The Sun.
London, England, 1821-03-22 00:00:00

MALT DUTY.

• In 1791, per t'wrter ' £0 10: 6 •
1602
1803
SPIRITS nts.ruLtn FROM BARLEY,
17M, per Tinter 172 10 0
17E 43
1”,6
There was a duty of 2i. 01:,011 Bariey,.eXCloSiVe
of the Malt Tax; which, supposing an, aere ut.

laud to produce four qitatters, ttore wortl4l be a
duty of .51. 12.5. upon every acre of Barley that
was grown, independent of the tax for distilla-
tion and for Malt. NQW, he did notpretend tr;
say, that the whole of these taxes pressed upon
the grower, he knew they were paid by the con-
sumer. But they in part fell upon the grower,
and he should be able to shew in what manner
they did so ; namely, in reducing the consump-
tion. it was worthy of remark, that 'the duty
of 10s. 6d. was never increased throughout the
whole of Mr. Pitt's administration, with one
single exception. In 1701 Mr. Pitt did propose
to the House, and the House did enact, that a
temporary advance of 3d. per bushel should be
made in aid of the Spanish armament. .But there
was a distinct understanding at the time, that the
advance should be temporary ; and accordingly
in the year 1792 it was actually repealed. The
aluestion was at that time most fully and elabo-
borately discussed in the House of Lords as well
as in the Commons, and it was admitted on all
hands, that nothing was more to be avoided than
such a tax, as it would, tend to divert the habits
of the people from their natural industrious and
contented channel, and prevent them from enjoy-
those indulgencies which rendered theiv,fire-
kldes peaceful and happy. This temporary tax.
was repealed, and in no part of that administra-
tion it -was -renewed. Then came the administra-
tion of Lord Sidmouth, and the tax was advanced
in 1802 from 10s. 6d. to 18s. Sd., a`tid. in 1800 to
the immense extent of 345. The effect of these
high duties was, that in England, Scotland, and
ireland, the consumption was reduced in a most
material degree. He would go by the accounts
Raid upon the table, and lake . three periods at
which he would strike the averages of consump-
tion. He would take one period commencing
with 1791, another commencing 180-1, and ano-
fuer embracing the last four years. He found
eat in England the consurtiption of Malt in 1791
was 27,673,947 bushels. Then came the high
duties of 1802, and his next average was taken in
1.1504 ; at which .period the consumption from
-17, 673,947 bushels was reduced to 23,450,000.,
Then he came to the last period, where he found
a still further reduction to '22,600,000 bushels.
iliow if the average of the last four years was
compared with the consumption of 1791, it would
be found that there was a deficit of 5,073,947
bushels. In Scotland the averages were—

Bushels.
In 1791, consumption - - 1,875,000
1804, _ - - 1,031,030
Aning a deficit between those periods of nearly half. In Ire-
land the reiluction wag-still larger. Bushels.
In 1791, ccnsu:ni Lion - -4.855,00 G
1804, 2.78'1,800
1818, - 1,780,000.
Taking the totals, it would he found that the de-
ficit of consumption in Great Britain, exclusive of
Lrelancl, amounted to 5,574,000 bushels. The
increase in oar population ought also to create
as increased demand. Therefore, in point of
fact, the reduction in the- consumption was still
greater. lie would now ,sub.ruit to the Rt. llon.
Gfmtlernan whether by taking off these taxes to
a certain amount, and thereby causing an in-.
creased consumption to the extent of 1,8007000
quarters, the extent of the deficit, the revenue of
the country would not gain rather than lose. It
would be openino-in our own country an addi-
tional market,
,and erecting a constant demand
for our additional growth. Whenever it ap-
peared that taxation had passed beyond its limits
oionaumption would begin to decrease, and then it
was that taxation became prejudicial. If it were
necessary still further to establish the policy r, -
repealing this tax, he must go more minutely i.
tEOie circumstances ; and it was really curious to
see the immediate effect of the increased duties,
ald•the progress of the reductions of consump-
tion. En England the consumption was

- Bus'leis.
In 1791
1304 , 22,421,000
11105
1808
1007
18013
1801
In Scotland :

In 1701
1004
1895
1805
1007
1308
Finch were the results of increased taxation. As
the present distress pressed particularly hard upon
agriculture, it was the duty of the House to re-
Hew: that pressure wherever it could be dwna,
ae he contend,-‘d it could in the present instance.
The Act of 1815 had not given that protection
to the agriculturist which the House intended it
should. He would endeavour in a very few words
to explain his meaning upon this point. lie be-
lieved that the intention of the Legislature was
to protect 01.r7 own produce up to the price of
ROC ; and when i exceeded 804. to call in the
aid of foreign markets, t) prevent its going far
beyond that price. But the effect of that Act
had not been consistent with the viows and in-
ttntions of the Legislature. What had that ef-
fect been? Why, upon the admission of foreign
grain, when the averages reached 80s. such an
inundation of corn had been poured into the
oountry, that every market had become abso-
infely glutted with it. By looking at the Re-
terv, it would be seen that in a space little less
than twenty months, 2,600,000 quarters of fo-
reign Wheat had been imported ; a quantity of
five- times the amount of the annual imports for
the last twenty years. Irish imports had also
increased fo a great extent. The importations
from that coo.ntry, during • the period Ire had al-
luded to,-•was 400,000 quarters. There was
now in Inland 743,000 quarters, and in the gra-
naries of England 2.60,000 quarters. Some mea-
sire ought to be adopted to prevent, this sort
of inundation upon the country, yet to provide a
sufficient check upon the prices of our markets.
lie was sure that such a measure would give sa-
tisfacticn to the country throuzhout—not merely
to the agriculturist, but to the merchant, the
manufacturer, and to aul parties. Compatible
with the original views and intentions of the le-
gislature, considerable alterations might be made
in the Act of 1815, without materially affecting
its principle, so as to effect in a degree the ob-
jects he had pointed out. • Ile really was net
prepared to say what extent of duty would put
the Britisli grower upon a footing with the Fo-

reign grower. With respect to what was gene-
rally called a free trade, he considered it as im-
practicable as the putting in practice the abstract
doctrines of the Rights of Man, or any theory of
that description; for, with the present load
of taxes, it ,was impossible to put the Eng-
lish Agri cul tarlit upon an equality with
the foreigner. Another circumstance, .which
pressed; he thought, upon the industry
of all classes, was the Act of 1819, vulgarly.
called Peel's Bill. The effect of this measure
pressed upon all clasSes to an extent almost in-
calculable. lle knew it was little shert of pro-
fanation to call in question the wisdom of that
measure ; but he vas confident it was a measure
which could not be permanent. The lion. Mem-
ber concluded, by appealing to the justice of the
House in calling for their support to his motion ;
which was " For-leaveto bring in a Bill to repeal
so much of an Act passed in 59th year of the
reign of his late Majesty, entitled, An Act, tee.,
as related to the imposition of an additional duty
of is. 4d.per bushel upon British malt; and so
much of another Act relating. to Ireland as im-
posed an additional duty of 4s. Sd. per barrel
upon Irish malt."
Mr. Macxtslztx, in seconding the motion, dis-
claimed any wish to shift any undue share of the
burtheos of the country upon any chess of the
community ; but he was satisfied that the tax in
question pressed upon the agriculturist to an ex-
tent which must eventually dry up his resources.
The tax as it affected Scotland had rendered a
great portion of the Barley grown in that country
unserviceable ; and it had consequently been ap-
plied for the purposes-of illegal distillation. The
Scottish I.3arley was of a quality inferior to that of
English Barley, and therefore could not hear the
duty.. The duty was -in fact greater than the
value of the Barley, and he considered no other
fact necessary to show the justice of the present
motion, The deficiency in the quantify of pro-
ductive Barley, had not even yet reached its
head, for under the present law the distills .r was
tax d, not upon what he distilled in the present
year, but upon what he might have distilled upon
comparison with the last year. The Honourable
Member complained of the system, which he
s lid ir.!vailed, of imposing taxes at the end of a
Session,- without any inquiry, and without any
reference to the :Members ,of that part of the
Country likely to be affected by those taxes.—
He intreated the House to sanction the present
motion. He spoke, lie believed, the unanimous
voice of the Magistracy of Scotland in saying,
that this tax was dearly purchased. It gave rise
to smuggling to such an extent, that it threat-
etsed to overturn the police of the country ;
and yet nothing but an imperious sense of duty
could bring the Magistrates to enforce the
laws.—(Hear, hear.)—lie spoke in the pre-
sence of Hon. Members from that part of the
country. If his statement was erroneous,
.he
called upon them to correct him, and if it was
justified by the fact, be had a right to call upon
them to support the present motion.—(Cheers.)
Mr. ELLICE said, he should support the mo-
tion, but upon grounds different from those of
the last speaker. Before he even consented to
the repeal of the tax, he wished to satisfy him-
self that that taN could be repealed with advati-
,tage. So largely bad we dealt with the Sinking
Fund, and so little was there remaining of that
Fund, that he thought the House ought to exert
oselves to relieve the present pressure, in
;der to enable the country to provide an efficient
sinking Fund, applicable to the purposes origi-
nally intended.—(Hear, hear, hear!)—He ob-
jected to the manner of keeping the accounts of
the public debt, as it tended to the support of
many useless offices, and because it made the
state of the country appear darker than it really
was. He saw no good reason for our debt being
stated at one-third more than it really amounted
to. lie asked whether, after all the trials which
had been sustained by the country, was there
a hope left of forcing the Government to eco-
nomise ? Would it be believed, for instance,
that the collection of the Customs cost more than
it did in the year 1807, by a million, although
the amount collected was nearly the same ? He
really thought an Honourable Friend was by no
means wrong in his calculation, when he said
that a million a year might be saved without
any inconvenience. To address himself, how-
ever, to the tax immediately,under consideration.
He by no means agreed with his Hon. Friend,
the Mover, in every thing he had advanced. He
(Mr. E.) thought the tax in question pressed
most heavily upon the consumer. The consump-
tion had fallen off in consequence of the pressure
of the tax, and this'alone convinced him that the
tax had been carried too far. This was one rea-
sou for his giving his vote for the motion ; but he
confessed that when speculative opinions were
circulated very freely he was anxious to correct
them. He agreed with his Hon. Friend that the
Act of 1815 was inadequate for the protection of
the agriculturist ; but he thought it would be
better even for the agriculturist to repeal the Act
altogether.—(Hear!)—The idea of keeping up
prices was perfectly absurd, while the Act of
1819 was in force. All speculations of this kind
he was satin led would fail. The Hon. Member
for Norfolk had said on a former debate that
the price of corn was the same as it was in the
year 1792, and yet that rent, tradesmen's bills,
and every thing else had doubled. But the
farmer, he thought, should look for low charges
rather than high prices.—(Hear, hear !)—The
landholder must now pay the price of the sup-
port he bad given to Government in the" prose-
cution of infamous wars.—(Cheers.)—The
holder was always subservient to the Minister,
and actually supported the measure of the Right
lion. Member for Oxford, under the effect of
Which they were now suffering. It was this mea-
sure which bad brought the country to its present
state, and the only- chance of relief was to', be
found in the reduction of our expences within the
smallest possible limit.—(Cheers.)—He consider-
ed it was the greatest injustice to compel persons
,who had entered into contracts in a depreci-
ated currency to make good their contracts in
a full currency.--,(llear, hear!)--The lion.
Member concluded by stating his determination
to support the motion.
The CiIANCELLOR of the EIGUE'QUER wished

to -meal the attention of the House to the eines-
tion immediately before them.--e(Hear !)—The
Hon. Member. for Essex could not, deny that
%ihich was proved by the accounts on the table,
that the produce of the tax- of JBl9 had
.fully
answered the expectation, and risen to the amount 1
which the Country had been led to expert. The
Hon Member had contended that the consump-
tion of barley had-been reduced b3re4xatio,n ; but
he (the Chancellor of the ErC:hequec) denied'
that the Honourable Member had accurately ex-
hibited the accounts which were before the House
or. stated a fair view of the subject. The inference
which the Chancellor of the Exchequer drew froth
these accounts was, that the repeal of the War
Duty in 1816 did not afford relief to the Agricul-
ture of the Country ; and dile he proved by an
argument of expressly the same nature as that
used by the Hon. Gentleman himself in favour of
the repeal of the Duty at present. The repeal
in 1816 did net increase the consumption
during the succeeding year, although not only
was the duty then withdrawn, but that ,which
had 'been advanced for the stock on hand had
been repaid. The average quantity of corn, ou
which duties were charged, between July, 1816,
and Juiy,-1819, when a considerable proportion
of the war duty was resumed, was 22,000,080
quarters, making an actual diminution of nearly
3,000,0001., on- the revenue during these three
years, as compared with the three years preceding
1816. Neither had the re-imposition 'of a part of
that duty, in 1319, diminished either the con-
sumption or the:revenue since, that period. The
quantity was in fact eincretsed, by 1,'260,000
bushels. The Right Hone Gentleman continued
his reply to the propositions of the Hon. Mem-
bers for Essex, Rosshire, and Coventry ; but his
arguments wero given in so indistinct a tone, that
it was with ditliculty we could catch even 'a few
detached sentences. The Right Hon. Gent. con-
tended,as we understood him, that the new duty
,ort malt had in no degreelessened the consumption
of strong beer ; and that, by consequence, the tax
falling not upon the farmer but upon the consumer,
was an eligible- impost, pressing fairly and equally
upon the public at large. lie next proposed to
meet the objections to the new. duty as they ape
plied to the case of Scotland peculiarly. It was
said that the imposition of so high a duty held
out an encouragement to illicit distillation ; but
it would not be found, he believed, that since
the new duty had been in operation the extent of
legal distillation had been diminished. On the
other hand, it was to be remembered that Scot-
land hail a free importation of English Vain ; and
if English barley could be carried into Scotland,
there, at a reduced duty, converted into malt,
and in that state brought back into the English
market, what security was there for the English
grower or maltster ? He certainly - could not
consent, to a partial • reduction of the duties,
therefore, wilich was to benefit Scotland exclu-
sively, at the ex pence of crippling the revenue of
the country. There was another point on which
the Hon. Mover had expatiated—he meant the
superannuations which had been adopted under
the system of 1818. Persons, he admitted, had
been allowed to retire ; • but the aftera-
tion of circumstances rendered it neces-
sary ; and if any increase of expellee lied
been the consequence, those circumstances
could be fairly pleaded as a reason for it. Many
persons considered that it would be far more de-
sirable to reduce some of the duties on foreign
products for the ptirpose a effecting general re-
lief, rather than to remove such an impost as
this ; but when lee himself proposed to remove
the tax on one article, (we believe on the hn-
portation of certain descriptions of silk goods,) he
found that persons_ nterested in the trade would
not agree to such a proposition. If, then, a reduc-
tion of an impost on foreign articles would not be
allowed, still less was it likely to be admitted
with respect to a great internal duty, which fell
equally, on all classes of the community, and the
amount of which could he accurately computed.
—(Hear.)---Under these circumstances he should
Oppose the motion.

Mr. MAGRExzis and the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER mutually explained. _ _

Lord A. HAMILTON had, in common with the
rest of his countrymen, an utter hopelessness and
despair of prevailing on the Chancellor of the
Exchequer to take of} any cluty.on Scotland, as
to its growth or manufactures. lie thought it
rather hard to lay on a duty last year of ~-
tenth on Scotch grain, when the additional duty
on English malt was hitt one-twelfth. The
amount of the duty on Scotch malt was literally
more than the real price of the article. flat he
would say again, that he had no hope of making
any impression on the utter oh.luracy of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer in matters of
economy.

Lord G. CAVENDISIV Said, he would vote for
this motion, as one that would he of the greatest
relief to the landholder and the farmer. The
trader and the manufacturer 'could, (what was
vulgarly called) keep their heads above water.
But he would ask if that was the case with the
agricultural interest ? -Something must be clone
for the relief of the farmer ; and this was one of
the first which would enable him to bear the bur-
dens which had been imposed upon him. The_
landed interest and the practical farmer could
not be better relieved than by the. adoption of
the motion of his Honourable Friend, the Mem-
ber for Essex.
Mr. WoutuousE was decidedly in favour of
the repeal of this tax. He considered it as a met/-
Sure necessary for the relief of the agriculturist.
The land-owner had been charged, with a desire
to raise the price of agricultural produce, that
the farmer Might be enabled to pay exorbitant
rents. He denied the assertion. Upon a fair
calculation, light lands would produce about 40
bushels of barley an acre. Such lands usually
let for 26,5, an acre. He would put it to any
Hon. Member to say if that was too high a rent
for the land-owner to receive. An Hon. Gent..
had talked of the servility of the landed interest,
to the existing Government. The Hon Member
might have used a more courteous expression.—
He knew not in what sense it had been used ;
but he would say, in reply, that the assertion was
wholly unfounded. The Hon. Member then
proceeded to comment on the present st4te. of the

country, and to urge the necessity of a repeal of
the tax, though in doing this he intended to im-
pute no censure on his Majesty's Government for
proposing to retain it.
Mr. ELLICE in explanatititi said, he had used a
term in the heat of argnment which he wished he
had not used.—(Rear, hear o—He wished not to
apply_ the word subserrients-o as to give the least
ofence,• on the .contrary he was desiron4 of
spealt.ing'qn the most respectfut terms or ale
landed interest.

Mr. R. SUMNER contended, that the statement
made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer was
correct. There was nethiudin the situation of
persons north of the Tweed, to entitle them to.
indulgence - with respect to the duty. Much had
been said against the late war, to which the pre-
sent state of distress was attributed. With other
Members who felt pugnacious, he supported the,
war, and he was convinced the Representatives in
Parliament who voted:with him on that occasion,
spoke the sentiments of the people.- IJe was
ready to a►ford relief to Agriculturists', by voting
for the repeal of the tax on husbandry horses ;
but he could not vote for the motion before the

Lord FOLICS9TONE supported the motion, but
said he did not coincide in all the topics intro-
duced by. the Hon. Member for Essei. He did
not agree with him in the proposition, that taking
off this tax would relieve Agriculture only. lie
thought manufactures would be benefited by a
repeal of the tax, and therefore he should support
it. Distress was not confined tctone class of the
community but all. With respect, to the cause of
that distress ; it was impossible for the country
to goon paying the interest of the public debt.
fu some cases .it might be a nittter of justice" to
break faith with the public creditor. He thought
it right to state his sentiments on thathead fairly.
Mr. ilusKtssox was aware of the .unpopular
task whiCh that man itad to perform who rose in
• his place to oppose the repeal of a tax, especially
when it was represented that the repeal would
relieve the. distress of a great body of the people;
but on this occasion ht felt he had a duty to per-
form, and that duty was to oppOse 'the repeal of
the tax in the present instance. He strongly re-
probated the doctrine of the Noble Lord, as re-
garded keeping public faith with the public cre-
ditor:,. He contended. that faith oughtto be kept
inviolate, and impressed with that opinion, he
could not consent, in this time of public neces-
sity, to give up a branch of revenue amounting to-
upwards of .../.,000,000/. annually. The Hoe. Mem-
ber then entered into .various details; to shew
that the Malt Tax did not affect the agricultu-
rist_ This tax was not like the Hop Tax; it was
not taken out of the pockets of the grower, but
was taken from the consumer. Speaking of the dis-
tress of the country, he apprehended no man would
say that taxation had brought the present pres-
sure on America, neither had it here. He was
ready to allow that the Poor-rates and,Taxation
were heavy evils, but they were not the original
cause of, our difficulties. The lion.. Member
then read an extract from the RepPrt matte to
Congress in America during the present Session
of Congress, which described, the distresses of
America as greater than those of this country,
yet they had not thought of breaking, public
faith; and he thought persons were disposed
look at our situation with too gloomy and des-
ponding an eye. He was persuaded, with per-
severance, we should come out of the struggle
with our honour unimpaired, and with increased
strength. He considered our greatest difficulties
as surmounted, and that We might now look for-
ward to a diminution of expenditure and a gra-
dual reduction of taxation. He concluded by
moving the previous question. _

Air. Wir.ucn.ronci.-addressed the House in a
low tone of voice. We understood him to sup-
,port the motion for a repeal of the Malt Tax.
Ile agreed that it was necessary to support Go-
-vernment to enable them to retrieve the affairs of
the Country ; but at the same time he thought.
they ought übt to lay any burdens on. the Coun-
try which were not absolutely necessary. They
ought to beware and remember, that the posses-
sion of the good-will and heart of the nation, was
in this Country the most valuable they could
have, and if there was too great taxation, no oc-
casion should be allowed to pass without lighten-
'ing it.
Mr. MoNcK delivered his sentiments in favour
of the original motion, amidst repeated cries of
question. He thought that as the rent roll of the
Country diminished the taxes, that burdens ought
to be decreased in something like the same pro-
portion.

Mr. LYTTLETON intruded on the time of the
House to state his reason for voting in favour of
the motion of the Hon. Member for Essex (Mr.
Western). He was ready to vote for a system
of more extended taxation ; but it must press
more equally than this upon the country.
Lord CASTLEREAGH assured the House, that if
he rose for the purpose of arguing the question at
that hour, he should. think he deserved theimpa-
tience which ,he perceived growing around
lie entreated the House to consider what had
been the situation of Parliament in discussions of
this nature for the last five years. For'the three
years preceding the last two the character of the
Government had been run down because it de-
layed bringing forward some system ormore
extensive taxation, which should restore the
faith of the country and give support to the
money operations, and during the last two years
no less than three propositions had been made
for repealing taxes. So that, after having SO-
lefithly resolved that it was necessary to sustain
the public creditor with a sinking fund of five
millions, when no one could lay his hand upon
his heart and say that their sinking fund. was
worth more than two millions, they were pro=
posing to recede from their resolutions; and in-
stead of considering hOw they should make up
the other three millions, they were trying how
they should get rid of the two they had. He
fully appreciated the benevolence of the views of
the Hon. Gehtleman opposite (Mr. Wilberforce),
but they were most limited, unfounded, and un-
fair.' If he were inclined to repiit any .tax, he
certainly should not fix upon this tax ; fur its re-
peal would not fall upon the consumer. He
conjured the House not to allow • its enlarged

views of the state of the country', exifi'oi this
subject, to be shaken by the false "arghuneuto
which had been advanced that evening.
Mr. K. DOUGI,AS stated, that in coutequenee
of a tax upon Mailt having been laid upon the
Scotch without their .I-tepresentatives being duly
advised on the subject, the SCotch :Members felt
themselves so situated on the present occasion,
that tlkey should, -think'liktheic duty to vote for
the repeal of tIXTdx..
The CHANdILLOR of the EXCiIEQUER explained.
Mr. WESTERN shortly replied, and the House
then divided. The numbers were

For the Previous Question
-Against it

MaiorAyfor Mr. Western's Motion
Mr. WESTERN accordingly wa.. 611.c:tell to
bring in his. 1.31 it.
The other Orders of the flay were then dis-
posed of, and. the Ilonse adjourned at HALF..
PAST TWO O'CLOCK.