The Sun.
London, England, 1846-12-08 00:00:00

TOBACCO DUTIES.

A deputation of the Associated Manufacturers of
Tobacco, accompanied by Dr. Bowring, M.P., Mr.
Henry Berkeley, M.P., Mr. G. H. W. Heneage, M.P.,
la.tudhlioswhßoursuegeisn, Mch.Pe;,Laraitpeldacue,pon Lord John
for the purpose of calling his attention toontheSasttuartdeayot,
tßahnueassMteolbrl tobacco trade, and the injurious influence of high
duties on the interests of the trade and on the comfort
and morality of the public. The deputation consisted of
the following members of the trade :—Mr. John Lloyd,
of the firm o J. and F. Lloyd and Co.; Mr. Williamson
and Mr. Back, of the firm of Taddy and Co.; Mr. H. 0.
Wills, of the firm of Ricketts, Wills, and Co., Bristol.
Mr. Von der Heyde; Mr. Thomas Huxley; Mr. Charles
Lloyd, of tlse firm of Wishart and Lloyd; Mr. Robert
Roberts; and Mr. Paul Anstie, of the firm of P. and E.
Anstie, of Devizes.
Lord John Russell was accompanied by the Chancellor
of the Exchequer, and received the deputation with much
courtesy.
Dr. Bowring referred to the Committee of the House
Commonsofthe important
ut
sr
iavdee ,mwa which
s s cof sate in
v de
cBe44 an
d
to which
was given before that Committee. It was shown that of
the number of seizures of contraband goods made by
the Customs, five-sevenths of the whole consisted of
tobacco, and that the convictions for the crime of smug-
gling had increased during the three years previous to
January last, mots than two hundred per cent.; that the
duties on tobacco are so enormous (varying from 800 to
1,400 per cent, on the value of the article), that the
temptation both to smuggling and adulteration is so great
as to forbid the hope of collecting the duty; that the evi-
dence proved such an amount of these practices as to show
that the power of the revenue was entirely defeated. It
was shown that a quantity fully equal to that on which
duty had been paid was introduced fraudulently, and
consumed without payment of duty, to the injury of the
fair trader. The Board of Excise produced chemical
evidence, with the intention of showing that they bad
the means of discovering adulteration by analysis ; but
in that respect they had entirely failed. The evidence
went to show that the expenses attending the evasion of
the duty are so great, that smugglers could not intro-
duce tobacco under a cost which would render it unpro-
fitable to him to run his goods if the duty were reduced
to Is. a pound.
Mr. John Lloyd said that the trade had been com-
plaining of the operation of duties for many years, com-
mencing soon after the close of the war, when inter-
course with the continent became open. That the strin-
gent regulations of the Excise survey—and the trade
had readily assented to the most stringent regulations
the Government could devise—having altogether failed
of their
abandonedheirinteTid in
edeffleBc4to o. f preventing smuggling, they
were
That the rate of duty so
much exceeded any other article in the tariff, that even
on that ground tobacco had the first claim for reduction.
And now the duties on other articles having been re-
duced, the tobacco duties had become relatively still
higher. Thus all the operations of the smuggler had
become concentrated on tobacco. Formerly his venture
consisted of brandy, silks, and other highly taxed foreign
articles. Now tobacco forms the whole venture. That
the low prime cost of the article, and the consequent
enormous profit realised, had led to such an amount of
smuggling, that the condition of the fair trader was now
worse than at any former period. That this duty falls
heavily upon the working classes, inasmuch as eleven-
twelfths of the revenue derived from tobacco was derived
exclusively from the consumption of the working classes.
Mr. Lloyd also referred to the general views of the sub-
ject on which Dr. Bowring had touched.

J Mr. Paul Anstie said that,
Eafxtectrhhee Mcipur. Lloyd's state-
ment, he was only anxious to prove that
aetip.h,eer:,ert ie, calculationsesytrinc(t)l
w le'lif
ti cNih,i t
ht h
teh ter acdhea
nh
caedl l eomr
ob
fo dtihe
ed in
based on evidence given before the Tobacco Committee,
and upon Parliamentary papers since published. They
had taken the proportion which existed between seizures
in thet e lastytr TobaccolB43 (theAt
onlyc
), and the whole of
They had then
taken the positive testimony given before the Committee,
as to definite amounts introduced into London by
smuggling during that year. The witnesses who had
titnhh e London
passing
seizures of h i
n th a_ United
spoken to quantities of smuggled leaf tobacco within
their own knowledge, were only six, and the total quan-
tity so ascertained had been multiplied only by
three ; an estimate believed to fall far short of
the truth. This remark applied also to the calcula .
tion of the quantities of smuggled foreign manufac-
tured tobacco, in which case the quantities deposed to
and the result was, that if in
by three witnesses were multiplied only by four. The
same proportion which existed between the amount
seized in London and in the whole kingdom in
reduced to Is. per lb. on leaf, ss. on
1843, was applied to ascertain the whole of the
been reduced
and Is. 6d. on other foreign
quantitiest
hedlB44
manufactured tobacco and snuff, the revenue from tobacco
would have been as great, taking adulteration also into
account, as now derived from the present high rate of
n foreignt yc
i hgsaamdr cigars gagn dl
duty. Several official papers had been published ; when
Sir R. Peel introduced his last tariff, the associated
manufacturers complained that he had taken spirits in-
tstead of tobacco, the latter being most largely smuggled,
and was subject to the highest rate of duty. They have
evidence in these papers that the anticipations they then
-expressed had been fully realised. Parliamentary re-
turns show that tobacco now constituted five. sevenths of