet3. The Noble
Viscount stated the admixture of chicory at the enor-
mous aineunt of 12,000 tons; but from the accounts I
have seen, it would appeal that the total amount of
chicory consumed in this country is 10,000 tons; and of
these about 9,000 tons are used in the adulteration of
coffee. But these 9,000 tons are raw produce, and in
the processes of kiln-drying, roasting, and grinding, are
reduced to about 1,520 tons. I believe that according to
the best estimate wnich can be formed that is the amount
of cheery which is mixed with coif, e. The total quan-
tity of the articles mixed with coffee, of which about
two-thirds are composed of chicory eud one-third is com-
posed of other substances, such as beans, roasted corn,
some more, some less deleterious—the total quantity of
the articles mixed with coffee is about 5,400,0001b5., or
about 22,000 or 23,0(30 tons; Mid the less to the I9YQatie by

that adulteration, supposi:7.g that coffee to the amount of
the other articles employed would be consumed, is about
i
60.0001 a year. But you must not rupp,se that t that
adulteration could be alwg,ether prohibited the consump-
tion of coffee would ri;e to a cosap,n:4atinq amount. Nor
ought you to conclude that you could altogether co
away with the adulteration or admixture 01 chicory with
car e; ui cause ciiicury, being en too pet iced, wn=
some there is no reason why the c uisumur should not
have chio,ry mixed with his c. ur.c if he should thii.k
fit. But the point on which I do certainly concur with
the Noble Viscount opposite, and with my Noble Friend
the Noble Duke behind me, is, that there is no justifica-
tion for a state, of things which admits of a fraud on the
consumer, and of an admixture of ceffee with chicory,
which enables the dealer to defraud the revenue by the
introduction of an inferior material, and at the same
time to defraud the consumer by furnishing him with a
spurious instead of a genuine article, and charging
tom, nevertheless, the pike at elnch he might pur-
chase, at all events, en :infaiior sample of the g. naive
article. lam told that the process of adulteration has
gone on to so great an txient that you are not secure
against it even by that means, which might be generally
considered to afford a perfect security—namely, buy-
ing the coffee in the beau; for there are actually imi-
tations of the coffee bean; so that although you may
buy the bean, you may grind for yourself spurious
coffee with the most perfect confidence of its being a
genuine article. But this security, such as is, is a se-
curity which is confined to the classes which purchase in
large quantities, and are in more easy circumstances.
The poor man, who buys his pound or half pound, or
quarter pound of coffee, mullt buy it ground, and must
be at the mercy or the retail denim as to the article
which he purchases. I think this is a question which
deserves the consideration of the Treasury, and I do not
pretend to justify the minute of the year 1840. It never
appeared to me to be capable of being justified, because,
for an object not I think in itself very desirable, it un-
dertook to set aside the special and stringent provisions
of an Act of Parliament. The introduction of that
minute was not in itself certainly a violation of the law,
but it was a great stretch of the powers of those to whom
the execution of the law was entrusted; and I think the

subject is ono worthy of the consideration of Go-
vernment. It'rom what I can learn, I am not
sure that the mere rescinding of the Treasury
minute of the year 1840 would not go somewhat far-
ther than your Lordships or the country would desire;
because the law superseded or suspended by that
minute went the length of saying that no person being
a dealer in coffee, or other articles which are specified,
should have on his premises any article capable of being
mixed up with coffee, and if he were to have any such
article, even for the purpose of a legitimate mixture, he
would be subject to a very heavy penalty. Now I can-
not help thinking that a medium course might be
adopted in this case, and that some check might be put
on the unfair mixture of chicory with coffee without in-
terfering with that mixture which might be desired by
the purchaser, and might be perfectly legitimate, al-
though it might undoubtedly have a tendency to dimi-
nish the revenue. That to which I think the attention
of Parliament and of the Government ought to be di-
rected is not the bond fide admixture or sale of avowedly
mixed articles, thereby doing an injustice to the fair
trader, imposing on the defenceless purchaser, and prac-
tising a fraud on the community at large. Eater-
tainieg these opinions, I am quite ready to say that
although there may be difficulties in the ac-
tual rescinding of this Treasury minute, yet I
do think it is a subject which calls for the atten-
tion of the Government; and their attention will be
given to the best made of restoring a due supervision in
the case, not for the purpose of preventing that which
may be permitted—namely, the admixture of a harmless
material with coffee, but for the purpose of supporting
a law which was intended to prevent the fraudulent ad•
mixture of a spurious article with coffee, and thereby
protecting the humbler class of consumers, and. I hope,
affording some advantage to the fair dealer, and also to
the colonial producers from whom these petitions have
proceeded.—(li ar, hear.)
The petitions wore then ordered to lie on the table.