The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-10 00:00:00

rHE SUN, _LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 10, 1865.

which the 20 per cent. was to be charged. Peremptory
letters were written to several messengers to pay up alleged
deficiencies, and in the case of Mr. Cooper the deficiency was
shown to be no defalcation at all, but to have arisen from
clerical errors. Mr. Cooper was reinstated in office, and
paid his arrears of salary. There was clear evidence indeed
in this and other cases, that these commissioners had been
guilty of precipitate conduct. He considered that they
desired to curry favour with the Lord Chancellor, and he
hoped the committee would consider on what grounds their
report was made and justified.
The motion was then agreed to.

and he expressed a confident opinion that, if the tax
were repealed, the right hon. gentleman would, by
increased returns from many other sources, more than
make up the deficiency which might be caused by its
remission.

Mr. LArrimEß said that among other injurious
effects of the present tax might be counted the en-
couragement given to the importation of foreign cattle
to the obvious injury of the home breeder. The land
was becoming impoverished in consequence of the in-
adequate returns yielded by the cultivation of barley
and grain. He might also refer to what he would call
the immoral effect of the duty, which virtually encou-
raged the adulteration of the beer sold at the public
houses, and to the injurious effects of this adultera-
tion on the health of the whole community.
In reply to these observations,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he had
heard with interest and pleasure the observations
made by the various speakers who hid addressed him.
On previous occasions he had had the honour of
hearing addresses on a similar subject to that which
they were then assembled to discuss, and he was then,
as he always had been, glad to enter fully and freely
into any interchange of opinions and remarks upon
a topic so important as that upon which the gentle-
men present had spoken, or, indeed, he might say,
upon any of the matters connected with the depart-
ment over which he had the honour to preside. He
was, however, sorry to add that the circumstances
under which they were placed that day were not at all
favourable to conversations of the kind he had al-
luded to. It was not, therefore, from the slightest
want of respect for the deputation, but solely from
the pressure of necessity, that he did not upon this
occasion enter into details bearing upon the whole
question. He would only assure the gentlemen
present, for their satisfaction, that when the proper
time came, which was towards the close of the
present financial year, it would be the duty of
her Majesty's Government, if they found them-
selves in the possession of any prospective sur-
plus in the public revenue, to make such proposals
to Parliament as might seem to them, upon a
full and careful consideration of all the cir-
cumstances bearing upon the question, most just to
the community at large. When he said the com-
munity at large he did not by any means wish to be
considered as saying that the agricultural interest,
so numerously represented by the gentleman pre-
sent, would not be included ; and the right hon.
gentleman added that if her Majesty's Government
were not inclined to do full justice to that important
interest it was not altogether provided with means
in the House of Commons of obtaining justice for
itself.

The deputation then thanked the right hon.
gentleman and withdrew.

LAW INTE LLIGENCE.—Feb. 9.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS.
(Sittings at Nisi Prins, in Middlesex, before Mr. Justice
Willes and a Common Jury.)
LARKIN V. KING.-ACTION OF ASSAULT AGAINST " TOM
KING."

This was an action to recover damages for an assault
said to have been committed by Tom King, the well-
known pugilist.

Mr. Kenealey and Mr. Eyre Lloyd (instructed by Mr.
Parkes) appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Sergeant Tindal
Atkinson (instructed by Mr. Thomas Beard) for the de-
fendant.

Mr. Kenealey, in opening the case, said that a person
named Bush, who kept a betting office in the city, had pro-
mised the plaintiff, who got his living by making betsupon
commission, £5 in reference to a race at Goodwood, when
an outsider won. On the 23d May last the plaintiff saw
Bush and King walking at Tattersall's, and asked Bush for
the money. Some few words passed, and the defendant
struck the plaintiff on the back of the head. The blow sent
him down as though he had been hit by a cannon-ball.
The defendant had pleaded that the plaintiff had first as-
saulted him, but such a plea was absurd, for the plaintiff
was a man about five feet high, and between 50 and 60
years of age, whilst the defendant was one of the most
powerful men in the world and in the prime of life.
James Larkin, the plaintiff, said that Mr. Bush kept a
betting-office in Bell-yard, Gracechurch-street, and witness
bad been in the aabit of doing business with him. Bush
backed King in his fights, and King went about with Bush
to protect him. When he asked Bush for the £5, the de-
fendant said, "No ; get away you scamp." Plaintiff said,
" It is nothing to do with you ; what is a man but his
word." King then said, " I will give you £5 ;" and struck
witness on the back of the head, and knocked him down on
to the pavement. Ring and Bush then got into a cab and
drove away. Witness had his wounds dressed at the hos-
pital. His forehead, nose, cheek, and back of his head were
cut by falling on the pavement, and his coat and waistcoat
were covered with blood. The next day was the first day of
the races at Epsom, and witness was not able to go there.
Mr. Justice Willes—Are you in the ring ; a light weight
or anything of that sort ?
Witness—No.

Mr. Justice Willes—l ask with perfect simplicity, ecause
he seems a small man for anybody to strike, even if angry
with him.

Witness—The injuries were not cured for three weeks.
Cross-examined—Witness did not sell cards on race-
courses. When he first came up to Newmarket, if a gentle-
man asked him for a card, and he had one, he gave him it
and received money for it. (A laugh.) He had never sold
penny handicap books.

Mr. Justice Willes—A man must not strike another be-
cause he sells cards. I suppose you have some answer to
this, or else it is only an aggravation to ask these questions.
Mr. Sergeant Atkinson said he believed that he had a
perfect answer to it.

Witness—The £5 was not a bet, but money that Mr.
Bush had promised him.
Mr. Justice Willes—What for; to hamstring the fa-
vourite? (Laughter.)
Witness.admitted that he had had a glass or two extra
when he spoke to Mr. Bush ; but he was not drunk and
incapable.

Several men who were in Tattersall's yard were examined,
and they said that a blow was struck by King.
Thomas King himself was afterwards examined. He
said that he had now left the prize ring. He was not at
Tattersall's in May, and what took place was a month or
two after that. The plaintiff was drunk. Mr. Bush was
walking up the yard, six or seven yards ahead of witness.
Larkin went up and spoke to Mr. Bush about some horse,
and Bush said, " Get away, you scamp." Larkin went up
again and got hold of. Mr. Bush's coat, and pulled a button
off. Witness went up and said, "Do you know what you
are doing, you scoundrel ?" and Larkin then came at wit-
ness, and witness put out his arm and Larkin ran against
it and fell. (Laughter.) Witness never struck him. Larkin
got up and blackguarded them scandalously. Witness saw
Larkin at the Cambridge meeting in O'ctober following, but
Larkin said nothing to him, and witnessheard nothing about
any assault until November, when a lawyer's letter was sent
to Mr. Bush's for him. There was no pretence for saying
that witness went about with Mr. Bush to protect him.
Mr. Bush said that he had never promised the plaintiff £5.
The plaintiff was drunk, and he went up to witness and said,
"Put me on to something." Witness told him to get away.
The plaintiff went up to him again and laid hold of his coat,
and when witness pushed him away a button was torn off.
The plaintiff would have fallen,but there were a good many
people about him, and they kept him up. He followed,
abusing witness, and he also abused King when he came up.
King gave him a shove, and down he fell. The plaintiff
got up and followed them, and tried to prevent witness
getting into his carriage. The plaintiff's nose was then
bleeding.
Mr. Scott gave similar evidence.

The jury found for the plaintiff, damages £5.
Mr. Kenealey applied for a certificate for costs.
Mr. Justice Wiles said he should allow the law to take
its course. He should not interfere on either side.

bleeding profusely, and it was in great agony. He opened
the mouth, and saw a deep gash at the root of the tongue,
which only hung on to the small tendon underneath. The
tongue was also divided, and it was horrible to look at.
Witness informed a constable of what had occurred, and to
put the horse out of its agony it was killed. The prisoner
ought to have come to the stables that night to cut chaff
for the horse's food the next day, but he never came either
for that or his money. Witness communicated with Mr.
Knight, of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals, and the following day attended the Lambeth
Police-court, and obtained a warrant for the prisoner's ap-
prehension. He purchased the horse in June last, of Mr.
Gower, at the Repository, for eight guineas, but it was
worth a good deal more.
In cross-examination by Mr. Lilley, witness said that the
horse had been a tip horse, used by railway contractors, and
he knew that sometimes a chain was put on the tongue to
cause them to tip the waggon over suddenly. There was
a little scar at the end of the tongue, but it was not in-
jured in any way. Witness killed the horse himself, as he
could not get auy of the slaughterers to take it, as they were
all full, and the poor animal was in such agony.
William Fry, in the prosecutor's employ, said he saw the
prisoner take the horse out on the morning of the 23d of
December. It was sound at that time, but when he went
into the stable in the evening the tongue was cut out.
Samson Barnett, another workman in prosecutor's em-
ploy, said he saw the horse and cart in the Cowley-road,
Brixton, about eleven o'clock on the morning of the 23d
December. The prisoner was with them, collecting dust,
and witness saw the tongue hanging out and blood flowing
from the mouth. He told the prisoner of it, but he only
abused him in a disgusting manner. Witness saw the
horse before it went out, and then it was all right. At
night he saw it in the stable in the presence of his master,
and the tongue was hanging out ; and on opening the
mouth he found that it only hung by the cord underneath.
The tongue had been torn from the root. Witness had
frequently heard the prisoner threaten to have his revenge
on the prosecutor.
James Kersch, 141 P, said he took the prisoner into cus-
tody on the 24th of January, when he said, "I did not do it,
Brown did it ; but what's the use of rounding on him, I'll
stand to it myself." He also said that the horse bit his
own tongue off, and that the tongue was nearly off when
Mr. Smith bought it.
Mr. George Hall, veterinary surgeon, Brixton-hill, said
the horse's tongue produced was brought to him by the
prosecutor about a month ago, and on examining it he per-
ceived that it had been torn from the mouth with some
violence. He had known two instances of the kind, and
he was sure it had not been bitten off.

On cross-examination he said he had not seen the horse
when alive.

Mr. Lilley then addressed the jury in an ingenious manner,
contending that therewas no proof of the horse's tongue being
torn out, or that the prisoner had in anywise injured it. It
had been shown that the horse had been used by the railway
contractor as a tip horse, whose tongues had a chain passed
round them while in the performance of their work, to cause
them to stop suddenly and upset the load down an em-
bankment. As for the threats, the jury must not take
any notice of them, as they were of every-day occur-
rence among such persons, and had no meaning whatever.
He called for the defence several witnesses, one of whom,
named Brown, was alluded to by the prisoner when taken
into custody. He said the horse's tongue was injured while
at work on the railway, and on the morning in question it
was hanging out, and the horse would not eat. When they
brought the horse home the tongue was nearly off.
This witness was severely cross-examined by Mr. Robin-
son, when he said he never looked inside the horse's mouth.
All he saw was the tongue hanging out. He never
touched it, and when he got to the stable he left the pri-
soner there.

The other witnesses called corroborated almost all the
testimony of the prosecutor.
Mr. Robinson then replied upon the testimony of the
witnesses for the defence, and
Mr. Adams having summed up with great clearness,
The jury, without the least hesitation, returned a verdict
of guilty.

Mr. Adams quite concurred in the verdict, and thought
that they could come to no other conclusion. The prisoner
had been found guilty of a horrible crime, such as, he was
happy to say, seldom occurred in this country. Under all
the circumstances of the case, he sentenced him to 18
months' hard labour in the Wandsworth House of Cor-
rection.

THE POLISH BUDGET.

WARSAW, Feb. 2.

The budget of the Kingdom of Poland for 1865
has just been published—expenditure and revenue
balance presenting equal amounts-23,315,154
roubles 46i- kopecks (about £3,680,000). The fol-
lowing items in the expenditure are worth remark :
" A sum of 3,150,000 roubles (£504,000) is
placed at the disposal of the Finance Minister at St.
Petersburg for the general service of the empire.
Public education figures for the sum of 780,000
roubles, to which the budget adds 460,000
roubles as supplement for the execution of the ukase
of Sept. 11 regarding the various Russian schools
newly established throughout Poland. The police
of Warsaw alone are credited with a sum of 540,000
roubles, to which must be added 200,000 more
paid by the city from its own funds. The Warsaw
police therefore alone absorb as much as the
whole cost of national education throughout the
kingdom. This, however, is not all ; 87,000
roubles more must be added, which are allotted
to the administration of the head of the police
(General Trepow), together with a sum of 3,370,000
roubles, serving to defray military local expenses,
i.e., the costs of the system of military police en-
gaged in keeping up the state of siege. Adding
these items together, we obtain the sum of 4,197,000
roubles (£670,000) as representing the permanent
cost to the kingdom of the state of siege, being one-
fifth of the entire budget, after deducting the
3,000,000 roubles transferred to Russia. The budget,
as published by the official journal, is not signed by
the Secretary of State for the kingdom of Poland,
but by Prince Paul Gagarine, president of the
special committee established at St. Petersburg for
the regulation of Polish affairs. It appears from
the ukase preceding the document that, in addition
to the general budget, the committee sitting at War-
saw has also a special budget of its own, whence are
seen the expenditure and revenue arising from the
execution of the ukases of the end of March, in
reference to the peasants. The receipts consist of
the produce of the land-tax imposed upon the
peasants, the increase of direct existing taxes, and
of the monopoly of beverages, besides some smaller
branches of revenue. In 1864 the return from
these various sources reached 970,000 roubles. For
1865 their probable product is estimated at 3,740,000
roubles, being for both years together 4,710,000
roubles. The costs of administration fa. the two
years are stated at 3,960,000 roubles. The residue
some 750,000 roubles, is all that the ruined land-
owners have to hope for in lieu of an indemnity
valued at 50,000,000 roubles for the whole kingdom.

The French Charitable Society of Leghorn held
its general annual meeting some days back at the
French consulate in that city. The report pre-
sented by the administrative committee showed that
for the year 1864 the receipts had amounted to
3,078 f., and the expenditure to 2,666 f., leaving a
balance in hand of 412 f. In the course of the year
29 French subjects residing at Leghorn received
monthly allowances, whilst temporary relief was
accorded in 72 cases.

THE LOST SERMON.—Canon-Archdeacon-Rector
Bartholomew was to preach on Sunday afternoon at Exeter
Cathedral. He ascended the pulpit, when, lo ! he found
that he had not brought his sermon with him. He was con-
fused, of course, and if he had not been a dignitary by ap-
pointment you would not have discovered it in his bearing.
It is told of a Gascon preacher that, finding himself in a
similar predicament, he turned upon the congregation before
descending the puli.it, and, with a look of great commisera-
tion, he struck his forehead and exclaimed, "My friends!
I pity you! You have lost a noble discourse." The rev.
pluralist had, however, no such conceit of the talent of his
missing sermon. He could do nothing but beat a hurried
retreat. He went down and approached a Prebendary in a
flurried manner, and begged the loan of a sermon from him.
The Prebendary had not one composed, and, if he had,
might, perhaps, have doubted the ability of the reverend
thrice-beneficed to use it discreetly. The rev. Prebendary
offered to do his best extempore. This offer was accepted,
and Canon-Archdeacon-Rector had the enviable pleasure of
listening to an extempore discourse which, for ability and
force of delivery, made him feel that a parson might do
much better sometimes by leaving his written exercises
behind him than by plodding through a dead-alive deli-
very of measured mediocrity. Prebendary Brereton was
the preacher.—Western Times.

'ADVERTISEMENT.]—HoIIoway's Pills and Ointment.—
Colds, Coughs, Shortness of Breath.—These corrective
remedies are infallible for these pectoral complaints, which
neglected often end in asthma, bronchitis, or consumption.
The ointment, well rubbed upon the chest and back, pene-
trating the skin, is carried directly to the lungs, when it
expels all impurities. All the blood in the body constantly
passes through the lungs, and there all noxious particles
tending to produce disease can be quickly, thoroughly, and
permanently neutralised, rendered harmless, or ejected
from the system. Holloway's ointment and pills perfectly
accomplish this purification; and through the blood thus
cleansed the influence of these wonderful medicaments
reaches the remotest parts of the human body, and thus all
diseased action is cured, whether internal or external.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

"~ T

TIMES.—The financial system which the Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer had to defend yesterday is in
one respect like, in another very unlike, our repre-
sentative system. Both are settlements arrived at
after long controversy ; both are treaties of peace
between different classes • both are chiefly defended
on the ground of working well. Our taxation is
practically light and equal, and practically every
interest is represented. Such are the points of re-
semblance, but the difference, if not greater, is at
least more striking. Our representative system pro-
fesses to work well in spite of enormous and scan-
dalous anomalies, just as you may have no reason
to quarrel with a compromise which wrongs you in
one point, but gives you more than your due in
another. Our financial system, on the contrary, pro-
fesses to be perfectly balanced and symmetrical. It
taxes luxurious and indispensable articles, and at-
tempts to do this equally ; it also taxes the opera-
tions of business, as being a fair way of reaching
the whole community. The only anomaly, if any,
is the income tax, which, however, is a tax on the
luxury of mere income, and on the possession of that
wealth which, if hoarded, escapes taxation. But the
very difficulty of this system consists in its philoso-
phical or Pharisaical justice. It is righteous over-
much. "He is all fault in whom no fault is found."
The farmers would be much better pleased if Mr.
Gladstone admitted a hardship in their case, only
adding that he saw no way to remove it, and could
not do without the tax. On the contrary, they find
themselves confronted with a " system," always the
most odious thing in an Englishman's eye. The
system in this case is an equal taxation of luxuries.
That system we cannot gainsay. We believe at
this moment that the habitual drinkers of tea,
coffee, brandy, gin, whisky, wine, and beer are all
taxed, if not equally, at least so that the beer
drinker has no reason to complain. Besides the
old quarrel between the liquors themselves, there
is a balance to be kept between England, Ireland,
Scotland, France, and the whole world. Our
agriculturists ought to see for themselves that it
is really no trifling affair to trim afresh so large
a burden. But they don't even help by working
out the figure, or the chemistry, or the practical
bearings of the question. At the Freemasons'-hall
we were told by one speaker that the duty is equi-
valent to 2d. in the quart, by another that it is id.
in the quart, and, after all, no proof is given to show
that it is more than a half-penny in the quart.
Which is it ? There are honest brewers who declare
that even if the duty be wholly taken off no cot-
tager will be able to brew his beer cheaper than he
does now ; and though if he gets his malt good, and
if he understands brewing, or if his wife does, and
if they can give their time to it, then they may pos-
sibly get their beer free from publichouse adultura-
tion. The figures of one simple cottage brewing
would have told more than all the poetic lamenta-
tions over the decline of malt liquor and the cruelty
of stepping in between the farmer and his labourers
Nor did the gentlemen at Freemasons'-hall tell us
who would have the benefit of this reduction, to be
purchased, as we have said, at the cost of a vast un-
settlement.
As to the price of barley, we fear that
is a very world-wide question, and Parliament will
never do much in raising it. Neither the landowner
nor the tenant, therefore, will get much by a change.
Bul the farmer, it is said will save the beer he gives
to the labourers. Indeed, one of the speakers at
- Freemasons'-hall said that the tax was a tax upon
wages, contrary to all sound principles, inasmuch as
wages are paid partly in beer. But, supposing the
beer to be a trifle cheaper, either the farmer will
pocket the difference or the labourer will get better
beer and more of if. The farmer hopes the la-
bourer will be content with his present allowance
and present quality of beer ; but if the beer should
be made cheaper he will demand his share in the
advantage. Supposing, however, that beer be an
indispensable item in the cost of a farm, a farmer
will pay rent accordingly. No !we hear from
one quarter. If a farmer has a long lease, he
may save a large sum every year by brewing his
own beer duty free, and pocket the difference. It
is the man with a long lease, then, that is most in
terested in the question ; but even he, we suspect,
does not know what he is about. He is much more
interested in the sale of his barley than in the cost of
his beer. The duty on foreign malt of course would
share the fate of the Excise. There is, then, nothing
to prevent any quantity of malt coming from the
Elbe, as a correspondent has shown ; and it is stated
that there is a good deal of foreign barley better
qualified for malting than our own. Are our far-
mers prepared to see whole fleets of malt arrive in
the Thames or other great ports ? There was not a
whisper about this contingency at Freemasons'-hall.
For aught one heard there the English barley-
grower might not have a rival in the whole world.
Then as to the use of malt for feeding cattle. They
were very humorous at the cost of Mr. Gladstone's
measure, the restrictions of which are found to cur-
tail its application. The conclusion they have come
to is that the measure has been found useful by the
feeders of prize cattle, but impracticable for small
people. We should think the matter is very plain.
It is simply a question between barley meal and
sugar. The process of malting converts a great part
of the barley into sugar, which is no doubt very fat-
tening for beasts as well as human beings. Meal
makes more flesh, and sugar more fat. If the beast
is to be eaten, we should think barley must be the
better food ; if it is to be converted into candles,
then give it plenty of malt. If the butcher and the
cook are to decide the question, they will be for malt,
but the interest of the beef and mutton eating pub-
lic les the other way. Mr. Bentinck denounces the
tax as a violation of Free Trade. -The farmer has a
right to do what he likes with his own, and Govern-
ment has no right to prohibit him by a heavy tax
from coverting his crop into good drink. Unfortu-
nately, this argument applies with equal force to dis-
tillation. Who has a right to step in between the far-
mer and his own crop, the produce of his own hands,
and say that he shall not make it gin, or whisky, or
whatever other spirit he pleases ? A large part of
the Irish peasantry have a very strong opinion on
this point, and it has been found necessary to em-
ploy other arguments than those of moral suasion or
financial reasoning. •But this is the first time that
we have heard a man's right to do what he likes with
his own maintained so publicly, so unreservedly, and
by so respectable an authority. A man has not a
right to convert the food of man and beast into an
intoxicating liquor, except under such rules and con-
ditions as the State shall see fit to impose. Free
trade is an affair between us and our neighbours
across the sea. In the matter of malt we take care
that they shall have no quarrel with us. Mr. Ben-
tinck would create a quarrel with them at once,
inasmuch as we should be removing all duty off
malt liquor, and leaving untouched higher duties
upon the foreign wines and spirits coming into com-
petition with it. Such a competition there certainly
exists, but, whether it exists or not, we should never
be able to satisfy our neighbours that we are dealing
fairly with them if we relieved our beer and left
their wine and spirits taxed as now. But these
gentlemen evidently will not give themselves the
trouble to work out these questions. They leave
figures and financial difficulties to the Chancellor of
the Exchequer and the press. They do not, how-
ever advance their cause by refusing to understand
its difficulties. We wish they could get over those
difficulties, but they will not do so by the mere act
of shutting their eyes to them.
POST.—The Conservative party, or at least a sec-
tion, and that not an inconsiderable one, of the
party seem to be for ever bent upon illustrating the
proyerbial assertion that " extremes meet." Con-
tinually they exhibit themselves in affiance with
those politicians whose dearest object and avowed
aim is the elimination from our political and social
system of those elements which avowedly and
theoretically it is the especial function of the Con-
servative party to preserve intact. They have held
out to the extreme Radicals a hand with experi-
mental voting by ballot in the open palm; they have
shaken a sieve full of corn at the suspicious and
shy Roman Catholic ; and they now movingly en-
treat the Financial Radical Reformers to co-operate
with them in a movement which, if successful,
would result in an extensive substitution of direct
for indirect taxation. They ask Parliament—nay,
they do more than ask, they endeavour, by platform
agitation, and by all the other devices the successful
exploitation of which made the Anti-Corn-law
League so famous—to coerce the Government and
the Parliament to sanction the reduction of indirect
taxation by six millions now realised by the malt
tax, and to fill up the gap by the absolute retention
or possible augmentation of the income tax. They
are will-of-the-wisps these Conservatives, so erratic
that we shrink from following them through thebogs
of doubt and shaking ideas which apparently en-
gender them, and so unsubstantial that we cannot
grasp or realise them. Their political system may
have a sound basis, but it is as difficult to find as the
bottom of a " pot-hole," or what in Ireland is called
a mountain and in England is termed a morass. The
line that was taken at the Freemasons' Tavern can
scarcely be described as Conservative, and is cer-
tainly not new. It was taken by Jack Cade long
ago. Long ago he promised the urban population,
as Sir Fitzroy Kelly's following promise them now,
that the three-hooped pot should have five hoops if
they would only make him king and father of the
people, and ever from time to time popular songs
haN e damned in loud choruses the wretch who would
"rob a poor man of his beer." There are neverthe-
less, we venture to think, things more important of
attainment than even cheap beer, nay, even than
cheap food for cattle, or milk for growing calves.
We think it more important to keep faith financially
with the nation than to realise any or all the advan-
tages which might accrue from the abolition of the
excise duty upon malt. We beg to remind those