The Sun.
London, England, 1863-04-15 00:00:00

THE MALT TAX.

Yesterday a very influential deputation of members of
Parliament and gentlemen interested in the repeal or re-
. __ _ _

duction of the malt tax waited upon the Chancellor of the

Exchequer to impress upon him the advisability of abolish-
ing, or, at any rate, reducing the tax upon malt.
Sir FITZROY KELLY opened the proceedings by reading
a memorial to the Chancellor of the Exchequer from the
Central Anti-Malt Taxation Society. It stated that the

anomaly of a high duty on malt surviving the repeal of the
duties on corn and hops, and being almost the only remain-
ing tax upon a production of the British soil, must be ap-
parent to men of every political creed. Next to wheat,
barley is the most important production of our farms, and
yet it is loaded with a duty, when converted into malt, of
upwards of 50 per cent,, being 21s. Bd. per quarter. At
present only the finest qualities of barley can be profitably
malted ; but under a reduction of duty the inferior qualities
would also be converted into malt, and the consequent re-

duction in the cost price would induce an enormously in-
creased consumption. Thus, a substantial reduction of duty
would not severely affect the revenue, whilst the farmer
would have a sub: titute equal, if not superior, to oil cake
and other condiments, besides being the produce of his own
soil and industry. The Chancellor of the Exchequer ad-
mitted in 1862 that it would be a powerful argument for the
repeal of the duty if it could be shown that malt is well
adapted for feeding purposes. The heavy duty is a bar to
very extensive experiments, but enough has been done to
answer this question in the affirmative. The malt duty in-
flicts great wrong and injustice upon the public generally.
Beer is a necessary of life to the working man, and he ought
to be able to drink it as free from taxation as the bread he
eats; abandon the high duty, and there will be an end to
adulterations which destroy health, and to the numerous
other evils which accompany high-priced beer, whilst the
general use of untaxed malt for feeding cattle would sensi-
bly lower the cost of producing the food of the people. The
close relation between a high duty and a diminished con-
sumption, and vice versa, is most clearly proved by the statis-
tics of production and consumption during the last 100 3 ears.
In 1750 the consumption amounted to 6 bushels per head of
the population, the duty being 4s. per quarter; whereas in
1858, the duty being 21s. Ed., the consumption was only 1
bushel per head.
Sir F. KELLY then said—As there were some gentlemen
present who would venture to address a few words to him
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer), he would not detain him
but for a moment. He reminded the right hon. gentleman
that the malt duty was a war tax, and when it was imposed
it was under a pledge that it should be repealed when the
war ceased. That pledge had been violated and the tax
continued. It was a tax that fell heavily on the poor, for
it was a tax upon those necessaries which to those people
were at once a comfort and a luxury. The reduction of the
duty would, in his opinion, result in an increased consump-
tion, and if the reduction were extended to 10s. or 12s. the
revenue would not suffer by it. (Hear, hear.)
Col. BARTTELOT said this matter had been warmly taken
up in the country because the people felt they were aggrieved
by the imposition of the tax. If the malt duty were decreased
there would be an increase in the growth of barley. There
was a great deal of land that was not capable of growing
the best barley, but if the duty were decreased they would
be enabled to grow an inferior quality of barley, which
would do very well for malting, and therefore the revenue
would not suffer by it. They felt that as wheat was at a
low price everything should be done to improve the condi-
tion of the agricultural community, and they called upon
him (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) to do it. (Hear.)
Mr. DODSON said there was no duty the reduction of
which would injure the revenue less than the malt duty.
It had been found by experience that, whenever the duty
had been increased, the consumption had been checked,
and when it had been decreased the consumption had been
stimulated. If the trade in barley were free, he had no hesi-
tation in saying that there would be an increased produc-
tion of that article.

Mr, BOOTH, from his own experience, assured the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer that there was a great difference
between raw and malted barley for feeding purposes. The
latter had been very extensively used by his father and him-
self in fattening cattle for the various cattle shows, and
they found it was the best feed they could use, but they
were restricted in the use of it on account of the high duty
upon it. B e could get good barley for £7 per ton and could
malt it for £1 per ton more, and that would be better for
the cattle and so much cheaper that they need not then use
oilcake.

Mr. ARKELL said the farmers considered themselves in-
jured above other classes in the prevention of the consump-
tion of the article. They felt aggrieved in not being able to
malt the second quality of barley. if the duty were reduced
the consumption would be increased, as was shown by the
fact that when the duty was 45. the consumption was five
bushels per head, and now that the duty we s high the con-
sumption was only one bush€l per head. There were some
who thought that the duty only affected the barley growers,
but he contended that it affected all the agricultural in-
terests.

Mr. ALEXANDER said that he should like to turn some of
his premises into malting premises for his own stock, but
the high duty prevented it. So strongly did it operate
against him that he could not afford to give his men the
beer they ought to have.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed that it
was the same price now that it had been 20 years ago.
Mr. ALEXANDER replied that that was true, but he com-
plained of it then and now. (Laughter.) It had been said
by some people that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
succeeded in giving the middle and upper classes the stomach
ache—(laughter)—but he hoped the right hon. gentleman
would give the poor man his beer.
Mr. PUNNETT said he now took up the same position that
he did when he attended with a deputation on the hop
duties, but unfortunately the malt tax was in a much worse
position than those duties had been. They were in a
peculiar position, for supplies of the raw material had been
increased, while they had the same heavy penalties for
manufacturing it.
Mr. WILLIAMS also supported the memorial.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in reply to ad-
dresses which had been made to him, said that was not an
occasion in which they could discuss some of the questions
that had been alluded to there, but he would say a few
words on some of the remarks that had been addressed to
him. Mr. Punnett had expressed a hope that he would
deal as fairly with the malt tax as he had with the hop duty;
but he could tell them the reduction of that tax was not so
sure of a favourable consideration in the House of Commons
as it was in that room. In certain quarters of the house
where the malt duties did not bear so heavily as upon the
agriculturists, there were interests involved which pointed
to other taxes to be taken off before they thought of any re-
duction on malt. Some gentlemen had spoken of reduc-

tion, and Borne of repeal, and they were both legitimate
objects to attain, but there were formidable obstacles in the
way which they must look in the face. If they went for
repeal it was a question of between five and six millions,
and if they went for reduction it involved nearly three
millions. Some people thought that indirect taxation should
be removed, and direct taxation substituted for it; but how-
ever that might be, there were none of them present but
would allow that it was an alteration that might not be
expedient or desirable. There were other articles to be
taken into consideration. They must now examine the
question of the number of beverages which they had at their
command, and consider that when the question was
brought before Parliament those who were interested in
the reduction of other taxes would oppose the relief they
sought, and he must say that in a comparison with them
malt would not holl a favourable position. There were
tea, coffee, and sugar, on which reductions were being
sought, and they would be pressed upon the attention of
the House of Commons. He would not speak of spirts,
because he thought they ought to be taxed much higher.
These were questions which they would have to consider,
and to work up all the information they could to lay before
Parliament, as it would be on the floor of the House of
Commons that the battle would have to be fought and won.
With regard to the malt duty, there was an increase in the
amount of it during the Russian war, and he was convinced
that it caused a decrease in the consumption, but he was
convinced that there would be no increased consumption in
it to any extent if they were to reduce the tax, say to one
half, until atter the first year at least, and there would,
consequently, boa loss to the revenue of not less than two
millions of money. It would be a strong point for them
if they could show to Parliament that the malt duty pre-
cluded the free use of malt in the feeding of cattle, and
agriculturist to feed his
that if they were able to feed cattle with malt it would be
the means of enabling the English
beasts cheaper and better than on the raw grain. That
would be one great point gainers, and the next strong
point would be to put the malt tax in competition with
other duties.

Mr, DODSON asked whether there would be any objection
to making malt duty free for feeding cattle, the same as the
distillers were allowed to make it for distillation.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was his de-
sire to facilitate such a plan, as it would very much relieve
the taxation, but he could not give an answer to the sugges.
tion without consulting their experienced officers. He would
however say that in the case of the distillers making malt
duty free for the purposes of distillation it was all done
under the eye of the Excise but that would not be the
case if the farmers were allowed to make it duty free. He
then recommended them to consider the points he had sug•
gested, and to bring them prominently before the House of
Commons.
Sir F. KELLY, in thanking the right hon. gentleman for
his courtesy, also thanked him' for the promise he had giver
them, slight as it was, that the tax would ultimately be re-
duced or repealed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER begged to say he
had not held out the slightest hope of anything of the sort.
After his experience of
the promises that had been made
seeing
hon.
with regard to the income tax he had carefully avoided
holding out any hopes of the kind.
Sir F. KELLY
said, then he hoped to have the pleasure
of the right
gentleman again, and to storm the
castle until it yielded at discretion. (Laughter.)
The deputation then withdrew.

Importing Tea without colour on the leaf pre-
vents the Chinese passing off inferior leaves as in the usual
kinds. Horniman's Tea is uncoloured, therefore, always
good alike, Sold in packets by 2.280 agents.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

TIMES.—The House of Commons transacted no
business yesterday. It adjourned to pay a signal
mark of respect to the memory of one of its mem-
bers; and well might it do so, for the country has,
indeed, sustained a heavy and irreparable loss. Sir
George Cornewall Lewis died on Monday last at his
family seat in Herefordshire, whither he had gone
to seek relaxation from the labours of the session,
but where he was seized with the disease which has
abruptly terminated his useful and laborious life.
We have been recently drawing attention to the
great longevity of our statesmen, and the death of
Sir George Lewis, in his 58th year, come to rebuke
us for speculating on the duration of human life,
and to remind us how frail is the tenure by which
we bold the servicesof the most valued and respected
of our fellow citizens. But it is by no means to his
political services alone that Sir George Lewis owes
his great and well-deserved reputation. Before he
had taken any part in politics he was an earnest and
devoted student, labouring, if ever man diC assidu-
ously and conscientiously in the pursuit Of truth,
and loving every species of knowledge with a pure
and unselfish devotion for its own sake. At Oxford
he attained the highest honours in classical litera-
ture, and from that time up to the very latest mo-
ment of his life the study of the great models of an-
tiquity was his delight and relaxation. He has
written much and ably on many subjects, philoso-
phical, literary, and philological. He enjoyed a
high reputation throughout Europe, and probably
has done more than any other critic to draw a clear
and strongly defined line between what is fabulous
and what is authentic in Roman annals. For many
years he has contributed to the instruction of the
public, and even a few weeks before his death he
gave to the world an elegant and candid dialogue
on the best form of Government. Had Sir George
Lewis been nothing but a literary man he would
have filled a considerable space in the eyes of his con-
temporaries, and he would have established claims
to the regard of posterity. But his death would not
have been that grievous loss which every one intui-
tively perceives it to be. Sir George Lewis has lived
from his youth upwards a double life, one-half of

which was devoted to literature, and the other to
practical business. To anything like oratory he
never made any pretension. Calm and unimpas-
sioned himself, he addressed himself almost exclu-
sively to the reason of his audience. His voice was
agreeable, his manner simple, yet courteous and
conciliatory, his illustrations apt, his knowledge
wide and accurate, and his manner of dealing with
his subject plain and straightforward. He conci-
liated confidence, he disarmed opposition, and spoke
with a weight and authority which is seldom at-
tained by more ambitious and rhetorical speakers.

Such were his usual characteristics, but those who
have listened to his happier efforts, such as his ad-
mirable speech on the transfer of the Government
of India from the Company to the Crown, will net
deny to him a species of eloquence of his own, aris-
ing from clearness of arrangement, simplicity of
language, and a certain conviction that he was
in the right, which he created in his audience.
Raised to the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer
in 1855, Sir George Lewis discharged its duties
during three eventful years greatly to his own
honour and to the advantage of the country. All his
abstract speculations and all his classical researches
had not weakened him in that never-failing practi-
cal good sense which commended him alike as a
safe guide to the theoretical economist and the prac-
tical man of business. Without making any pre-
tence to ingenuity, subtlety, or novelty, Sir George
Lewis, by the clearness and candour of his state-
ments, and by the simplicity and straightforward-
ness of his financial measures, thoroughly satisfied
the country that its affairs were in discreet as well
as able hands. He has never since then held an
office so congenial to his character and talents, but
he has up to the last moment of his well-spent and
honourable life never lost his hold upon the esteem,
we might say, the partial attachment, of the great
assembly of which he was an ornament and a fa-
vourite. Under that mild and unassuming exterior,
those simple and unaffected manners, that plain and
straightforward utterance, was concealed a power
rare and valuable at all times, and never more
needed than at the present time. No man sought
less for popularity; no man studied less to bend and
shape his opinions to meet the temper or the pre-
judices of his audience; and yet no one ever more
entirely achieved that very popularity for which he
disdained, or at any rate forbore, to struggle.
Among all the persons with whom he was brought
into contact in the course of an active and checkered

career, Sir George Lewis never made a single
enemy; nay, more, it was very difficult to be brought
in contact with him without wishing to become his
friend. He inspired with the utmost confidence not
only his own party, but his political opponents.
Always ready to admit large practical modifications
of speculative truth, or to acquiesce in the wisdom
of pursuing his objects with temperance and mode-
ration, he had the rare felicity of enjoying the con.
fidence and esteem of all parties. He was regarded
on all sides as a safe and discreet practical guide, as
the man who knew better than any other how to

conciliate theory with practice, and to play the part
of the Statesman without forgetting the principles
of the philosopher. These qualities made him above
all men the probable nucleus of some future coalition;
the person qualified beyond all others to draw
together discordant parties and interests, and to
unite them in the pursuit of the public good, at
whatever sacrifice of personal prejudice or predi-
lection. The time has not yet come, but no one can
say how far it may be distant, when we may learn,
by sad experience, the full amount of the loss which
we have sustained in the death of a statesman

trusted by all, and the obleetOFfear and jealousy to
none. Sir George Lewis hasdied, and left the mis-
sion which all men of foresight attributed to him un-
accomplished. Yet it can hardly be said that his
life was incomplete or imperfect. Into those 57
laborious years he had crowded and concentrated
centuries of labour. He knew no relaxation 'but 1
variety of intellectual employment. The duties of
his political position called him from his study, and
their intermission restored him with fresh relish to
his books. His was no light or perfunctory method
of investigation. The notes to his works bear tes-
timony to his untiring diligence and to the vast
mass of authorities which he conscientiously and
carefully consulted. People smiled to see a Chan-
cel:or of the Exchequer investigating the fabulous
annals of early Roman history, and a Secretary of
State detailing with a most conscientious minute-
ness the astronomical aberrations of Grecian philo-
sophers. Yet there was in all this the most
perfect simplicity and sincerity, no affectation
of versatility, no desire to surprise by the
variety of his knowledge or the immensity of his
labour. To vanity, whether of ability or industry,
the simple and philosophical mind of Sir G. Lewis
was entirely superior. He read because it was his
delight to acquire knowledge—he wrote because his
mind was full, and it was a pleasure to impart it.
It has been his felicity to confer; dignity on lite-
rature by showing how happily it may be blended
with political eminence, and to honour and adorn
public life by showing that its highest prizes may
be honourably won and firmly grasped without re-
nouncing the pursuit of abstract truth or the culti-
vation of a liberal spirit of inquiry. But all this
unremitting exertion would have re.luired for its
longer continuance a frame made of other materials
than the frail tabernacle in which the soul is de-
stined to dwell. The spirit was 'ever willing and
eager, but the body was unable to answer the de-
mands thus incessantly made upon it. It aasbroken
down, and all the treasures of varied knowledge and
wisdom collected with such unceasing labour in a
single mind are-scattered to the winds. But if the
public have such reason to mourn the loss of Sir G.
Lewis, what must be the feelings of his private
friends ? Cold and unimpassioned, as he seemed, no
man possessed more the art of attracting and retain-
ing the regard of others—no one was more steadier
in his friendships, no one kinder or more winning
in the social relations of life. Of spotless honour,
uniting simplicity and sincerity with high ability
and immense knowledge, and adorning these solid
qualities with genuine wit and unfailing cheer-
fulness, how could a man so capable of gaining the
esteem of his opponents fail to wind himself into
the innermost affections of his associates and
friends ?
HERALD.—EarI Russell has been making April
fools of Greece and Europe. He recommended the
Greeks to elect Prince William without the sanction
of the father and guardian of the Prince, without
the sanction of the King or Government of Den-
mark, and without even the knowlodge of the
Danish Minister in London. The first inkling the
world got of this strange mad proceeding was the
complaint of Earl Russell's organs that Prince
Christian had set up sime impossible con-
ditions, and the declaration of a Danish
newspaper that Denmark could only give
her consent upon terms which it was quite im-
possible to accede to. The astonishment was
general. It appeared quite incredible that Earl
Russell could have invited the Greeks to elect
the Prince without having first assured himself
that the persons entitled to impose conditions fully
acceded to the nomination; but Earl Russell had
done so, and Mr. Lay ard tacitly admitted as much
last 'tight. Lord Henry Lennox asked the n
1 der
Secretary last night whether it was by the reieom-
mendation of the English Government that the
National Assembly of Greece nad proceeded to the
election of Prince William of Denlark , secondly,
whether it was with the consent of the King and
Government of Denmark, and full knowledge and
consent of Prince Christian,
not that so decided a step
s
was taken ; and thirdly, so, whether it was
after consultation with the Danish minister in Lon-
don ; or, if not, by whose authority the step had

been taken. Td these questions Mr. Layard refused
to repiy, and when Lord Henry Lennox intimated
his intention to repeat them to-day the -tinder Secre-
tary had the coolness to say that he would not an-
swer them even_then. This most unprecedented
conduct upon the part of the Government is suffi-
cient evidence that the recommendation was given
without the consent of the King and Government,
of Denmark, without the full knowledge and con•
sent of Prince Christian, and without the know-
ledge of the Danish ambassador here. But we can
go beyond this evidence, and state most decidedly
the step was taken without the consent or knowledge
of Prince Christian, of the King of Denmark, or of
the Danish Minister. What condemnation can be
too severe for such an escapade ? The Greeks have
been tricked again. Prince Christian has been per-
sonally insulted. The Danish Government and
people have been wantonly outraged. Prince Chris-
tian said he would consider the subject. He told Earl
Russell that in any case the content of the Danish
Government must be obtained. Earl Russell, with-
out waiting for the condition, without asking the
Danish Government for its consent, recommended
the Greeks to elect the Prince. We are at a loss
to discover what excuse can be offered for such an
outrageous piece of folly. Mr. Layard is, no doubt,
attempting to evade all explanation, in the hope that
some influences may be brought to bear upon Prince
Christian and the King of Denmark which will re-
pair this madcap freak of his chief ; but the country
will not submit to have its prestige destroyed by
these follies, and Parliament will, we trust, enforce
a full explanation, and follow it up by an emphatic
censure.