The Sun.
London, England, 1835-03-11 00:00:00

DUTY ON SUGAR.

Mr. EWA RT begged to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a question relative to the
equalization of the East and West India produce. He was aware
that asking questions of that nature was likely to create some
inconvenience—he had no wish to do so, but at the same time
he felt it his duty, as the question was one in which our terri-
torial connection with these countries was deeply interested ;
he begged to know whether it was the intention of the Go-
vernment to take that subject into consideration?
Sir R. PEEL said he thought he should best consult the
public convenience and interest by adhering to the rule
which he laid down on a previous evening, namely, not
to enter into details upon every individual question that
was put. He apprehended that his best course would be to re-
serve himself for a general exposition of all those subjects
until after the Ist of April, when be would be able to lay a
statement of the public finances before the House.
Sir ROGER G R lESLEY gave notice that he should
move next Thursday for a return of all the expenses of the
late Houses of Parliament since the year 1800. And also for
a selection of ten of the most eminent architects of this coun-
try to lay plans and estimates of new houses before the House.

Several petitions were presented for the repeal of the Malt
Tax.

THE MALT DUTY.

The Marquis of C HAND° S then rose and said—in
pursuance of the notice of motion which I have given,
I am about to address the House upon a question of
very considerable importance, not only to my constituency
but to the whole country ; and whatever motive may be
ascribed to me in consequence of the course I am about to
adopt, I assure the House and the country that I
have but one motive, and that is, to do the most I can for
the benefit of the country.—( Hear, hear, hear.) I can
further assure the Right Honourable Baronet at the head
of the Government, that I have not the slightest wish or
intention to embarass the Government. I have not the
slightest idea of so doing, but I am forced by my duty both to
my constituents and to the country, to bring forward
the motion I have to submit to the House. It
is in pursuance of a public promise, and nothing under
heaven can drive me from it.—( Great Cheering.) The
question is one which has often been discussed, and I
am quite aware that I can do nothing more than detail
anew to the House, the scenes of misery and distress which
are now so often seen in the farmer's house, and which so
generally surround the agricultural interests.—( Loud
cries of " Hear, hear.") With regard to the Malt Tax, which
it is my duty now to bring before the House—for a great many
years it oppressed the country. I find that the malt duty was
first imposed in the reign of William and Mary, when it was
45., it was afterwards raised to Bs., and again in 1791 it
was further raised to 12s. 6d., in 1802 to 18s. Bd., and in 1804
to 38s. Bd. In the year 1817 it was reduced to 20s. Bd., at
which it now stands. Many gentlemen are of opinion that a
partial reduction of the duty would be beneficial to the
country. I most cordially agree with them, but still if the
duty was only reduced one-half, the whole machinery of the
excise—of the collection of the duty will remain to
be charged to the country—(Cheers)—which is also ex-
tremely harassing to the farmer. Besides the harassing
nature of the collection, it injures him most materially
—( Hear, hear)—it diminishes to a great extent the growing
of barley—it prevents him from, like in the days of old, having
the labourer in his house-4 Cheers)--and it prevents him,
therefore, from enjoying that beverage which in former times
was the strength and sustenance of the country labourer.—
( Cheers.) By the reduction of the duties on malt the
farmers will be benefited in all these points.—( Hear.)
The malt tax used to be, like the sugar duties, voted
annually ; but in 1822 that system was altered--it then became a
permanent tax, and was taken from the control of Parliament.
The excessive pressure of the hop duties led on to the immo-
derate use of ardent spirits, and if that temptation were re-
moved, and the private brewery substituted for the gin-
shop, they must all agree that these—the chief incen-
tives to crime, to the destruction of the morals and
health of the lower orders of the people—would be thereby
most effectually removed. They all knew the evil conse-
quences that resulted from the establishment of those gin pa-
laces in the metropolis and in the country. I shall have merely
to refer to the returns on the table of the House, to show the
ruinous effects that the use of ardent spirits has had on the
morals of the people, since the year 1812. From the year 1812
to the year 1819 the number of criminal offences appears
to have been 72,216 ; from the year 1819 to 1826, the number
is 95,628 ; from the year 1826 to to 1832, the increase is such
that the total amount of criminal- offences in that period is
131,818 ; and what is most to be lamented is, that of
these not less than 12,000 women have, during the
same period, been brought before the police magistrates,
all of whose offences were attributable to the use of
ardent spirits. It was, therefore, most disastrous to the
morals, as well as to the health of the people, that
their national beverage should, by oppressive taxation, be re-
moved from them, and that ardent spirits should be substituted
in its place. It was much to be regretted, and it was one of
their chief complaints that relief was extended to different
classes of his Majesty's subjects, but not the slightest
attention was yet directed to the relief of the agricultural
classes from the grievances they endure. In his Majesty's
speech he deplores the ruinous state to which the agri-
cultural interest has been reduced, but no hopes are
held out in it, as to how it can be improved.
The Right Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel) in the relief which he
proposes, merely intends to do away with the county rates and
other local expenditure. This would be of no advantage to the
farmer; for suppose that a farmer who held 250 acres of land
was merely relieved from local taxation, the benefit which he
would derive would not be more than 81. per annum, whereas
if the Malt Duties were removed, the benefits would be 701.
or 801. per annum. Such were the fivourable consequences that
, the farmer would experience by the abolition of the Malt Tax.
If any one looks at the state of the farming houses and farmers,
he find that there is scarcely one man in the circle of his
acquaintance in the same position he was in some years ago.
--( Hear, hear.) There is scarce one of them able to brew
his own beer, or to maintain servants paid by the year. On
the contrary, he is compelled to depend on the com-
mon brewer. It was most beneficial to this country at
the period when in every farming town there was a
circle of domestic labourers, who received wholesome homes
brewed beer ; but who were now compelled to slake their thirst
at the pump in the farm yard, or in the ditches, being unable to
purchase beer of any sort, and the farmers being unable to give
it to them. I hope and trust that in a British House of Commons,
where there are so many country gentlemen, that I shall not
make this appeal in vain on behalf of those on whom they de-
pend for the station they hold, and for that subsistence as
gentlemen.—( Hear, hear.) The agricultural interests are
bent down with distress--the landholders are obliged to leave
their homes, and to visit a foreign soil, and the old mansions
of the country are every day shut up.--( Hear, hear. )
The farmer finds it impossible to go on, and it is absolutely
necessary for the Government and the House of Commons to
take the subject into consideration, and to remedy the distres-
to which I have alluded. I hope they will follow the T'
which I have proposed, and which I think will ~tan
relief. It may be said that I ask a boon at the c afford
other of
sking a par-
notother classes of the community. If I felt I was r
*ling what was
r7erlilcetfi tiunratlh
e s h interestape
tial favour I would at once admit that I was
the tradesmen who
correct. I feel that in relieving the a'
you relieve the community at large, ar
depend on the farmer will not grudge ' •