The Sun.
London, England, 1839-02-04 00:00:00

_
a free trade in corn, I must now turn to the article of barley.
It appears that the consunoion of barley and malt iu London
alone has increased about 50 per cent. in the last twenty_
one years, and since the large import of Dublin porter
and Scotch ales the last few years, it is but fair to
l'ay, full 60 or 70 per cent. yNow it is certain that
There has been a very large increase in the cultivation of bar..
ley, and yet we have the last seven years always consumed
every sack of our large growth and good crops, including an
import of about 60,000 quarters a-year into London alone.
I remember the evidence given by the farmers on the Corn-
law Committee of 1826 and 1827, stated they should be con-
tent with 30s. per quarter fur their malting barley ; but such
Crops for several years barley has ranged from about 355. to
455., being from 20 to 50 per cent. higher than even the
growers, in their evidence, said they would be content with; and
at this present time, and for many months past, the very worst
has been selling at several shillings above their own maximum
price—this, of course, is a wrong state of things, even accord-
ing to their own evidence. Then let us see how this has hap-
pened, find the cause and suggest the remedy. The only cause
Inscinrecaresead sedconsumption of beer and spirits; the only remedy is
import, because it is evident an our increased growth is
andlll3t sufficient. Now I shall show that the consumers of barley
!realt are taxed to the amount of 100 per cent., and I may
ben be allowed to presume that if the 100 per cent. tax could
he taken off, it would increase the comfort, and largely extend
the draught of beer (I am not advocating gin).
It is well known that some millions of the people can get
little or no beer at all—the rate of wages to labourers, and
n°*e particularly agricultural labourers, being about 9a.
.in Weck, it follows they can get none, and let us follow it up
Y. the scale of wages to I Ss. or 20s. a week, and I would ask
it be possible men with any family can afford to drink what
Is needful. Certainly not what is needful; but what I corn_
plain of is, that thousands get none. Of course I must be al-
*Wed some latitude, and, after all, I cannot bring my assertion
to a demonstration. But I think I can show enough to satisfy
any reasonable mind that we actually want a free trade in
barley, and that, with untaxed malt and hops, we should not
„ t Only consume all we grow, but all the Continent could
-Pare us ; always bearing in mind that a free trade here would
214 e a corresponding rise in prices abroad, which would act
-"some protection to our own growers.
The population of the United Kingdom is somewhere
aenut twenty-five millions, and it is certain that some millions
of the Irish nation never taste beer. Some millions of the
I!'glish and Scotch are in the same situation or nearly so ; I
ink it would also be admitted there are some few millions
W° get but little, and who would drink more if they could
tat it.
. consider beer as a poor man's necessary, but, if you cal
it his luxury, I do not see why a poor man should be de
ed of his luxury by taxation, and that tax which don'
affect the rich.
I_llillow thbt tax to be 1001. per cent. Thus—
The Excise duty on a quarter of malt, is about... 20s. 8d
Th Ditt' on 19ibs. hops to the qr. of malt 2 0
duty on all the barley imported of late years
has been 12s. 10d., and seldom can be less un-
der our present laws . 12 10
4. d, for Licences, &c. &c., per quarter.. 0 4

Amount of tax
Al the agriculturists said they would be satisfied
With 305. per qr. for their barley, say 3O 0
It follows that the ta is above 100 pr ent., and it fol-
lots that we should drink our beer nearlye at half the present
F°Bt if the duty could be taken off malt, hops, licenses, &c.,
1"Illy with a free trade in barley. Having shown what the
aZ " does in enhancing the price, let me show what the extra
,esuroption. would be, if the tax was abolished, to do which I
Celist suppose that some few millions who now do not taste
er Would then get some, those who now get a little would
iret a little more, and those who are exceedingly addicted to
It would also drink more. Therefore 1 will suppose that there
ate five millions of people who on an average would be able to
afford to drink half a pint per day each beyond their present
consumption of 'ittle or none ; then to make this half pint
Per day it would require 1,184,895 quarters, which is as much
barley as the Continent ever could supply us with if there was
no duty whatever; so the farmers would have customers for
all the barley they could grow, and the merchants find buyers
for all they could import; the people would drink their beer
at about half the present price, and still the farmers would get
301:_ for their barley.

We come to the same conclusion with this article as we
did with wheat, which is, that the people have been squeezed
out of Bs. to 10s. per quarter on the whole growth of the king-
dom for the last few years, to prevent them getting a few
hundred thousand quarters which they actually wanted.
On the subject of oats, I find the same objection to these
Prohibitory laws as regards them, for although we have re-
Peatedly wanted oats the last few years, yet such is the state
or the law that we cannot have them I say we have wanted
oats, and I am justified in saying so when they have almost
teary spring and summer got up to from 28s. to 325. a quer-
-1Z: arid be it remembered here also the agriculturists said 20s.
I;e,cluarter would satisfy them, but the Corn Bill has pro-
-111)(7,1 them up to 30s. So here, too, is 50 per cent. again
en 4 growth of perhaps 30 millions to keep us from getting
that Nihon. It may be said with some degree of plausibility
e
v tinireland has benefited by high prices, forcing into culti-
ifirs'u so much more of her bog and mountain ; and so it may,
l4gdllrish nation you substitute the words—lrish absentee
rrds ; but the Irish nation at large are no more benefited
."44e Corn-lavrs than the English or Scotch.
114,Gareat stress is laid on the fact that capital invested in land
ao-w- Only to 3 per cent.—that may be true if you buy land
Per 'e I3ut the only fair way
top look at the question is, what
*bet entsge it paid on the co rice before any Act of Parlia-
billet./48 passed to raise the price of the produce. At least
tenths of all the landowners should look back to the
tea 1790, and then sit down content with the present per
lioutwge on the then value. And as to the other tenth, who
glit their laud since then, they bought it knowing that the
..arbe
and 'ands that made the Corn-laws could alter the Corn-laws,
xs so it amounts to this—that they bought a bad bargain,
Ziher speculators often do.
YOurri•Editor,—l feel I have trespassed already too much on
the ,'"indricss, and will therefore conclude by saying, bad as
repeal are, I would not instantly advise their total
4nrd'r übstitute a fixed duty on wheat of 12s. a quarter,
tied bunt"e Is. a-year ; and 6s. on barley, beans, and pease ;
of oats 4s • and lower them 6d. a year; and am really
eoerion that. 'such is the rapid increase of population and
yearegoent consumption, the landlords themselves will seven
eiot,BBl hence wonder how they ever could have clung so tena-
Y to these ill-judged laws.
I am, Sir, your obliged servant,
WILLIAM RUSTON.
Corn Exchange,
London, Jan. 30.