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

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

HOUSE OF LORDS, April 27.
Lord REDEtDALE presided in the absence of the Lord
Chancellor.
MARYLEBONE CHURCHWARDENS.
Lord PORTMAN gave notice that on Friday next
he should move for copies of all correspondence between
the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests and the
Rev. the Rector of St. Miry'ohne relative to the ap-
pointment of the Crown Churchwarden of that parish for
1852.
On the motion of the Earl of DERBY, the Exchequer-
bills' Bill was read a second time.
On the motion of the Earl of DERBY, the St. Al-
bans I.sfranchisement Bill was road a third time and

pa-sed.
COPYRIGHT AMENDMENT BILL.

-----
Lord COLCHESTER moved the second reading of
,his Bill. _ _ .

Lord BEAUMONT said he had several objections to
make to this Bill as regarded its details, but he would
reserve them until it went into Committee.
After a few words from Lord CRANWortTH and Lord
STANLEY of Alderley, the Bill was read a second time.
On the motion of the Earl of HARDWICKE, the
Sheep, Sec., Contagious Disorders Prevention Bill was
read a second time.
ADULTERATION OF COFFEE WITH CHICORY.
Lord TORRINGTON rose to present a peti-
tion, complaining of the operation of the Treasury
minute of August, 1840, with respect to the sale of
coffee mixed with chicory. The Noble Lord said the
subject was locked 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 petitioners desired was that
instead cf the Treasury minute of 1840, now complained
of, the regulation of the trade might be, with some slight
alteration, that of 1832, when chicory was permitted to
be sold separately by grocers as chicory, but notices were
ieeued 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
cireumstance 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 6d. 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 Imperial Government sanctioned
the selling of a spurious; article for the true one, making
honesty in the retailer almost impossible. The peti-
ticners 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 invigorating beverage. If this were the case it was to
be feared that the consumption of ardent spirits would be
increased. The Noble Eerl concluded his speech by
calling their Lotiships' atttntion to a memorial lying
on the table from the inhabitants of Ceylon to the
Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Colonies, re-
'stove to the adulteration of coffee with chicory.
The Duke of MONTROSE supported the prayer of
the petition jest, presented, having a similar petition to
present hitneelf from certain merchants and planters, as
also from a large number of the gaceral inhabitants of
Ceylon They stated that the colony was labouring
under very great depression in consequence of the
amount of finals invested in the growth of coffee, as
well as the great reduction that had taken place in the
price of that article, as also in the duty previously
charged upon it. Gradually since 1847 the revenue had
decreased en the article of coffee; adulteration remained
and the complaints c mtineed as strong as ever. But the
question did not alone confine itself to the adulteration
of coffee; for the grocers and traders complained that
even chicory itself was largely adulterated; and he,
therefore, should contend that, under the circumstances,
the existence of the Treasury minute was injurious to
the revenue.—( Henn hear.)
The Earl of DERBY said--I am not disposed to
underrate the importance of the subject which has just
been brought under cur notice, either as bearing on the
revenue, er on the case of the fair trader, or on the
interests of the colonial planters and merchants; or,
above all, as bearing on the interests of the poorer
classes of the community who are consumers of
coffee, and who while they aro parties least able to
protect themselves are those who have the strongest
claims to the favourable consideration of your Lord-
Alps. I can by no riVar4B accede to the position
laid down by the late Chancellor of the Exchequer in
another place, in a former session of Parliament, that
the doctrine of caveat emptor is applicable to all these
cases, and that so long as the revenue does not suffer it
forms no part of the duty of the Government to guard
any portion of the public against fraudulent dealers, or
from any impseition against which they ought to protect
there eves. I do not at all adopt that doctrine. I
think, on the contrary, it is the duty of the Government,
with regard to this as with regard to other articles, to
do all that in them liee to protect the public from fraud,
white they do not at the same time interfere with the
mixture of articles which are not in themselves delete-
rious, if the public should think fit to 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 so 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., c. 129, was an Act which went
a tvieryltn way in the direction which it took, because,
as 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
Ethterlooffif cheiopf", we believe), who many
Chancellor of the Exchequer,
that that Act was introduced mainly for
massyt be oppositea
rp: ar ere gic:oo (the
heldi
ee recollect
meeting what was in great vogue at that
time—tee 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 consume-
othfa dat e
Ition of chicory, or of the extent to which he referred the
yearthe consumption, so far from
1846
diminishing,
diminution in the consumption of coffee to the operation
of the year 1840, because from
ye':icr seers
t hadotrilYe mrlarut a
good deal increased. It amounted to
the year 1842, and in the fol-
lowingased to 32,000,0001b5. and
1846 it was 36,000,0001b5.,
rie,neOaroo,ooolbs. After that time it
a23lB4d:toiooi 00:0010(8y,00:117abbrs2.1:
tli
ni iyhtai;jekn3,y(t7
declined to 34,000,0001b5. and 32 000,0001 be., and in the
year 1850 it was only 31,000,0001b5. But there was an
according to the latest
the sth of April, 1851,
accounts,it increase ctrheeaaset, isi
of
fthe p
April,yearpeappears
a181t58h254,0t ; f
therefrom
was a very large increased
which was principally to be
4d. to 3d. on Colonial coffee. The effect of
CO doubt, to the diminution in the duty last
year—b%ciienddsimucainPntti°j:°ttr. from 6d. to 3d. en foreign coffee,
aduty has been an increase in the con-
sumptioncensiderable extent, the consumption
thatn d frr du from
oi
an
veryo t
last year having umounted to 34,500,0001b5.• and not
less than 1,200,0001b3. of that increase took place in co-
lental coffee. It is undoubtedly true, however, that with
the amount of coffse consumed, there is a large admix-
ture of chicory and of other substances. The Noble
Viscount stated the admixture of chicory at the enor-
mous amount of 12,000 tons;
that the total amount of
but from the accounts I
have seen, it would aptiear
chicory consumedin 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
d
the processes of kiln-drying, roasting, and grinding, are
reduced to about 1,520 tons. I believe that according to
the best estimate which can be formed that is the amount
of cheery which is mixed with coffee. The total quan-
tity of the articles mixed with coffee, of which about
two-thirds are Composed of chicory and ono-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 23,000 tons; and the loss to the revenue by
that adulteration, supposing that coffee to the amount of
the other articles employed would be consumed, is about
60,0001. a year. But you must not suppose that if that
adulteration could be altogether prohibited the consump-
tion of coffee would rise to a compensating amount. Nor
ought you to conclude that you could altogether do
away with the adulteration or admixture of chicory with
coffee; because chicory, being an article perfectly whole-
some, there is no reason why the consumer should not
have chicory mixed with his coffee if he should think
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 justifies-
don for a state of things which admits of a fraud on the
consumer, and of an admixture of coffee 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
him, nevertheless, the price at which he might pur-
chase, at all events, an :inferior sample of the genuine
article. I fun told that the process of adulteration has
gone on to so great an extent 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 bean; 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 moat 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, must boy it ground, and must
be at the mercy of the retail dealers 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
but it was a great stretch of the powers of those to whom
execution of the law was entrusted; and think the
subject is one worthy of the consideration of Go-
vernment. From 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-
therbecause the law superseded or suspolded h—
e that
than your Lordships or the country would desire;