The Sun.
London, England, 1841-05-17 00:00:00

CONSUMPTION OF SUGAR.

In the year 1331, when the population of the Ignited
Kingdom was, in round numbers, 25 millions, the con-
sumption of all kinds of sugar was 4,364,243 cwts.,
which gave to elle!! individual better than twenty
pounds annual consumption. The price of sugar iu
this year was 235. the cwt., and e.erefore, in so
far as the wholesale price, exclusive cf duty, was con-
cerned, the cost of the entire consumption was
.5,164,875/. In the year 1840 the entire consumption
of the kingdom was 3,764710 (.911.R.. which gives to
each individual little more than fifteen pounds a year.
The price per cwt. had tlen :ism to 48s. 7id., as
given in the Gazette, and, therefore, the consumer
paid for his diminished supply just 9,156,829/., which
is nearly four millions sterltie,—,--Ire than what be paid
ten year.; before for his ampler supply. In short, the
consumer paid for his sugar in 1831 about 21d. per
pound, while in 1840 be paid 54d., or beyond cent-.
per cent, more. The reader wiltfof course, under-
stand' that what is here meant is li.e wholesale test,
without duty or retail profit. We shall p!ote the sub-
ject iu another point of view. Every poor family of
five persons paid in 1840 a tax of 12s. to the sugar
monopoly beyond what he paid in 1831.
By this statement it will be area that, in tea years
time, the consumption had fallen off by very nearly
sir hundred thousand hundred weights, equal, at the
average rate of the year 1831, viz., about 201bs. per
heal, to the annual consumption of three minims,
three hundred and fifty-seven thousand, three hundred
and eighty-four persons! But. this is by no means the
most unfavourable aspect in which our diminished con-
sumption may be viewed. Our population had multi•
plied meanwhile by 45 per cent. This would make
it, in 1840, twenty-eight millions, seven hundrel
and fifty thousand. This number, at 20 No. a
head, the consumption of 1831, ought to have
made that of 1840 as much as 5,133,928 &its.,
but the actual consumption, as before stated, fell
short of this by the following number, 1,309,118
mist., which, at the computation of 20 lbs. per head, is
equal to a supply for 7,667,016 persons. It is needless
to add, however, that the scarcity thus produced did not
fall equally on all the classes of consumers. The
wealthy, to whom it is not of much importance whether
they pay 21d. or 511 prime cost for a pound of sugar,
would, of course, use just their usual quantity. The
middle classes would economise, and the poor economise
greatly, or be compelled to dispense with the n-2cessary
altogether. Thus the monopoly has, in truth, reduced
the inhabitants of this kingcom, in so far as tie frrst of
all imported articles of comfort is concerned, to a coctli-
Lion p etty much resembling that of a beleaguered town
with a scarcity of provisions.—Examiner.

The Town Council of Carlisle have agreed to
petition the House of Commons to pass the- measures
proposed by Ministers. In - the bourse of the debate on
the subject, Mr. Alderman Ross p;ave the following ac-
count of WAGES IN
lie might refer to tables of the rates of wages to show
they were not connected with the price of food—indeed
it was found that when food was dear money wages were
lowest He might take in illustration of this poinj„, the
rate of wages in Carlisle for two or three years. They
Were, of course, not perfectly accurate, but as far as an
average could be taken they were correct. Mr. Posit
then read the following statement of the aggregate wages
paid in Carlisle for three years, with the prices 'of food.
Year. Wages. Price of Flour
per stone.
183 G £127,000
1838
1840 76,000
There was thus a difference in the wages paid in 1836
mid 1540 of 51,000!. If they took this into considera-
they would see the enormous amount of suffering which
must now be endured by the working poptilalm. How
was it to be remedied ? In two ways. Either by re-
ducing the price of food so that as much could be bought
for fcr 127,000 L, or raising wages to such an
extent6t" would give a similar advantage. This the Ma-
nufacturer could not do.—Carlisle Journal