The Sun.
London, England, 1865-06-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LtYN 1)0N, FRIWtY EV LICJI,,ti, JUNE 16, 11865.

agrarian laws. All he wanted was that the farmer should
have unbought beer—unbought, because home-brewed.
Mr. BARROW wished to defend himself from the re-
proach thrown by the right hon. gentleman upon the advo-
cates of the malt tax. He for one did not wish for the re-
duction of the income tax and the tea duty in competition

with the malt duty.
Mr. BASS thought the right hon. gentleman went too
far in stating that the repeal of the malt duty would be the
death warrant of indirect taxation, because the reduction
_ _ _

of one-half that duty had only been asked for. He wished
to direct the attention of the right hon. gentleman to the

mode in which the malt tax was levied, and to the fact that
in one instance, within the last six months, L 3,500 was paid
to the revenue more than could be legally collected. All
that was intended to be obtained by law was the amount

of duty on dry barley when put into steep.
Mr. GRIFFITH was willing to give the Chancellor of

the Exchequer credit for all the financial measures he had
proposed in the present year ; but he hoped that on a future
occasion he would give effect to the mos timportant admis-
sion he had made, that it was possible to solve the question
of the repeal of the malt tax by substituting a tax on beer.
Mr. HENLEY protested against the taunt cast by the

right hon. gentleman upon those who supported the repeal
of the malt tax He considered the observations of the

.._ .
right hon. gentleman uncalled for, and not calculated to
promote the amicable spirit in which the business of the
house ought to be conducted.
Mr. MALINS said he represented a borough in which
there was a great diversity of opinion with regard to the

malt duty. What occured to him was that, inasmuch as
no one expected the reduction of the tea duty, while a
large body in the country desired the repeal or the reduc-
tion of the malt duty, the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would have exercised a sounder discretion if he had ap-

plied a portion of his surplus to the reduction of the malt
tax instead of the tea duty. He hoped, therefore, that next

session, if the right hon. gentleman retained his post and
had a surplus, he would give malt the primary claim, and
adopt the principle of the resolution of the hon. and

learned gentleman below (Sir F. Kelly.)
The house then went into committee on the bill, and
clauses to 6 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 7,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that,
as this was the material clause of the bill, he would state

what the practical operation of the bill would be. It was
well understood that the aim and intention of the measure

was, as far as possible, to apportion the weight of the malt
tax in every instance to the real malting value of the bar-
ley. There were many qualities of barley which gave it
value for malting purposes, which he feared the bill would
not touch ; such as colour, texture of the skin, friable qua-
lity of the farina, and other matters which went to deter-
mine the price. Those must remain as they were, but there
was one great quality which ran through all barley, which
was of immense importance to determine its value, other
things being equal—he meant weight. So far as weight
was concerned, what the bill aimed at, and what he hoped
it in a peat degree would effect, was to place light barley
upon a fair and equitable footing, so far as the tax was con-
cerned with heavy barley. The important point in the
clause was making the pivot weight of barley 531bs. He
had ascertained from the best authorities what were really

to be considered aslight barley; and what was the weight
that ought to be taken as marking the point of division

between those and heavy barleys for malting purposes.
The defect -which he aimed at curing in the operation of
the present law was a defect incident to the fact that
the -malt duty was charged by measure. 'Phe problem of

the =lister was therefore to get out of a given measure

of barley as much virtual power as he could. In order to
do that, he looked to the quality of the barley. The
better the barley was, the more extract it gave for a
given bulk. The bulk of malted barleys did not differ in
any great degree, but the amount and value of the extract
differed very greatly, though it was subject to nearly the
same tax. He believed that to a certain limited extent the
better barley did give a greater bulk of malt than the light.
It was that quality in the value of this malting product of
barley that ho sought to deal with in the bill. If they
took two parcels of barley equal in all other respects, but.
differing in weight, when these parcels were malted the
difference in bulk would be very small, but the difference
in value would be very great. The lighter barley would
give a malt of very much less value than the heavier bar-
ley. Consequently he wished to put the holder of the
lighter barley on a footing on which he should be less sub-
ject to the disadvantages of the operation of the present
law, and more on an equality with the holder of the best
malting barleys. The mode of effecting that object was
as follows :—He took the standard weight of barley at 531 b.,
and he would show the operation of that standard or pivot
weight in relation to light barleys used for malting. He
would take a light barley weighing 501 b. A quarter of that
malt he would suppose put into steep. The process would
then go on precisely in the same way as at present, the only
alteration being that the top of the cistern would have to
be covered in such a way that, though the process of steep-
ing could be watched, the barley could not be changed for
a heavier barley. It was gauged then as it is now, before
it quitted the cistern to bo put upon the couch, and also
after it was pat into the couch. That was the period when
it was supposed to have attained the maximum swell or
increase of bulk. Suppose in the present case that the in-
crease was from 8 bushels to 10 bushels. Then a process
was applied for the purpose of rectifying that increase,
which was said to be insufficient, of allowing 18+ per cent.
That allowance, which was reckoned to two places of deci-
mals, would reduce the 10 bushels to 8.15 bushels. But in
practice the second place of decimals was struck off, so that
the bulk would be made 8.15 bushels. That was the
operation as the law now stood, and that parcel of
barley would be charged for the malt duty as 8.1 bushels.
By the operation of the present bill what would be done
was, that 8.1 bushels would be multiplied by the weight
per bushel of the barley, and divided by the standard weight
of 531bs. The operation in this case would be-8.1 multi-
plied by 50 and divided by 53 would ba equal to 7.6 bushels.
The quotient would represent the amount on which the
malt duty would be charged. 'ln this instance, instead of
being charged on 8.1 bushels, or a relief of 6 to 7 per cent.,
and varying in proportion as the weight of the barley
differed more or less from the standard weight.
Mr. BARROW thought that it would have been better if
the standard weight had been fixed at 541bs. instead of
531bs.
Mr. BASS and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHE-
QUER both pointed out that this would have the effect of
leading to poor foreign barleys being malted and receiving
the main portion of the proposed benefit.
The remaining clauses were agreed to, and the bill passed
through committee.
SUGAR DUTIES AND DRAWBACKS BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill.
On clause 1,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the bill
was for the purpose of giving effect to a treaty not yet
ratified, and which could not be presented in the usual form
by command of her Majesty. This was an attempt to esta-
blish a practical economy in the sugar duties of four Euro-
pean countries, which amongst them combined a large por-
tion of the trade of refining sugar, viz., France, England,
Belgium, and Holland. For a length of time it had been a
matter of complaint in each of these countries that the legis-
lation of the other countries was so regulated on the draw-
backs as to operate unfairly upon the refiners. Those in
this country particularly had complained of the large bounty
that was granted to Holland under the name of a drawback.
He believed that in this country the drawbacks were fair,
but complaints had been made that they included in them
an element of bounty. The French Government desired to
arrive at a practical and uniform system. Her Majesty's
Government replied that it would be impossible to enter
into a treaty to remove from Parliament the power of
raising or lowering the duty on sugar. They were, how-
ever, content to agree that the relative duties on the article
should be so adjusted that all sugars going out of the
country should receive back neither more nor less than was
paid on them on their coming into the country. They
went into an examination of the subject with the French
Government, and the result was the treaty that was laid
on the table, the effect of which was that elaborate experi-
ments should be carried on in behalf of the four Powers in
common, and subject to the approval of every one of those
Powers. It was required that the tax on miledo, or cane
juice, which was neither sugar nor molasses, but partook
of the composition of both, should be altogether left out,
and that this article should be charged the same duty as
the lowest class of sugar. Therefore tho question was
whether was it to the interest of trade to abolish the duty
on miledo or not. The Government had no doubt that,
under the circumstances, it was expedient to abolish the
duty. These, then, were the changes they proposed to
make. There was nothing to prevent Parliament taking
what steps it thought fit with regard to what was called
sugar refined in bond; and with regard to miledo, as it
had been represented that some hardship might be inflicted
on those who had quantities of that article in preparation
for or on the way to this country, the Government had
applied for a relaxation on this part of the operation of the
treaty until September next. With these explanations the
right hon. gentleman proposed the clause.
Mr. C. EWING highly approved of the treaty, but was
sorry the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not see his
way to avoid altering the duty on cane juice from 6s. 7d.
to Bs. 2d.
The clause was then agreed to, as was also the remain-
ing clause, and the bill passed through committee.
COMPTROLLER OF THE EXCHEQUER AND
PUBLIC AUDIT BILL.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that the measure provided for uniting the head of the Board
of Audit and the Comptrollership of the Exchequer in the
same person. The duties of the two offices were certainly
varied and important, but could well be discharged by one
individual, and the consolidation of the offices would effect
a saving to the public of the salary paid to Lord Monteagle,
the present controller. It was intended, however, that the
noble lord should retire upon a pension of £5OO a year, to
which the Government considered he was entitled, by rea-
son of his being a distinguished civil servant and his long
and valuable political services.
Lord R. MONTAGU objected to passing a measure for
the abolition of an important and ancient office at a moment
when they were at the last gasp of a moribund Parliament.
To the principle of the bill he was not opposed, but it
ought to be carefully considered, and more time and oppor-

tunity ought to be given to the house for that purpose.
The noble lord stated several objections to the bill, and
amongst them that it would completely alter the character
and functions of the Board of Audit. He also argued from
several instances which he cited, that the Comptrollership
of the Exchequer was a bona fide and useful check upon the
issue by the Treasury of the public money. Being of opinion
that it would be better to leave the matter to be dealt with
in the new Parliament, he moved as an amendment that the
bill be read a second time that day three months.
The amendment was seconded by Sir G. BOWYER.
Sir F. BARING said the contemplated saving was a
matter of secondary importance, and that if the proposed
consolidation of offices was intended to be permanent and
not tentative, he could not give his assent to it. He had
objection, however, to the second reading, with a view of
going into committee and introducing a provision to make
the suggested arrangement a temporary one.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE was decidedly in favour of the
principle of the bill, and prepared to vote for the second
reading. But if the arrangement was to be final it ought to
be more fully considered, and a bill should be brought in
next session not merely reconstructing the Exchequer, and
if necesssary the Audit-office, but dealing with those ques-
tions which affect the superintendence of the appropriation
of public moneys and which required solution. It would be
unfortunate if the bill were rejected, because in the event
of a vacancy in the office of comptroller-general without an
alteration of the law it would be the duty of Government to
appoint a new comptroller. Under these circumstances not
only would the gentleman so appointed take a position in-
volving considerable expense if the office were afterwards
abolished, but the house would be sanctioning the continu-
ance of an office the retention of which was at least doubt-
ful. He hoped that in committee the Chancellor of the
Exchequer would consent to limit the bill to the impending
vacancy, and introduce a proviso that any person holding
the office should do so subject to such alteration as Parlia-
ment might hereafter make with regard to salary and
duties.
After some observations from Sir M. FARQunig, and Mr.
HENLEY,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it was
not intended to abolish the duties appertainiag to the
comptrollership. On the contrary, the intention was that
all the duties of the Exchequer should continue to be
performed precisely as at present until Parliament should
have had ample opportunity of considering the larger
question. The right hon. gentleman also expressed his
willingness to adopt the suggestions made by Sir S.
Northcote.
Upon receiving this assurance Lord R. MorrAan with-
drew his amendment, and the bill was read a second time.
The Inland Revenue Bill was recommitted, and ordered
to be reported, with amendments, to the house.
In committee on the Law of Evidence Bill, a proviso
moved to clause 1, that no action for breach of promise of
marriage should be brought unless there was evidence of
promise in writing under the bands of the parties, was
agreed to ; but on the motion of Mr. LONGFIELD the whole
clause was struck out by 86 to 27.
Mr. SELWYN then moved the omission of clause 2,
which provides that a husband or wife might be at liberty
to give evidence in case of suits for divorce or judicial
separation, and after debate this clause, too, was negatived,
but without division.
Under these circumstances, as the very essence of the
measure was destroyed, Sir F. KELLY was determined to
withdraw it, and the order wasflischarged accordingly.
The Constabulary Force (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The adjourned debate, on the motion of Sir R. PEEL, to
bring in a bill to continue for a further period the Peace
Preservation (Ireland) Act was resumed, and the Irish
members delivered a series of short, sharp, and characteris-
tic speeches with the rapidity of file firing.
Mn HENLEY remarked upon the flippant manner in
which the measure had been introduced by the Chief Se-
cretary for Ireland, who seemed to treat this subject as if
it were of no more importance than the simple act of
" blowing one's nose." He thought they had better trust
for the preservation of peace in Ireland to the operation of
the ordinary law of the land.
Mr. ROEBUCK reminded the house that when the late
Sir R. Peel brought in this measure the Whigs, who now
proposed it, made it the ground upon which to drive the
right hon. baronet from power.
The house having divided, the motion for leave was car-
ried by 135 to 43.
Mr. MONSELL moved the third reading of the Roman
Catholic Oath Bill,
in a speech in which he laboured to
prove that the oath taken by Roman Catholic members was
a real and not a speculative grievance. Replying to the ob-
servations made by Mr. Disraeli in the debate on the second
reading, the hon. member was called to order by several
members of the Opposition, but the Speaker remained im-
passive, and permitted him to proceed uninterrupted and
nnrebuked to the end of the chapter.
Mr. WHITESIDE and Mr. NEWDEGATE took part in the
short discussion that followed, and the bill was read a
third time and passed.
The Record of Title (Ireland) Bill was committed. Other
bills were also forwarded a stage; and the house was counted
out at a quarter to 2 o'clock.

ELECTION INTELLIGENCE.

- .... _____.-

BODMIN.

Lord Ranelagh, one of the three Conservative
candidates who offer themselves for the representa-
tion of Bbdmin, addressed a large meeting of the
electors in th 6 Guildhall on Tuesday evening. He
said he was not one of those old-fashioned cut-and-
dry Tories, only fit to be stuck in a museum, but an
independent man, as liberal as most men, and a
great deal more liberal than a great many. He
would preserve the Church and State invulnerable,
would support our colonies, and uphold the prin-
ciple of non-intervention except where the honour
of the country was concerned. He would support
the principle of extending the suffrage, but not that
of lowering it. The ballot he hated. He would
vote for any measure which would settle the church-
rate question to the satisfaction of all parties, but
he would never vote for the total abolition of the
race. Lord Ranelagh then explained that Mr. Heri-
tage, with whom he was associated in the Conser-
vative interest, had been detained in London by
pressing business, but would shortly address the
electors ; and, as for Mr. Locock Webb (the third
Conservative candidate), he had never consulted the
whipper-in or the leaders of the Conservative party,
and when he (Lord Ranelagh) and Mr. Heritage
came forward under the auspices of the Carlton
Club they knew nothing of Mr. Webb's candidature.
Mr. Webb had refused to settle the matter amicably,
and therefore they were determined to fight him to
the last.

The meeting broke up in a somewhat disorderly
any opinion on the
mmaernintserOf
The two Liberal members (the Hon. Leveson
wLiotrhdo uR
at
ne
exipargehs B. i n g
Gower and Mr. Wyld) are expected here next week.
Their seats are considered safe.

BOSTON.

In response to an invitation from a smallsection of
the Liberal party, Mr. Sergeant Pulling, of the Inner
Temple, addressed a crowded meeting of electors
and non-electors at the Town-hall on Tuesday even-
ing. He avowed himself an ardent reformer, an ad-
vocate of religious liberty and freedom of commerce,
an opponent of church-rates, and opposed to the
ballot. A resolution to the effect that he was a fit
and-proper person to represent the borough in Par-
liament was carried by an immense majority, and
he expressed himself willing to proceed with his can-
vass and do battle to the last, provided a requisition,
started at a private meeting the previous evening,
was signed by a sufficient number of electors to war-
rant his doing so. On Wednesday, at the solicitation
of another section of the Liberals, Mr. Thos. Parry,
chairman of the Boston, Sleaford, and Nottingham
Railway, issued an address announcing himself a
candidate in the Liberal interest. The supportors of
Mr. Staniland, however, do not appear to be at all
uneasy, and speak of his re-election as being but
little less than a certainty.

that the result of the first contest must determine
-whether Liberalism or Toryism shall be represented
on behalf of Coventry in the next Parliament.
There can be no doubt of the fact that the popular
voice is no longer with Mr. Treherne, the present
member. Mr. Mason Jones is universally regarded
as the people's candidate, and as such all classes of
Liberals are now favourably disposed towards him.
The Tories are busily engaged in making a canvass
on behalf of Mr. H. W. Eaton, who, it is expected,
will arrive here to-night, and who, like Mr. Tre-
herne, lays his chief claim to popular support on
the ground of his opposition to the French Treaty.
The anti. Free Trade cry, however, is now finally
set at rest, a deputation of weavers to London
having just discovered that the Custom-house au-
thorities do not make an accurate return of the
quantity of ribands imported, now the duty is no
longer paid. The returns are based merely on the
rough guessing of the Custom-house officials, who
are so deceived by the packing in which it is now
the fashion to send ribands to the market that they
are frequently out in their estimates to the extent
of nearly 90 per cent. This fact the weavers' de-
putation has now clearly established, and the
weavers consequently have at last arrived at the
conviction that the treaty is doing them no harm.