The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-01 00:00:00

CUSTOMS BILL.

Oa the m tion for going into Committee on this Bill,
Mr. THOMAS DUNCONIBE presented a petition
from u gentleman trading in chicory in favour of the
reduction of the duty on chicory.
Mr. T. BARING thee rode to move," That it be an in-
struction to the Committee to make provision for preventing
the mixture of chicory with coffee by the vendors of coffee."
He said the late reduction of the duty on coffee had
naturally acted as a stimulus to the consumption of
coffee; but when the public could buy for 4d. per lb. an
article which passed for coffee, but in reality was nut,
they could not expect this consumption to continue. He
was ready to admit that chicory was the dearest article
with which coffee was adulterated, for bums, lupins, and
mahogany shavings were much cheaper, but even adulter
ated with this an article could be concocted for 7d. which
was called coffee, for which, to obtain pure, the
public would have had to pay 10]. If persons
chose to prefer this mixture, well and good, but
this was far different from proclamations by a Govern-
ment that chicory might pass for the real article of coffee.
He thought it would be a most improvident sacri-
fice to repeal the duty on coffee altogether, but at
the same time that they had reduced the duty, by not
torbiding it to be mixed, but even enjoining that it ought
to be mixed with coffee, they had destroyed the full benefit
of that boon. This, however, was not a question of
mere fiscal duties, but one of fairness and justice, and
involving the prevention of fraud. Let them allow
chicory to be sold to those who chose to buy it, but still
he thought they ought not to allow it to be sold for what
it was not. It was no answer to say that adulteration
had existed before this Treasury minute and would
exist after it; but it was one thing to stamp an
act as a fraud and brand it with disgrace, and
another to do all in their power to encourage it. They
had not attempted to ecourage the mixture of sloe leaves
with tea, and all that he asked was that they should be
consistent with themselves, and not endeavour to pass
one law for ono trade and a different one for another.
The country and the Government had but one common
interest in this matter, and that was to prevent fraud
and protect the honest trader, as well in the dealer as
the producer, the agriculturist or the manufacturer.—
(Hear, hear.) That was the rule which ought al-
ways to guide the Exchequer in its Customs and
Excise departments. The public had means otherwise
of protecting itself against frauds. Ia the present instance
the rich man might secure himself a4ainst adulteration
by making large purchases for his owu use, but the poor
man, who had an equal right to protection, was not able
to lay in any amount of stores. He had to buy what he
wanted in a state which should be ready fur use, and no
extent of precaution on the part ot the Excise could prevent
the adulteration necessary to defraud him. In spite of the
declarations of too Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer, he could assure the House,
upon the best possible authority, that this Treasury
minute had greatly reduced the consumption of 'afire.
—(clear, hear.) In 1830 the importations were
22 691,000 pounds; in 1840 they were 28,722,000; and in
1850 they were 31,226,0001 b. In 1840 the duty on
West India Coffee was 6]. per pound, on East India 9d.,
and on foreign ls. 3d.; but in 1850 the duty en East
India was 41., and on foreign 6d., showing an increase
of 4,000,0001 b. when the duty was highest and of only
2,000,0001 b. when there was a reduction of 50 per cent.
in the duty of 60 per cent. in bonding
charges. Now how came the large discrepancy? Surely
it did not arise from any want of trade or a lack of means
to consume, because our, large towns and manufacturing
districts had in the latter period enjoyed more than an
average share of prosperity. The consumption of
tea had increased, it was true, but not in any
way disproportionate with the increase in the
po
its
p uilgaht i population,
duty
mnhdaa
dl tyh
met
oasittnha
maintained
no,ef h
namely,
d t
t,i things
tpresentedha that
while t 1
a extra-
ordinarywthgradual increase, the con-
sumption of coffee, with a large reduction, hail seri-
ously fallen. He could attribute the fail to
no other circumstance but the minute permitting
the adulteration with chicory. ( dear, hear.)
These were the grounds on which he proposed the in-
struction to the Committee; and this instruction would
not have the effect of making them go back to
the law which previously prevailed, and prevent
grocers from selling chicory, but would allow them
to keep it in stock, and only prohibit the
sale of chicory under the name of the dearer
article. He wiehed to propose no interference with the
trade, and only asked the Government not to become
godfather to the illegal christening of chicory and coffee.
The great body of grocers in the metropolis were a
very respectable class of people, and he con-
sidered that if the sale of chicory in the
way he had mentioned was once declared to be illegal,
the practice would at once discontinue among them.
Many of them had resisted the temptation for a long
time, because they could not reconcile their mind.
and consciences to the fraud, and it was only
when starvation stared them in the face that
they found themselves compelled to mix chicory with
coffee. The Hon. Member concluded by proposing the
motion, which is given above.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Hon. Member had acted under the delusion that coffee
was the only article adulterated, whereas almost every
other article of consumption was in many instances
mixed with deleterious ingredients. He (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) did not think it expedient that the
grocers throughout the country should be subjected to
Excise interference to prevent their mixing chicory with
coffee. Any Government interference in regard to this
alleged fraud could only take place on two grounds—
either that the article was adulterated with dole
terious ingredients prejudicial to the health of
the public, or that the revenue suffered in
consequence of the practices adopted. Now he
was in possession of facts which showed that chicory
was not injurious to health, and that its mixture with
coffee was actually preferred by a great number of
persons. The revenue had Buffered to a very inconsi
derable extent, if at all, by reducing the duty on coffee;
he thought he had adopted the best means of prevent-
ing the continuance of the adulteration by chicory.
He held in his hand a letter which he had received ttett
morning from a coffee-roaster in the metropolis, stating that
the mixture of chicory with coffee had led to the production
of a much better article than that which had formerly been
in use, and that previously to tho introducCon of chicory
the coffee sent to the roasters was so bad that the men
engaged in roasting it could hardly remain on the premises
during the process, while the trade were at present enabled
to purchase good coffee, and, by mixing it with chicory, to
give the public a much better and cheaper article than that
which they had formerly sold. He could assure his Honour-
able Friend that if he could give him (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) any information showing that a dele-
terious article had been mixed with coffee, he should take
care that the party guilty of the offence should be pro-
secuted. The Treasury minute dealt Keith chicory, and with
nothing but chicory ; and with respect to the mixture of any
other article the law remained as it had been. He should
confess, however, that unless it should appear that there had
been some deleterious article mixed with the doffee he did
not think it was the business of the Treasury to interfere.
No doubt the Treasury found it desirable to prevent the
adulteration of such an article as tobaceo, on which a very
high duty was imposed. But it should be remembered that
the powers confided to the Excise officers in these matters
were confided to them mainly, not for the purpose of pro-
tecting the consumer, but for the purpose of protecting the
revenue. It was lett to the discretion of the revenue officers
to decide whether in any particular else the protection of the
revenue was so indispensable that it was advisable, in order
to attain that object, to subject parties to that annoyance
which always accompanied Excise interference. His belief
was, that in the present instance it was not worth while that
the Excise officers should interfere in the manner proposed.
His Hon. Friend had alluded to the falling off in the con-
sumption of coffee during the last three or four years. But
it should be observed that there had been a large increase
in the consumption of coffee during the last ten years; and
he believed that by reducing the duty on the article he was
raking the best means of insuring its increased consumption.
There were in Great Britain 131,000 grocers, who had taken
out licences for the sale of coffee, and it would be no light
matter to subject all these persons to that Excise supervision
from which they had been exempted during the last ten
years. He had received communications from several agri-
cultural districts, in which he had been requested not to in-
terfere with the growth of chicory,which had been carried on
successfully for some time. One gentleman had stated to him
that there were probably 20,000 engaged in the cleaning or
the cultivation of chicory, and that he himself employed
nearly 300 persons in that way. He further said that the
supply of labourers in that business did not equal the de-
mand, so that those who did offer themselves were all in full
employment. His Hon. Friend proposed that he (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) should put an end to that employ-
ment. He had been informed that in the great consuming
towns in the manufacturing districts the mixed article was
preferred to the inferior descriptions of coffee, and not a
single complaint had as yet proceeded from the consumers
against the mixture in question. All the complaints that had
been heard upon the subject had been raised by the roasters
and the sellers of coffee. His Hon. Friend proposed that
they should introduce into a Customs Bill a clause which was
to be carried out by the Excise; but it would be a new and
unexampled proceeding to introduce an excise restriction into
a Customs Act. He had formerly heard frequent complaints,
to the effect that he had imposed undue restraints on the
right of the agricultural interest to cultivate any article they
might please. And yet the Hon. Gentleman proposed it to be
known that if the consumer were prevented in that case from
having a cheap and wholesome beverage, that arrangement
would be forced on an unwilling and reluctant Government,
to the injury, as he believed, of the dealers, of the growers,
and of the public.
Mr. CRAWFORD said he entirely approved of the mo-
tion of the Hon. Member for Huntingdon. Neither the
growers nor the importers of coffee had any objection to chi-
cory as chicory; but they objected to the use which unscru-
pulous dealers made of the suspension of the provisions of
the Act by the authority of the Treasury. It was well known
that coffee was adulterated with the most unwholesome and
offensive substances.

Sir J. TYRELL said he felt compelled to oppose the
motion of his Hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon. A
good deal of land was at present used for the growth of
chicory, and a considerable number of labourers were em-
ployed in its cultivation. Now, ho could see no reason why
those labourers should be deprived of that employment.
They had hear. nothing of the unwholesomeness of chicory
until after large sums bad been invested in its growth ; for
he believed that the cultivation of an acre of chicory cost 141.,
while it was an article very well suited to the climate of this
country.
Mr. ANSTEY said no one wished to interfere with the
growth.of chicory, but what was desired was, to prevent
substitutes from being sold for coffee, and fetehing a price in
the market which they would not otherwise reach; and be
contended that those who laboured to that end were truer
friends to the poor than the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The only persons who benefitted by the present atrocious
system were those grocers who had memoralised the Right
lion. Gentleman. He differed from the Hon. Member for
Huntingdon in one respect, for in his (Mr. Anstey's) opi-
nion, the object which he had in view might be attained by
abolishing the duty on coffee altogether. But if they were
not prepai ed to do this, there was no alternative but the
Excise system. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer said it was quite unprecedented to introduce an
Excise clause into a Customs Bill ; but he begged to remind
him that the Right Hon. Member for the University of
Cambridge, when Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1843, pur-
sued that course, for the purpose of preventing the adulte.
ration of tobacco. Similar precautions had also been taken
to prevent the adulteration of tea and pepper by means of
the Excise, and why should not the same course be followed
with respect to coffee ?

Sir F. BARING, as the author of the Treasury minute
which had been so much attacked, was anxious not to shrit.k
from taking his share of the responsibility attaching to it.
It had been said that these frauds could not be prevnted ;
but ten years' experience in the case of tobacco had con-
vinced <dim of the contrary. In 1832 statements were made
that the adulteration of coffee had gone to a great extent, and
that chicory had been very much introduced. The Treasury
minute was issued on the representation of the most re pect-
able part of the trade that the law was a punishment to the
honest dealer and a protection to the dishonest. Their state-
ment was this—" We obey your regulations, and do not mix
chicory with our coffee, but our neighbours do; and the re-
sult is that we are losing the trade which they gain." The
question was, whether the law would be effectual if carried
out, and he was assured that sach would not be the case.
The respectable part of the trade whom he saw assured him
that the law was inefficient, and that if the whole of its
powers were carried into effect they would be unable to
accomplish the object in view. But he was told this was a
question of public morality, and that great dishonesty was
practised by those who so d the mixture called coffee; but if
parties were perfectly aware of what they were buying, he
could not understand where the dishonesty was. But as
they talked so much of public morality he must beg to cau-
tion them with regard to one point. They could not carry
their object into effect by the mere repeal of the Treasury
minute; they must introduce a new survey and system of
excise; and was that likely to render the people more moral?
He had had unfortunate experience of the effect of the Ex-
cise laws, and the evasions and frauds attending them, and
he was perfectly satisfied that the success of this motion
would introduce a most unconstitutional practice, and he
therefore hoped the House would reject it.—(Hear.)
Mr. HERRIES assumed that as the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was the author of the minute in question he had ex-
hausted all the arguments which could be urged in its de-
fence. And, after all, what had he said? All he had said
was what with him was a matter of necessity. But, he said,
that if they now insisted on enforcing by means of the ex-
cise a check on this fraudulent practice, they would increase
immorality greatly by extending the excise laws. Why,
there was not one of these trades to which allusion had been
made which were not already subject to the excise with re-
spect to many other articles, so that the operations of the
excise officers in point of fact would not be extended at all.
This was the first time he had heard the head of a depart-
ment sanction the commission of fraud.—(Hear, hear.) A
technical objection had been taken to the motion on the
ground that an excise clause was proposed to be introduced
into a Customs Bill. But that eras not correct. If the House
should accede to the motion of his Hon. Friend, it would not
follow that excise officers must of necessity be the persons
employed, for it would be quite competent for the Treasury
to employ the officers ot,the Customs if they should so please.
The mixture was said to have been accepted by the public,
but he confessed he had never heard that the public were
willing to have it, or that this celebrated Chancellor of the
Exchequer's.mixture had been advertised. Such being the
case, and the motion of the Hon. Member for Huntingdon
not being inconsistent with the practice of the House, and
being moreover calculated to prevent fraud, he would cer-
tainly give it his support.—(Hear, and cries of " Divide.")
Mr B. OSBORNE assured the House that he would re-
spect the hour, and that his observations should be few. In
giving this assurance, however, he must remind those Hon.
Members who did not seem disposed to take their coffee
before dinner that this was a very important question to the
commerce of this country. A greater delusion had never
been foisted on the public than that which had been first
hatched by the Hon. and Learned Member for Youghal, and
now was brought into second life by the Hon. Member for
Huntingdon. What was the whole gist of the question?
The Hon. Member called on the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to violate a very important principle. He called on the
Government to interfere in all the petty details of commerce,
instead of leaving them to the legitimate spirit of enterprise
and competition.—(Hear, hear.) He had been informed by
one of the first houses in the metropolis, that, in consequence
of the erroneous impression which had been abroad that bul-
lock's blood and bone-dust and other ingredients were used
for the adulteration of coffee, a great demand had arisen for
what was called " Anstey's Pure."-- (Laughter.) But what
had happened since? He was told by the same authority that
within the last fortnight the same people had come back to
the establishment and said, "Let us have nothi• g to do with
that stuff for which we paid Is. Bd. a pound, but give us the
old mixture at ls. a pound."—(Hear, and laugh er. ) The
law of 43d George, which had been misrepresented, only
provides sgainst the introduction of vegetable substances,
and would afford no protection against the admixture of
bone-dust and horses' blood. He had had this mixture
examined, and it turned out that it was not horses' blood
which it contained, but horse beans.—(Laughter.) It had
been asserted that the importation of coffee decreased last
year, but the Hon. Gentleman who made that statement
forgot to tell them that the impo tation of other potables—
tea and cocoa—had increased. He hoped the Irish Members
would well weigh this matter, for it was very important to
Ireland. He knew from residing in t hat country that this
beverage was fast creeping into consumption there, and he
therefore called—not on the Hon. and Learned Member for
Youglial, who, probably, did not care much for Ireland, in-
asmuch as he was never likely again to represent an Irish
constituency, but on the other Irish Members, to resist the
motion of the Hon. Member for Huntingdon. He knew that
Hon. Member's motives to be perfectly pure, but there were
parties behind, large owners and consignees of tea and
coffee, to whom a reversal of their policy might make a dif-
ference of 25 per cent. on their money stock. Let the House
not be made the tool of a commercial operatien.
Mr. G. BERKELEY said, that the question before the
House was simply this—whether the Government were to
sanction a fraud in this country or not ?—(Hear, hear.) He
held in his hand a document of the greatest importance—
namely, a report from the Commissioners in British Guiana
as to the state of that colony and its exportations. He would
be glad to hear the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Colonies
explain why this report had not been laid upon the table up
to the present moment? It appeared by this report that the
export of sugar and c ffee had gradually decreased during
the last 20 years—but the decrease in the exportation of coffee
within the three or four latter years was most serious. The
policy of free trade bad inflicted great injury upon the landed
proprietors of this country, and these were not times when
their interests and those of the colonies should be divided.
The same policy that had brought ruin upon the colonies was
bringing ruin upon this country.---,Eear, hear.) Unless they
stood tog ther shoulder to shoulder to check this invasion
upon their just rights, they would find that it would un-
doubtedly end in the ruin of the 'whole community. He
trusted that the proposition of the Hon. Member for Hunt-
iugdon would be carried.
Mr. WAKLEY said that this subject, if properly dis-
cussed, out to occupy but a very short space of time. The
question, in reality, was this—Would the Government of
England sanction a practice of this sort? - (Hear, hear.)
It was not a question as to whether chicory was unhealthy or
not; but whether the Government, whose duty it was to
institute prosecutions for offences of adulteration, was to
sanction an adulteration in the article of coffee for purposes
not as yet explained. (Hear, hear.) He believed that the
Government, in taking this course, was acting most unjustly,
immorally, and injuriously, bUth as respected their own
character, and the character of the British Legislature. He
regretted that he was not present during the entire of the
debate, but he understood that he had been alluded to by
the Hon. Member for Essex ( •ir J. Tyrell), whom he saw
in his place. It appeared that the Hon. Baronet had re-
ceived a letter from some person, whom he had not named.
He (Mr. Wakley) held the document in his hand. He did
not know whether he ought to read it—(" No, no," from Sir
J. TYaELL.) It was curious writhag. The author appeared
to have had a twist in his hand as well as in his head,—(A
laugh.) The writer said he had no doubt but that the
agitation on this subject had been set on foot by the
coffee merchants and grocers, and that it was impossible
but that the Lancet and other publications were in their
pay. Now (observed Mr. Wakley) they said that the
practice of the Government in sanctioning this adulteration
was calculated to have an injurious effect upon the morals
of the people. He was sorry to find that that injurious
effect had even extended to the Hon. Baronet the Member
for Essex. That Hon. Baronet was at one time esteemed
and respected as a noble-hearted, very droll, straightforward,
and honourable man. He did not, however, hesitate on that
evening to read an extract from a letter in that House con-
veying an odious; and scandalous imputation of this kind,
without reading also the name of the slanderer. If the Hon.
Baronet were acquainted with a single fact or circumstance
to justify him in conveying such an insinuation, in former
times, before he was reduced to hies present wreck of morality,
he would have boldly stood upon the floor of the House,
and have named the party who lead made the accusation.—
(Laughter ) But now it appears, notwithstanding the for-
mer high attributes of his character, he is sunk to this de-
grading level, although he is still the country gentleman
par excellence.—(Loud cries of "- Oh, oh.") Why, if he
were guilty of what was imputed to him in that letter, he
was unfit to sit in that House or to mix in respectable
society.—(Hear, hear.) Throughout those proceedings, he
assured the House that he was solely influenced by public
grounds and considerations entirely, and that he had never
been influenced in his conduct by individual feelings. He
would further assure the Hon. Baronet, that outside of that
House he was not personally acquainted with any grocer or
coffee merchant, nor had he any private communications
with such persons. What he had done was solely from
public considerations and on behalf of the public health,
which he believed was damaged by this adulteration.—
( Rear.) If he had said anything that was painful to the
Hon. Baronet's feelings he begged at once to recal the words.
It was not his intention to make any insinuations in reference
to him—(Laughter)—as he entertained the highest respect
for his personal character.
Sir J. TYRELL could assure the Hon. Member for Fins-
bury that in reading the extract referred to, from a com-
munication he had received that morning, he did not
mean to convey any insinuation whatever against the
Honourable Gentleman. He entirely acquitted him of any
such motives. But when motives of a corrupt nature were
so bandied about he thought he might as well read the do-
cument in question.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HUME referred to a Treasuty minute in reference to
this subject. A prosecution having been commenced in
Liverpool for a fraud upon the revelers() by the adulteration of
coffee with chicory, the Chancellor of the Exchequer leas ap-
plied to for instructions upon the subject. The Right Hon.
Gentleman replied by saying that such a proceeding was im-
proper, as it: could not be considered that the revenue was
defrauded, the duty being paid upon chicory. fie would
support the Government.
Mr. CAYLEY said that a great many of his constituents
were growers of chicory, as they lotted that nothing else
would pay them. He was therefore oppose rowd tth.
o any proposi-
tion that was calculated to discoursige its g
' The House then divided, when th ere appeared
122
For Mr. Baring's motion -se
Against it 199
Majority againstthe.ruotion --77
CUSTOMS BILL—TIMBER DUTIES.
The House then went into Committee upon the Customs
Bill.
Upon the clause respecting timber being proposed,
Mr. BERRIES thought it right to call the attention of
the Chancellor of the E `chequer to the alterations proposed
to be made in the timber duties. From all parts of the
country, and from Liverpool more especially, they had re-
' ceivea strong remonstrances against the alteration of the
timber duties.
From the city of Liverpool, especially, he
had had the honour of presenting a petition to the House
upon the subject. In this petition there were several strong
Tesomnsanunrseer it was
urged for not making the change in these duties in
proposed. The Canadian, the colonial,
the
the shipping interest had already suffered much injury
by the alterations made in those duties, and were likely to
suffer much more serious injury by the proposition of the
Right Hon. Gentleman. It would be remembered that in
1e46 an adjustment was made of the timber duties in order
to carry out what were called the principles of free trade,
It was well known that the restrictive duties then put on
had reference to the difference of freight between the
Baltic and North American timber. The difference of
duty he thought was about atts. The difference of
freight was at the time 28s. in the one case and
14s. in the other. They now proposed to take off
from both parties interested the same sum of 10s., which
would in effect favour considerably the Baltic trade. He
was not prepared to go specifically into the question, but
wished merely to throw out the suggestion for the con-
, sideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. These alte-
' rations had also the effect of giving to the Baltic shipowner
a decided advantage over Canada. This WAS altogether in