The Sun.
London, England, 1857-11-18 00:00:00

TIIE HOP DUTY.

We are indebted to our indefatigable member,
Mr. G. Dodsos, for a copy of the answer to the me-
morial of the hop planters, presented to the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer on Friday. It will be seen
that the right hon. gentleman lost no time in ful-
filling his promise of immediately taking the matter
into consideration. The following is the communi-
cation forwarded to Mr. Dodson on Saturday
evening :

" Downing-street, Nov. 14.
"My dear Sir,—l have taken into consideration the
memorial from the hop-planters of the county of Sussex,
which was left in my bands yesterday, suggesting that
upon prompt payment of one-half of the scorning No-
vember instalment of hop duty now due, the payment
of the remaining moiety may be postponed until May
next ; and I regret to say that I cannot comply with this
request. At the same time, I have no objection, under
the peculiar circumstances of the case, to accept from the
memorialists a moiety only of the duty now due, and to
grant them until the 016th of February next for pay-
ment of the remainder, on the express understanding,
however, that the duty on the first moiety of this year's
growth, due on the 16th of May next, shall be paid at
that period. Instructiow to this effect have been issued
to the Board of Inland Revenue.—l am, dear sir, yours
faithfully,
"G. C. Lewis.

"J. G. Dodson, Esq., M.P."
It will be seen by the above that Sir George
Cornewall Lewis has not granted the prayer of
the planters to its full extent. Their request was
for a postponement until May, whereas the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer has given them till Feb.
ruary,—that is, an extension of credit for three in-
stead of six months. The remarks made by the
right hon. gentleman at the interview on Friday,
and the terms of his letter above given, sufficiently
indicate the reasons which weighed with him in
fixing February, instead of May, for payment of
the instalment now due. Sir George Cornewall
Lewis desires, it is plain, to guard against any
further application for indulgence ; and he
obviously concludes that if the November and May
payments are divided, so as to fall due in February
and May, the Sussex planters will find less diffi-
culty in meeting them than if they had to make
provision for both payments at one and the same
date. The Sussex planters have thus again suc-
ceeded in staving off a payment which they them-
selves openly declare could only have been duly
met by the most ruinous sacrifices. How much
longer will they be content to submit to—indeed,
in many instances, to support—a duty the inci-
dence of which is the avowed cause of their being

periodically reduced to a condition which threatens
them with ruin, and certainly entails no slight
degradation upon them as men of business ? How
long will they consent to exhibit themselves
periodically before the country as suppliants at the
feet of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, suing in
forma paupertis for relief from a tax which at other
moments they cling to with desperate tenacity,
avowedly in the miserable hope that it may oc-
casionally shield them from competition, and, by
preventing the importation of foreign hops, force
their own to an artificial price ? We repeat, how
long will the hop planters of Sussex be content to
exhibit themselves in this wretched,
nay, degrad-
ing position ? For such in plain Eugli4h it 15•—•
Sussex Advertiser of yesterday.