The Sun.
London, England, 1860-02-28 00:00:00

tirHE SUN, tONDON, TtTESDAir EVENING; FEBIZTIARY 28, 1860

sorts of wines, at a ratenot exceeding ls. per gallon. Though
that appeared a very low rate, it was not, as regarded those
wines, a low rate at all. But what the Government thought
was this, that it was the highest rate of duty they could fix
compatible with an
_extensive entry of those wines into the
ports of this country. (Hear, hear.) Then be came to the
question, could we afford a uniform rate of Is. a gallon ?

He believed that would entail a fiscal sacrifice considerably

greater than that he had prepared to make. But that was
not the question. Were the sacrifice considerably more
he was of opinion it would be wise to face any disadvantage
so that they should give a full and fair support to this
measure. They proposed that wine which approached
to the strength of 40 per cent. of proof spirit should be
liable to a duty of 2s. per gallon. The effect of that would

be that while he proposed to tax British spirits at some-
thing over Bs. per gallon, proof spirit in wine would
be only taxed at the rate of 55., although the proof
spirit contained in wine was an important element in the
composition of .wine, yet it was only an element. There
was a very considerable spirit in beer. If you take a gallon
of beer, and look at the amount of malt duty upon every
gallon, they would find that the alcohol contained in the
beer was much more lightly taxed than that in spirits pro-
perly so called. The reason they could do that was because
the competition in spirits was an indirect competition. The
large amount of between £11,000,000 and £12,000,000 was
now levied on the article of British and foreign spirits ;
and, in fact, they had placed the 2s. duty as low as they
dared. With that duty at 2s. they had no fear of illicit
distillation. The committee would see, therefore, that if
they were to have a plan to meet the great exigencies of the
case, it would be necessary unfortunately to adopt a varying
scale of duties. If it were possible to apply the principle of
an ad valorem scale it would be the best of all, but the simple
answer to that was that he did not think any minister of
finance or the head of any revenue department could take
the responsibility to administer under such a principle. If
they had a very low rate then the temptation afforded to
defraud would be so great that the law would become im-
practicable. Then the scale which he proposed had some
degree of reference to value. Under it the higher priced
wines would pay higher duties, and the lower priced wines
would pay a lower duty. There were some wines of a very
weak alcoholic character, and some which from their high
flavour were of very considerable value. Putting this out
of the question, the alcoholic test would vary a good deal
in accordance with the value of the wine. As regarded the
test itself, all these tests were open to a certain amount of
objection, and Parliament had found it necessary to adopt
a system of classification. So as regarded sugar, it was
divided into three or four different classes, and as the hy-
drometer told the strength of the wine, he apprehended
there would not be any danger of fraud or inconvenience
except such as might be readily faced. Another important
point was the drawback upon wines. He was of
opinion, and he hoped the house would be of opinisn,
that as a general principle nothing could be worse
than to allow a drawback upon articles subject to customs
dutiete though, of course, there might be exceptions. He
would ask the house to remember what had been the course
of recent legislation. It had been a mitigation or a removal
of duties in every case where it could he attempted on a
scale calculated to produce legitimate effects, and the result
had invariably been a benefit to the dealers in the articles.
Do not let it be supposed he begrudged to dealers that'eTo-
fit, for that increase of profit in trade proved the extension
a the trade ; therefore when legislation had been in one
uniform coarse, he must say he held that as a general rule
nothing could be weaker than to claim the return of duty
upon stocks in hand, inasmuch as those stocks were not on
survey, and thus there would be an opening to extensive
frauds. It was true that with respect to wine, it increased
in value by long keeping. But on the other hand the value
of old winos would depend upon the duty, while the new
wine would be chiefly consumed by that class who could not
compel e with the class who consumed the old wines. He
did not believe there ever was a time when these considera-
tions told more than they did at present. Ho believed that
all houses in the wine trade who sent round circulars put in
low prices to make them attractive. They were what were
called the cheap houses in the trade, and he himself received
a circular from one of those houses which offered him
old pot at £2 10s. per dozen. Now he believed that that
woul dregot be worth 6d. Itss from the change of duty.
Therefore from all these general grounds there was no rea-
son whatever for allowing any drawback upon wines in
stock. At the same time, though there was no justreason
founded upon general grounds for such a course, there did
happen to be a specific or partial arrangement under which
a claim on the ground of good faith might be thought to
have arisen. In 1839 and 1840 there began a negotiation
with France for a reduction in the wine duties, and that
was continued for one or two years ; before that was over a
negotiation began with Portugal; and those were followed
by negotiations with Spain. In consequence of these nego-
tiations there was produced a paralysis in the wine trade,
and the dealers made an application to Sir R. Peel's Go-
vernment for relief, and Mr. Goulburn, who was then Chan-
/
cellor of the Exchequer, though objecting to allow draw-
backs upon wine in stock, did think there wore special rea-
sons in the common interest of revenue and trade, for mak-
ing an arrangement, and it was founded upon the belief that
there should be no drawback except in the event of a nego-
tiation being followed by a commercial treaty, and that
would keep the trade in a healthy condition, whereas there
had been a great falling off from the expectation of the
treaty. Therefore the Treasury in 1843 passed a minute
which was perfectly distinct and definite in its terms, the
effect of which was this, that all persons should be allowed
to make claims for drawback upon certain wines in their
possession upon certain conditions, in the event not of re-
duction of wine duties, but of a reduction under a treaty.
The conditions were these, that in any act which might be
passed on the conclusion of a treaty for reducing. the duties
on any foreign wine, provision should be made for allowing
dealers a return of duty upon all such as were in bond, pro-
vided a stock equal thereto should be found in the dealer's
possession when the duty was reduced, and that the wine so
found, and iu respect of which a drawback was claimed, had
been paid within two years, if Portuguese and Spanish, and
six months if any other foreign wine. The Government found
this minute in existence in 1843. It attained its object and
, restored confidence in the trade, by placing it again in its
natural condition, and so it wont on till all idea of the com-
mercial treatry was abandoned. The minute was, later in
the year, extended by order of the Board of Excise to all
wine the dealers might have in their possession at the time
of reduction of duty, limited to the quantify upon which
they had paid the duty in the terms of the minute, and
proof of identity of wine was no longer required. The
whole matter thee passed out of view. In 1852 it was sug-
gested that it would be satisfactory to the trade if they were
permitted to commence acting again under the minute of
1843, and accordingly new directions were issued from the
Board of Inland Revenue that they might conform to the
original minute of 1813, but the extension of that minute
was withdrawn. The order of the Board of Excise of 1843
was expressly cancelled in 1852. The Government found
this minute in existence. It was quite true that dealers in
wine had suffered none of the inconvenience which attended
former treaties. There was no protracted delay, no publi-
city, and nothing to interfere with the regular action of
trade. But without entering into these considerations, which
might be thought to partake of the nature of special plead-
ing, he might state that as the Government found there was
a considerable portion of the wine trade who haducted upon
the minute as it stood, and ready to produce their books to
show they had so acted, they thought it right to propose to
the committee to allow the drawback to those who had con-
formed to the minute ; although he had told many of those
gentlemen that they enjoyed extreme good fortune, for he
had no doubt they would lose nothing at all by the altera-
tion in duty, but that they would in a great many cases
pocket the same money twice over. But inasmuch as they
had acted under a contract, he hoped the committee would
confirm that contract, though he did not propose that they
should go in the slightest degree beyond the terms of the
minute. As to going beyond the terms of the minute,
and allowing vague demands to be made upon the
public purse, he thought that such demands could
not be justified by the spirit of the letter of that con-
tract, and he thought it would be the duty of the Govern-
ment to offer a firm resistance to any such demand. The
first part of the resolution he had to place in the hands of
the chairman declared that the wine duty should imme-
diately fall from 5s 9d a gallon, to 33 a gallon, and the next
allowed a drawback on exportation up to the 31st of March,
1861; the third gave a drawback to dealers in wine who
had complied with the provisions of the minute of the Tree-
bfs
aua closingl
cri
ky o,
fd
accordingt dated
eaedrwt tiehnfee
tt2dho4uettthhyeadt July,ffae resolution,rle lanBt cei
or3b,
whiched andtaNvtee
ecraaefri3vt
de: rdaae that came the
gallon
furtheraf
lolroan faunr
d drawt further-
the
sum at which the new duties might be finally fixed. In
reading the resolution he should propose that the chair-
man should stop at the figures 2s. 9d. per gallon, which
wore immediately before the scale prescribing the alcoholic
test. The effect of that would be to put before the commit-
tee the arrangement which was to take place immediately,
and to postpone for further consideration that which related
to the final fall of the duties. An opinion might exist that
whatever change should take place in the wine duties should
be entire and at once. The Government were aware that
there were various questions of convenience connected with
the course of trade which would be best served by an ar-
rangement of that kind. To traders, no doubt it would
have boon convenient that the change should have been
complete and immediate ; but the objections to that course
were greater than its recommendations. The first objection
was one of revenue, and he thought to make the change so
great by a single stroke would inflict on the revenue a loss in
the first instance, and for a little time very much more serious
than it would have to bear according to the plan proposed by
the Government. But besides that, he confessed he did not
think ho could venture upon so hazardous an experiment
with a due regard to the interests of the consumers. (Hear.)
They must consider what was the state of the stock of wine in
this country. There had been no notice given to enable the
grower and the manufacturer of wine abroad to make any
preparation whatever for this change. They had had no
notice whatever of the probability of the English market
being opened to them till within the last few weeks, and
though the stocks in this country were sufficient for the
change recommended, the Government did not think they
were more than sufficient—they were certainly not sufficient
for the full and entire reduction of the duty, which the plan
oitf
Ntavhboeul
eiG toi oavneetlr naukai nel
yesnopt umreeldtaiudmedeaitt ei
01 y,nrachloeneexteepnnotiripntlaaetntiedotna agtnhr d7swt beyerescailrii:ai changett
bein.all probability that addition would not be a large one. It
sliencgohntabreedduocutbiotedn
waseththeeprrtohpeeip.oenrieo,dbultioatliTrdesefinxtedit
sfoeremthede
cotwlneeeawrnhtiotchhheinhirst that aa
and
da
fimoderate.
thel d bvearailolonws
poedibhets-
he had thought it Thosenecessarwyeto comment, and he
would now beg leave to move as the first resolution, "That
following
n lieu o f
dutiesthe
charged and allowed on the
all e
Kingdom, dararart
glebl
dee:
tkuhs
eloecofrnn,ei
ennsottnioothu
;II
pn
toohrwe_
inelu.,i viz.:—Until the 314
dtaatyionefi I 1 o
March,the United
1861,
earl Wine of and from
sauticohn
;gallon Wi
untilonne such3tshg.e;
NNVv7iinlihe3s3lnss;white,
the
Foreign Countries—Red, the
t exportedarch, 1861,
gallon,inclusive,
drawbacku s 3s.;ve,
00 fnl:e3eesxs.
exportation
rt
allowance
wine; and with an allowance of drawback tolicm(se ofs
or
dealers
,r 1
as ships' stores, but that no drawback be ,ranted on
on. wine who have complied with the provisions of them w •
of the Lords of the Treasury, dated the 7th July, 1813 as
btd.to
"
the foreign wine which they have had in stock on the —,Fo
1860, on the conditions of the said minute, at the rate a
9d. per gallon." The resolution having been read from
the chair,
Mr. H. BAILLIE said before it was agreed to he hoped
that more satisfactory information would be given to the
committee by the right hon. gentleman as to the mode by
which he intended to supply the deficiency in the revenue.
In asking that question he assured the right hon. gentle-
man that he and those who sat on that side of the house
had no objection to the remission or reduction of excise
duties, and the encouragement of trade; but there was a
time for all things, and they thought that when there WAS
a large and admitted deficiency in the Exchequer this was
not the proper time to make such hazardous experiments as
those proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The
financial statement of the right hon. gentleman was

founded entirely upon the supposition that his deficit would
be between nine and ten millions, whereas he (Mr. Baillie)
was prepared to show that it must be at least £3,000,000
more than he had estimated, and it would be necessary for
him either to retain the excise duties he proposed to lower
or remit partially, or to impose an additional income tax to
make up these £3,000,000. The Government and the right
hon. gentleman were about to enter into a war with China,
for the extraordinary expenditure of which they estimated
only half a million this year That estimate was already
proved erroneous, having mounted up to £850,000. The best
way to judge of the real and probable expenditure of the
Chinese war this year would be to take the facts connected with
the Persian expedition in 1856. That expedition was fitted
out at Bombay, and consisted of 4,000 Europeans and 8,000
native troops. From the time they landed in Persia until
peace was ratified at Bagdad in May, 1857, that expedition
was on duty five months and a half, and the extraordinary
cost was £2,195,728, or, inround numbers, £2,200,000. The
Chinese expedition preparing in the three presidencies of
Bombay, Madras, and Bengal, was to be compssed of pre-
-1 cisely the same number of troops, but with this difference in
the composition of the expedition, that there were to be 7,000
Europeans and 5,000 natives, and consequently the expense
of the commissariat would be greater. He had no hesitation
in saying that six months in China with such a force would
cost a million more than the Persian expedition, 0rt3,200,000.
As to any indemnity from the Chinese, it was out of the
question, as the Government of China had no money. He
trusted that means would be found to provide for this extra
expenditure.
Mr. CRAWFORD rose to express his belief that the al-
coholic test by means of which the wine duties were proposed
to be collected would be found entirely unsuited to the pur-
pose. It would depend on the skill of the manipulation,
the accuracy of the instruments, and even the, state of the
atmosphere, and one gaiger might return a wino at Is. 6d.
' the gallon duty in London, whilst another might put it at
ls. in Liverpool, the first representing it 15 and. the second
only 14 degrees of strength. Classification had been found
to fail in tea, and a uniform duty was 'established ; and in
the case of sugar the question was a constant source of dis-
pute between the Customs and consignees. With respect
to the drawback, the dealers understood that they were to
receive a drawback of 2s. 9d. per gallon on all wines in
stock, provided they complied with the Treasury minute of
July, 1842, but they complained that when the Ist of April,
1861, arrived they would be deprived of their right by the
operation of a subsequent minute.
The CHANCELLOR of theEXCHEQUER wishedthat
the point alluded to by his hon.'friend might be reserved.
Mr. C RA.WFO RD was rejoiced to receive this intimation,
and trusted that the hesitation which it evinced on the part
of his right hon. friend had arisen from what he had heard
that day from the deputation.
-Sir S. NORTHCOTE said, with reference to the draw-
back, that the dealers were prepared to abide by the minute,
but they complained of its ambiguity. They believed that
the minute of 1813 was to a considerable extent revoked by
the subsequent oneeef 1852.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explained
that the minute of 1852 only revived that of 1843, and the
ono last issued was sent to every dealer in the trade. The
order of 1813 was revived by that of 1852, at the request of
the trade.
Mr. H. BENTINCK was afraid that the result of the
proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be to
introduce the practice of adulteration of wines upon a greater
merle on the continent. With regard to the importation of
French wines he believed they would not bear carrying, and
thet they were hardly drinkable even in France itself. He
only hoped the merits of the budget would be thoroughly
understood throughout the country, and that the labouring
population would at last see who were their real friends.
(Cheers.) He contended the budget was nothing but a
sequel to the proceedings of the hon. member for Birming-
ham and his friends, who in 1846 succeeded in passing mea-
sures extremely beneficial to themselves under the disguise
of a wish to benefit the whole mass of the population. He
trusted they would have an opportunity for ample discus-
sion as to how the deficiency caused by the budget could be
made up., At present they had had no explanation upon the
subject, but merely a series of assertions as to what would
be the result of the proceedings of the right hon. gentle-
man.
Mr. CROSSLEY had been very much pleased by the
statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer with
regard to the reduction of the wine duties. He thought
th right hon. gentleman had clearly shown that such a
measure would improve directly the position of the middle
classes of the country, and eventually the position of the
labouring population generally.
Sir E. GROGAN must enter his protest against the plan
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reference to the re-
duction of the duty on wine. The general feeling of the
tratle was that there should be a uniformity of duty, and
that the alcoholic test was likely to lead to injustice and dis-
putes. This was the opinion of a meeting of the trade held
so lately as Saturday last. A uniform duty would very
greatly simplify all the transactions of the trade, whereas
the alcoholic test would require a great deal of skill and
nicety, and would occupy in each case about half an hour.
Mr. B. WOODD read the general order of 1852, and said
ho could not agree with the construction which the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer put upon it. It was xot a revival
of any order which was issued exproprio mote by the Trea-
sury itself. It was the duty of the supervisor to have de-
livered this order to any one obtaining a licence, which had
not been done. The trade thought naturally that the same
words had the same meaning in 1852 as in 1343. The order
was reissued word for word in 1852, and ho had no doubt
on the subject. The present proposal of the Chancellor of
Exchequer held out a premium to fraud, because it was ut-
terly impossible for any exciseman to identify wines in
stock so as to say whether they were wines bought within
two years or not.
Mr. M. MILNES said it was an illustration of the
fluctuating nature of opinion in that house, that when the
question of the reduction of the wine duties had been dis-
cussed in previous years with considerable ability by an
hon. gentleman who was then his colleague, it excited
very little attention. (Hear, hear.) He had no special
private reesens for doing so, but he thought it was only
due to Mr. Oliveira that he should recal to the
house the great assiduity with which that gentleman
brought forward this question year after year. (Har, hear.)
He need not remind them of the labour and expense ern-
' ployed in getting up the facts and illustrations which he
placed before the house. (Hear.) He little thought that
he was then sowing the seeds of this great financial mea-
sure. He (Mr. Manes) considered that the alcoholic test
was the very worst that could be selected. The effect of it
would necessarily bo to introduce into this country the
worst and most acidulous kind of wines, and keep out those
better productions of the Peninsula, the stronger and haler
wines of `pain and Portugal, which would accommodate
themselves to the taste of the British public, and most ma-
terially carry out the designs of the right hon. gentleman.
He thought that the Government appeared to be about to
deal unjustly with the present holders of stocks of wine.
There was something repulsive to his sense of justice in the
fact that the right hon. gentleman should talk of dealing
with it as a matter purely of contract, to be carried out
with the strictest legality, and not as a question of justice
to be dealt with liberally. It would only be just to
the holders of stocks of wine to treat them as they would
have been treated in 1843 had the treaty then been carried
out ; and if they were to have been no losers by that treaty,
why should they be so new ? (Hear, hear.) Why draw
such a distinction between 1843 and 1860 ? There ought
also to be the greatest liberality in dealing with the
question of the identity of stocks. Many memers of the
trade had ceased keeping stock•beoks, evhich was winked
at by the officers, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer
would do well to abstain from requiring the production of
any such merely formal documents; and bleontent himself
with the production of the pass-book, regularly drawn up,
and accompanied by duplicate certificates supplied to the
trade by the Inland Revenue, and by them transmitted to
the Excise. .The right hon, gentleman would be no loser by
this plan, and he would do justice to the persons whom he
would wish least to injure, viz., those wine merchants who
had small stocks in trade. The larger merchants who could
bear any lOss without the least injury to themselves had
been more correct than merchants holding smaller stocks.
The latter had been, he would not say culpably negligent,
for they had been encouraged in their negligence by sfficers
of tho crown. He proposed that after the words " 2s. 9d.
per gallon" these words should be inserted, " or by such
other process as might prove satisfactorily to the Commis-
sioners of Inland novelette that such stocks have been ac-
quired before the let of February, 1860."
Mr CAYLEY, who was very imperfectly heard, was
understood to suggest that our beer should be adinitte.l
into Francs at: a rate of duty proportionate to that charged
eier us on wines imported from thence.
Mr. DODSON said the duty upon beer imported into
France was about equivalent to the duty upon French
wino imported into this country. A duty upon wine of 6s.
a gallon was equivalent to a duty of ls. per bottle. The
duty upon wine was about one-fourth or one-fifth of the
value of beer. The right hon. gentleman had said that his
budget was one to sweep away the last remnant of protec-
tion, but the duties levied upon wine should not
bo made so as to establish a protection to the foreign pro-
ducer. (Hear, hear.)
Thu CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was afraid that be might be accused of disrespect to hon.
members, if lee did not at once address one or two remarks
upon the points to which they referred ; at the seine time,
he did not think when they were in committee on a parti-.
cular vote on the Customs Act, it was the proper time for
considering all the questions which had been put to him,
and particularly as to the expenses of the war with China,
inasmuch as when they were in a committee of supply they
would be enabled to deal with that question. The questions
of one or two of the hon. gentlemen who had last spoken
appeared to him to be more germane to the subject now be-
fore them, than leaving reference to malt, hops, and iheer.
With respect to the article of beer, he did not think that in
the official correspondence there had been any mention
made of that aitiele ; it was mentioned by the negotiators at
Paris, but it was not thought advisable to introduce the article
suggested in the treaty. If they had endeavoared to weigh in
opposite scales, the advantage given on the one side and the
advantages received on the other, they would have broken
down, and have failo I altogether. Therefore, there was that
reason why they should not have persevered as to the admis-
sion of English beer into France; for if they had founded
a demand for the admission of. English beer into France,
upon the reduction of tlee duty upon French wines, it
might have been justly asked, what duty was going to be
levied on French wines ? because the French duty on beer
was now etensideyably less, according to value, than the
English duty on wine,. and would continuo to be after the
proposed change had been carried into effect. The French
charge on beer was 2d. 2-sths per gallon, or about 18 per
cent. on the ordinary value ; and in regard to the wine
duty here, it would be 40, 50, and even 100 per cent. He
perfectly agreed with the hon. gentleman that it would be
inexpedient and unfair to put a higher duty on malt, which
was the produce of their own soil, than upon wines which
came to them from abroad. But with respect to the dif-
ferent qualities of light wines, he thought it would be im-
possible to draw a clear distinction between the rate of duty
on wine and beer, but it would be on the lower class of
wines which would come into competition with beer. The
hon. member for Dublin had said that if a graduated, scale
were good, why should it not be applied immediately ; but
he did not think it necessary to give the same facilities for
the ion (Auction of eheap wines until the plan should come
fully into operation. The gradual scale wouldritot apply to
.the iuterneetliate period, but after that period was worked
out, then they should leave recourse to the graduated scale.
Then, as to the subject of drawbacks, he denied the justice
of the system of drawbacks generally, .as they had been
taken of late years, but they should be conformed to the
cheer of cases in which the ieentilleation of the goods was
practicable. That could be done under the Excise, but not
disposal
eioier:pi(liteoilrleti
tttilicieoeehf Ciecis:siliirlitmoglirrig.sao.et
sftth'ilt(eh).lhyiee( Treasury minute of 1843 placed
Wine ureter reeelations sinter to those of the Excise. What
) Exchequer)should I ollt Lei
hd ocn confine
onbt ofeuvtti
hneoeraefxktacthegor
aenraletiEearftcaoctnh. return
feeoegrTo,
ufhteandreiudet‘
return
.5
v.nrfli
ennie would
e member
frgpg Pontefract.
nS
themselvestt
ettfoor
att
chht
the
The hon. gentleman proposed that they should be prepared
t
eao
toa
suunl
rdnn course theirno
oo ;s cosweatnllohueci
under
rl
that
rttthHtdhhi
uenee
tgy(sh. tph:e
uencsiChancel-
lorfspecific
Thehis
trinepotermsaurl
td
trade was not going to be losers, but large gainers by his
proposals, and they recognised the enormous benefits that
would result from the change. The stimulus whielmould

be given to the trade would largely increase the profits.
The Treasury Minute was perfectly explicit, as to the re-
duction of the wine duties, and the letter accompanying it
recognised no such distinction as that represented. The
Government was at liberty to revoke their own order, and
they had sent round that revocation to the trade, and by
that they intended to stand. He should like to know how
the half million deficit would be made up if ho agreed to
this suggestion.

Mr. MONCKTON MILNES explained, and said that
his right hon. friend was in error when he said the present
merchants would be no losers by his budget, because they
would have to give up to their customers the benefits that
would flow from the operation of the Government scheme.
He thought the course pursued by Government was one of
summary injustice. He was in the hands of the house on
this matter, but if he found any support he would take the
sense of the house upon it.
Mr. BALL thought the question of the malt duties was
immediately connected with this question. Before consi-
dering the claims of wine merchants they should consider
those of the farmers in respect te the malt duties, which was
the most oppressive of all duties. The hon. member stated
the process of levying this duty, every stage of which, he
contended, was vexatious. During the discussion of these
minute details, protection had been ridiculed, but although
he had submitted to free trade he held now the same prin-
ciples with regard to protection which he had always held.
During the last seven years free trade had not given to the
poor a cheaper loaf. The poor were deceived and betrayed.
It was said pass the corn laws, and there would be no
fluctuations, but had not that also proved a
fallacy ? He believed that just the result that had at-
tended the repeal of the corn laws would attend the ope-
ration of this budget. It would break many a man's
heart. The manufacturers had damaged the agriculturists
and shipping trade, and now they were going to damage
other trades. The assertion that this change would benefit
them would prove a fallacy as other assertions of Free •
traders had done. On the subject of malt he meant to divide
the house, and he felt he was justified in so doing. There
was no class so oppressed as the agriculturists, and his ap-
peal to the right hon. gentleman was to give them relief
from the malt tax. The right hon. gentleman was going to
allow the foreigner to introduce barley, and that would teach
foreigners by and by how to malt, but there was no end to
the mischief this budget would inflict upon the country,
and he might truly say to the right hon. gentleman,—
' " You rob Peter to pay Paul,
And tax the Briton to serve the Gaul."
Mr. BASS did not feel very sanguine as to the advantages
te be derived from repealing the duties on French wines,
but let the Chancellor of the Exchequer reduce that on malt
and he was certain not to be a loser. The right hon. gentle-
man said the other day that there were many hon. members
in the house free traders, who were not for free trade with-
out some exceptions. Now, he was for a free trade in itself,
and he believed he was the first brewer who ever said so.
It was well known that all the great brewers were entirely
opposed to it, and his opinion was, that no other connected
with the trade would make a similar declaration. If the
wines of France, and Spain, and Portlgal were to be ad-
mitted into England, if spirits were to be imported from
Holland and from America, where he understood it was sold
at Bd. the gallon, if new houses were to take up this trade,
why not give the same advantage to English beer. (Hear,
hear.) The hon. member for Liskeard, the other night,
quoted from a blue book the manner in which wines were
adulterated in this country; but a similar practice existed
in France. From the same authority it would be seen
that Spanish and Hungarian wines were often sold as
French wines, and under the new order of things he had
no doubt whatever that such wines would be introduced
to this country as French wines. He read the opinion of
Sir Emerson Tennent, given before that committee, when
he said that if they reduced the duty on wine, they must,
as a matter of necessity, reduca the malt tax.
Mr. VANCE, as a representative for a city celebrated for
its manufacture of spirits, wished to say a few words, and
begged in the first instance to express his regret that the
hon. member for Derby did not make the speech he just
delivered in the course of last week. Had he done so many
hon. members would have voted, he had no doubt, in a dif-
ferent manner. He complained that the measure proposed
by the right hon. crentleman would have a serious effect on
the spirit and wine trade of Ireland.
Colonel SYKES thought the proposal of his hon. friend
was just, namely, that those who could prove that, within
the last two years, they had paid duty upon their stock of
wines, should be entitled to a drawback, and in support of
that principle he should give his vote in support of the pro.
position of his hon. friend. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. WHITESIDE said it would be well to inquire what
was likely to be the consumption of French wines in this
country. Now, on that question, ha thought the best evi-
dence they could have was that of Sir Emerson Tennent.
The right hon. and learned gentleman quoted from the
evidence to the effect that Sir Emerson Tenant in his com-
munications with the French authorities, had heard that
it was a delusion to suppose that if the duty were taken off
the people of England could be induced to drink the light
wines of France. He then went on to state on the authority
furnished to him that the opinion of the Emperor was that
it would be well if the Bordeaux merchants would consider
what they were about to do ; and it was distinctly stated to
him on the highest authorities that the low wines of France
would not be held in esteem by the people of England.
Illeo HENLEY considered the question at present
was, whether French wines were to be admitted at 3s.
per gallon duty. He had heard the Chancellor of
the Exchequer say that he was against the principle of a
drawback. He had not heard, nor did he understand
what the loss to the Exchequer would be by the right hon.
gentleman's scheme, as pointed out by the hon. member for
Coventry. If the scheme was to be carried out, he would
take that opportunity of saying that he would not do any-
thing to weaken it. (Hear, hear.) He thought it was weak
enough as it stood. (Hear, and laughter.) He could not
conceive how persons would consent to pay 3s. per gallon
for those wines—(hear, hear)—but inhis opinion they would
have to pay at a rate not of 35., but of os. 9d. The right
hon gentleman said that wine merchants would not be in-
jured because they might have a stock of wines on hand
when the reduced duty on French wines would come 'into
operation ; but for his (Mr. Henley's) part,.he could not see
how they could escape. Ho did not think there ought to be
any money granted by the Exchequer unless an equitable
claim were made out; and, for his part he did not see that
any equitable claim had been made out, nor did he hear of
any thiog of the sort. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. M. MILNES hoped he would be permitted to amend
the proposition which had been submitted, and to propose it
in a more distinct manner, as follows, viz. :—" Or who can
prove by any other process to the satisfaction of the Com-
missioners of Inland Revenue, that such stock has been ac-
quired, and duty paid on it, two years before the 10th of
February, 1860."
Lord J. RUSSELL would not now enter at all into the
question of the wine duties; but ho must confess that the
proposal of his hon. friend the member for Pontefract
seemed to him to be the loosest 'proposition he had
ever heard. (Hear, hear.) Here there were three
rules which required a drawback. His honour •
able friend said—" If you observe these rules you'll
have a drawback, or you may not." Now, if that was to
be the erect, how could they expect any conditions to be
observed ? And they might say to the House of Commons
—" You have done wrong in granting this large sum of
money—you did not know how much it was ; but you have
granted it to some, and you must grant' it to others."
Every one might be at liberty to come and say—" I hive
not observed these rules ; but I have a right, and you are
bound to grant me a suns of money as a drawback." His,
hon. friend said the assent to that proposition might cost
£600,000, but whether it would cost £600,003 or £60,000
was not the question. One could not say whether the stock
ou hand was the stock of ono year or of two years. He
thought his hon. friend could not maintain such a proposi-
tion.

Sir F. KELLY said if the right hon. gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer would take the grammatical
construction and plainpommon sense of the minute and the
order, and not rely upon any construction such as might be
put upon these documents by a special pleader, he believed
that he must come to the conclusion that the drawback
should be allowed to all wine rnerckants who had an equal
quantity of "such wine" as that they had paid duty upon,
though it could not be proved -that it was identically the
same wine.
Mr. WOODD referred to the words "and of a like de-
scription," and contended that these words could not possi-
bly apply to the same wine.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed
th4,there were two questions before the committee. With
regard to the point raised by the hon. and learned member
opposite, he proposed that the committee should pass the
resolution as it stood for the present, if they were agreed
that parties were to receive a drawback who had complied
with the minutes; and then, if any doubt were entertained
as to the terms of those minutes, the committee would be
better able to decide the question when they had not only
the minutes, but the orders that were made upon those
minutes, before them. (Hear, hear.) The question raised
by the hon. member for Pontefract was an entirely different
one. Ho wished the Government to allow a drawback
amounting to £600,000 to traders who had not complied
with the excise regulations, upon a principle, it seemed, of
generosity. [Mr. Milnes—" Of juz-,tice."] What his hon.
friend called justice was the granting of a favour to parties
to a contract who had neglected to observe the terms of
that contract. The mischief did not stop there, for the same
indulgence might be extended to timber, silk goods,
gloves, currants, raisins and figs, to an extent which would
break tie back of a richer Chancellor of the Exchequer
than he was.

Mr. MILNES said that there were persons who had
complied witl► the spirit of the order, had submitted their
accounts to the excise officers, and entered them in their
cash-books, but had only omitted to observe the form of
keeping a stock book, from which they had often been pre-
vented by the obstacles thrown in their way by the 'excise
officers.

The,CIIANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
rig one case of such conduct on the part of an oxeise officer
-had been verified, and he was not able to believe that such
cases occurred. The stock book ayes the only evidence, and
the only security which the trader was bound to preserve..
Mr. BENTINCK sail he shoal support fhe hon. mem►
ber for Pontefract if he went to a division. It was obvious
that to expect justice, patriotism, or go d feeling from her
Majesty's Government was a perfectly hopeless undertak-
ing. There was no attempt to convince except hymajorities.
Sir E. G ROGAN said that ho had presented a petition
only the other day from merchants and traders in the wine
business, who complained that the officers whose duty it
was to carry out the minute had refused to verify and cer-
tify their stock sheets.
Mr. LAING said that cases of omission were excep-
tional. The rule was to keep a book.
After a few words from Sir M. FARQUHAR, the commit-
tee
divided :
For the amendment • 72
Against it
Majority ----111
The resolution was then agreed to.
The C II ANC E LLO R of the EXCHEQUER moved the
following amended resolution, viz. :
Resolved, that on and after the let day of January, 1861,
the following duties shall be charged, viz.:—

Wine of and from Foreign
Countries—
the gallon
White
Lees of mteli Wine „

Wine the growth and pro-
duce ,f any British posses-
sion, and imported direct
from thence—
Red the gallon
White
Lees of sucl► Wine „

Containing less
following rates •
spirit, verilic
Sykes' Hydro]
:

18 deg.

s. d
1 0
1 0
1 0

26 deg.

8. d,
1 6
1 6
1 6

than the
of proof
k'd by
'meter,

I 40 deg.

0. d.
2 0
2 0

S. d.
2 0
2 0
2 0

1 0
1 0
1 0

2 0
2 0
20

2 0
2 0
2 0

The res,.lut ion having been put,
Mr. FITZGERALD said the alterations which the right
hen. gentleman had resolved on increased the objections he
felt to the proposal, because as the resolution was now pro-
posed it was equivalent to a virtual preferential duty on

French wines. While the highest strength chargeable with
the ls. duty was only 15 degrees, a very small quantity of
French wines. would have come in at that duty; and it
would have consisted of the lowest and weakestdescriptions;
but he would give the house the result of actual experiments
made by two or three importers during the last week. All
the sherries averaged from 32 to 33 per cent. of alcoholic
strength. Marsala, a Sicilian wine, averaged 33 per cent.,
and port from 33 to 40; so that all the wines from Spain and
Portugal would be charged the highest rate of duty. On the
other hand, Medoc had 17 per cent., Chateau La Tour 18
per cent., and the average of more than 200 clarets of the
years 1856-8 was 18 per cent. As therefore the right hon.
gentleman now proposed his resolution it would be, he re •
equivalent to a differential duty in favour of French
as against Spanish and Portuguese wines; and it looked like
an artifice to get rid of our covenants and agreements with
the Peninsular governments. Again, if there was one point
upon which the wine trade were agreed it was the impracti-
cability of carrying out the alcoholic test. The right hon.,
gentleman said it might be applied in half an hour; but 40
or 50 pipes were often received in a morning, so that the
committee would see what a serious hindrance to business
even a test that took only half an hour would prove. Why
in F aris, were such quantities of wine were daily brought
into the city, the test was not once applied for weeks
and months together. In the first place it required a degree
of skill hardly less than that of an analytical chemist, and
its results were most uncertain and contradictory. A short
time ago three pipes of port, of the same vintage and the
same price, were sent, one to London, another to Leith, and
a third to a port which he (the hon. gentleman) did not re-
collect. In London the pipe was admitted; but at Leith it
was refused on the ground that it had above 40 degrees of
alcoholic strength, and was, therefore, prohibited. At tate
third port the wine was at first refused, but a dispute aris-
ing, the test was gone through again by another officer, and
it was admitted. The result would therefore be that, the
test having been found impracticable, France would de-
mand admission for all her wines at the Is. duty, and then
all other countries would request the same favour; whereas
the right hon. gentleman had himself confessed that it
would be madness and folly to let in the strong wines for
less than 2s. per gallon. Indeed, it would take at least six
times the contemplated consumption to repair the loss to
the revenue if such a thing were to happen. It would even
pay to buy up inferior French wires to brandy them to the
full strength, to import them at the Is. duty, and to distil
them in this country.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said there
was some truth in the assertion that the wines of the colder
vine-producing countries were less strong than those of the
south; but the house did not as yet know what was the
difference, because owing to our vicious system' of duties
the Peninsular wines had grown to be of such an unnatural
strength that few even of gentlemen in the trade had any
knowledge of their original quality. (Hear, hear.) The
hon. gentleman said that no wines but the wines of France
would come in at the low duty, but the wines of Germany
would also come in. What had the Government done ?
They had placed in this scale the condition that wine in
bottle should pay 2s. a gallon whatever might be its
strength, but that was not conceived in the spirit of esta-
blishing differential duties against France. He was confi-
dent that France would feel as great an interest in the ad-
mission of the wines of the south as of any wine which she
possessed. We really did not know what the natural state
of the wines of Europe was, because they were very rarely
seen here in their natural state. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
gentleman said the test proposed was impracticable, and
I that the trade were of that opinion without one dissentient
voice. He, however, believed the trade did not hold the
language of the hon. member. If the hon. gentlemanwould
refer to the arguments used by the trade, he would find that
where they said the scheme was impracticable, they ex-
plained the expression by stating that it would be cumbrous
in operation, and would cause delays. When the hon. gen-
tleman said it would entail an enormous expense by
establishments at small ports, he (the Chancellor of the
Exchequer) answered him by saying there would be no ne-
cessity for any establishments at small ports. Neither was
the hon. member accurate in stating that it would require
men of a higher class than the present custom-house officers
for conducting these operations. The present head of the
customs had declared that in the course of a short time,
under the measures proposed, the department would be able
to dispease altogether with the class of landing-waiters,
who were the most costly officers the customs possessed.
The wine trade certainly had not represented to him that
they would sustain any amount of inconvenience such as to
interfere seriously with the course of their transactions.
With regard to the test of the strength of wines, rules
would be devised which would enable the customs to deter-
mine how many oases it was necessary to take in order to
test the ordinary strength of the wino. The hon. gentle-
man came down to supply the lack of information on the
part of the Government, and he told them that well-in.
informed and practical men had acquainted him that full-
bodied wines of strong quality could be purchased abroad
at 2d. or 3d. a gallon. [Mr. FITZGERALD —I said nothing
of the kind.] The hon. gentleman was totally wrong, it
he supposed that any wine fit to be imported here could be
brought to this country for 2d. a gallon. Wine of any
strength, however coarse, could not be brought here—as he
had been told by gentlemen who represented the trade—at
less than about twelve times the price stated by the hon.
member.
Mr.. FITZGERALD explained that what he said was
there might be a coarse wine bought in France at a sum
such as he had stated, and it might be worth the while of
parties to mix that with a very large portion of brandy and
bring it in here at the rate of Is. duty solely for the purpose
of distillation.
Mr. T. BARING begged to observe that where there was
a graduated scale for an article which came into consump-
tion without any subsequent process, they taxed it, not ac-
cording to its value here, nor according to its general con-
sumption, but they taxed it arbitrarily, and, he thought,
differentially in favour of France. If they took all the wines
of Spain and Portugal nothing could come in at this one
shilling duty, and what must be the resuit ? That in order
to get this wino in at a low duty it must bo diluted before it
arrived here. Where they introduced an article_ for imme-
diate consumption they ought not to adopt a scale of this
kind. They should adopt one uniform scale.
The. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
that from the remarks of the hon. member he had probably
not heard the statement which ho (the right hon. gentle-
man) had made at an earlier period of the evening. The
hon. gentleman wished to know why the strong wines were
to be taxed at 2s. and the weak wines at ls. The answer
was as simple as possible. If the Government placed the
tax high enouph with reference to strong wines to protect
us against risk as to the spirit revenue, then they would de-
feat entirely the main purpose of this great change, which
was to introduce the weak wines at the lower duty. It ap-
peared to him that if they were to protect the spirit duty,
and make an experiment in the introduction of the weaker
wines, they should have a sum which went down as low as
lss and as high as 2a. A change had taken place in the prac-
tice of the wine trade. It had become necessary, in conse-
quence of the oidium, to brandy the wine more, and that
might have led to some uncertainty in the application of the
law.

Sir S. NORTIICOTE wished to have some explanation
why the scale had been lowered from 18 to 15 degrees. He
did not think that the proposed system would be imprac-
ticable, but it would be cumbrous and inconvenient. The
result of the proposed system would be, that the fine clarets
and hermitages would pay the least duty.
Lord A. CHURCHILL observed that alcohol, having a
greater s taken f
avit, fell to the ottom of the cask ; so
that wine taken from the top of the cask would be weaker
by some degrees than that taken from the bottom.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCEEQUER said the
difficulty suggested by the noble lord was met every day.
In point of fact, the practice adopted was, that the customs
officers drew partly from the top and partly from the bot-
tom of the cask. His hon. friend asked him what effect this
would have on the revenue. Before they got out of com-
mittee he should be obliged to make a statement of the re-
sult, but as far as they had gone they would bo rather
gainers. His hon. friend said that,the hermitages and fine
clarets would pay the least duty; but the fact was that these
fine wines were excessively rare products, not of products
but rather of vineyards. Generally it would bo found that
the stronger were also the dearer wines, and, therefore,
the scale as far as it went would fall gradually, but he
was far from saying that it was to be recommended as an
ad vatorein scale.
Me. CRAWFORD wished to know whether the new
duties would take effect to-morrow (this day).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER believed
it was not the intention of the committee to continuo any
differential duty in favour of Cape wines after the new scale
came into operation. They would pay, like other wines of
the same strength, for the protection of the spirit revenue
in England. He felt it his duty, unless the committee
should be of a different opinion, to take care that the same
rule was acted upon in the present case, and that the 3s.
should be taken to-morrow (this day).
The CHAIRMMN, on being appealed to, said that the
resolutions would take effect as soon as the house in
com-
mittee had passed them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
was also his own impression, though upon making inquiry
he had been told otherwise. The usual course, however,
would be followed, and the now duty would take effect im-
mediately after the resolution had been reported to the
house. _

After a few words from Mr. NEWDEGATE,
The resolution respecting spirits was agreed to.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
moved the fourth resolution, providing that the duties
and merchandise uponim-
thecuerntaitiend
igioiondgsd, wares,m sh a
ll cease and determine,
a list of 43 different articles bein anexed to the resolution.
p o charged
ted i o
Mr. NEWDEGATE hoped then right hon. gentleman would net go on with the list that night. Ile moved that
the chairman should report progress.
Sir W. i*IILES suggested that it would be much better
not to take the other articles specified in the treaty of com-
merce until immediately after the house should have de-
cided -vhether it would take off the duty on paper, with
regard to which also the hon. member for Hertfordshire
(Mr. Puller) had an amendment respecting the prohibition
of the export of rags from France.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said care
would be taken to make some arrangement by which the
house would not commit itself on that subject. All he asked
was to go on with this resolution and the list now until they
came to some article on which a difference of opinion might
arise.
Mr. NEWDEGATE then said ho would take objection to
the first article in the list, " agates and cornelian;." (A
laugh.) He would not, however, trouble the house with a
long speech on the subject.
Mr. SALOMONS wished to know whether, if the house
passed-this resolution for admitting articles named in the
French treaty, we should be open to receive the same articles
from all arts of the world without any equivalent ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
resolutien proposed to the house did not limit the articles
admitted to those coming from France; it took no cogni-
sance of their origin, but left the import open from all the
world. (Hear hear:.)
Mr. D. GRIFFITH said this answer was not consistent
with the statement of the right hon. gentleman the other
day, that the giving of certain facilities to France did not
imply their being extended to German goods.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
hon. gentleman bad mistaken the purport of his answer.
What ho had stated was that, under the treaty, it would be
perfectly competent to the House of Commons, if it thought
fit, to lacy higher duties onQerman or any other goods than
on the k teach goods ; the French treaty would not forbid
it. He did not object to report progress if there was any
bona fide objection to the articles iu this list.
Lord PALMER ETON took this opportunity to appeal to
the hon. gentlemen who had motions standing for next day
(Tuesday) to waive them, and allow the discussion of these
resolutions to go on. The hon. member for Berkshire stood
first.
Captain VERNON, being thus appealed to, said he
give way, though his motion was one of great ecnnmercial
importance, and he might bring it en afterwards *upon going
into committee of supply.
Lord J. RUSSELL said it might be convenient to the
hon. member for Bridgewater (Mr. Kinglake, who was not
in the house) to be informed that the motion of which he
had given notice for next day—namely, 011 Q for the produe-

tion of copies and extracts respecting Savoy—would not be
objected to by the Government.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said he had no objection to the
house now resuming, in order that the resolutions which
had been agreed to in committee respecting the wine duties
might be reported.
The house resumed.
PACKET SERVICE (TRANSFER OF CONTRACT)

BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
PETITIONS OF RIGHT BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
MEDICAL ACTS AMENDMENT BILL.
This bill was read a second time.
WEAPONS OF WAR.
On the motion of Colonel Du NE, a return was ordered
of all sums of public money which -since the year 1852 had
been allowed to private persons for the purpose of enabling
them to make experiments, in order to improve weapons of
war.
The house then adjourned.