The Sun.
London, England, 1820-07-06 00:00:00

SCOTS MALT DUTY.

Lord A. HAMILTOA baring tiserst:s make his motion for
a Reeolution respecting the Tax on Malt in Scotland,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
should inform the Noble Lord what he inteoded to do, that
the Noble Lord might know how far his motion Will rendered
unnecessary. He should propose a temporary allowance of 6d.
per bushel on Malt made (tutu big or bear, under certain
regulations.
Lord A. HAMILTON said, this concession was so inferior
to what the people in Scotland expected and considered as
due to theta, that he should persist in Isis motion, of which he
would willingly have averted the necessity. The grounds
ou which he objected to the tax lately imposed on Scots
Malt were:three. I. That it had been the practice for more
than a century to impose on Scots Malt only half the duty that
was imposed on Malt in England ; SI. that is less tax had been
generally imposed on bear or big than on barley malt ; and
3. that the tax was passed at au improper time and in All un-
fair manner—in the last week of the last Session, when
scarcely any Scots Members were present, or knew of the Bill.
The effect of tke increased duty had beet' such iu Scotland,
that the distilleries could nu looger work except at a loss.
The tact was, very few of the great distilleries had worked
during the last 12 months, and those only were satisfied with
the duty as it at present stood who found means of defrauding
the revenue. It seemed probable, indeed, that this increase
of duty on Scots Malt had originated in s use mistahe, for a
letter in October from the Treasury, in answer to an applicas
tiros from Scotland, the 23d of August last, stated tba the
increase of duty on Scuts Malt was Is. td. per bushel, where-
as it turned out to he Is. O3d. Petitions had poured its against
this Tax from every part of Scut laud. Upon the cultivators
of inferior soils, where the inferior descriptions of Harley were
grown, it was most oppressive. The small stills, which had
heels encouraged by Government for the counteraction of
illicit distillation, were now obliged to cease working, and
to give way to unlawful eutupetition. The Noble Lord having
urged his arguments against the tax, under the several heads
we have mentioued, said, he should propose certain Resolu-
tions. The Resolutions stated, that in the Malt Duty Acts
of 1725, 1760, 1779, 1780, and 1785, the principle had been
recoguiaed, that the rate of duty on Malt in Scotland should
be one half of the rate of duty on Malt its England; that by
those and various other Acts, smaller duties had been im-
posed on Beer or Big, than on Barley Malt ; that by the Act
ethd"inishedy
out Malt had been inc,eased tt;
of
tllct titi Session, the
mi Scotland,
per cent. in England.
The Resolution with which he intended to cooclude the se-
ries was to this effect—that the departure from t he principle
previously acted upon in the imposition of the duties no
Malt had been injurious to the agriculture sod general inte-
rests of Scotland. The Noble Lord moved hie first Itesoln-
(ion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the prac-
tice with respect to the of the duty on malt bad

not been entirely uniform ; ie. in 171 a, SIX years aft,, flat;
Union, Gd. per bushel duty was imposed on Scots and English
malt equally, though IL years after it was reduced in the caret
of Scotland—(flear!)---There was obviously great incon-
venience in the existence Of unequal taxation in different
parts of the island. It VMS to be observed that in lEOi,
a tax of Is. 04al. per bushel, and in the next year 9s.
.more per bushel had been imposed on malt in Scotland as
well as England ; a tax nut much less than that which ex-
isted at peseta. Though on the whole the English might
be somewhat superior to the Scots barley, yet much of the
barley of Scotland was quite equal to that of England ; and
in many of the counties,of England, especially the Northern
Counties, the English barley was inferior to the average of
Scotland. lie allowed that in the case of beer or big thet c
was a claim for x reduction of the duty, and be proposed
to grant a temporary allowance of six pence per bushel.—
If the daty in Scotland were less than that in England,
it svoit!d be necessary to prohibit the intercourse in grain
between the two countries. because two hundred and fifty
thousand quarters of barley had been imported into Leith front
England, and would probably he sent back in the shape of
malt or strong ales. He should, therefore, persevere in the
principle which Parliament had adopted, and would move the
previous question.
Mr. FERGUSON said, he cnuld not agree that there should
he no deviation front the old proportion of the ditties in the
two countries, thtittgh he should have approved that the duty
should be somewhat lower in Scotland than in England.
Lord A. HAMILTON said, he had never mentioned that the
old proportion should be rigidly adhered to—(Hear
Sir .1. MARJORIBANKS said, the Members for Scotland
had been placed in a most difficult situation, when after having
left Parliament without any knowledge of such a tax being
imposed, they had had to meet their constituents, who up-
braided them with their burthen. Ireland had a Secretary
to protect its interests, but poor Scotland was left without
any defender in the House. The tax was one of the severest
ever imposed on a country.
Mr. KENNEDY said, when it was known that a Bill had
passed respecting the Malt Tax on the ‘:=d July of the last Ses-
sions, no one imagined that the subject would be again
touched in the Session ; yet on the 12th of the same moot,
another Rill was passed, not to exploit], but entirely to over-
turn it. He supported the Resolution.
After some observations from Mr. Marjoribanks, Mr. Wil-
mot, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Boswell, Mr. W.
Smith, and Mr. Douglas,
Lord A HAMILTON replied.
Sir G. CLERK supported the motion.
The first two Resolutions were negatived without adivision.
The House divid. d upon the third Resolution
For the previous qaettion
Against it 53
Majority against the Resolution.. —lO
ANTH A M ELECTION.

On the motion of Mr. WYNN, the Short-hand Writer who
took t•he minutes of evidence before the Grantham Election
Committee, was called to the bar; where he read that part
of the evidence is hich related to serving the Speaker's war-
rant on Sir W. Manners, mid the three other individuals be-
fore named. It appeared that the person employed to serve
the warrant had made several ineffectual attempts to see Sir
\V. Manners, and that eventually he threw the warrants over
the gate of the court yard. Atter the Short-hand Writer had
withdrawn,

Sir R. IfERON moved, that Sir W. Manners, Bart. be
taken into the custody of the Serjeant at Armsattending that
!loose.

Mr. TENNYSON, un the ground that the circumstances
stated in the Report did not warrant so severe a proceeding,
moved as an amendment, that Sir W. Manners be ordered
to attend that House en Aloud:Ay next.
Dr. PHILLIMORE• warmly defended the Committee. It
was evident that the persons in question had determined to
evade the Order of the House.
Mr. 'WYNN contended, that if the House did not resent
this attempt to resist their authority, it was at au end.
Mr. F. P.A LMEIt supported the motion.
The amendment was then negatived without a division, and
the original motion carried.

Sir lt. HERON proceeded to more, that R. Armstrong
Jet els shoidd he committed to the custody of the Scrjeaut at
Arms.

Lord NUGENT wished it to be considered, that, as a ser-
vant, there might be some defence for the conduct of this

Dr. PIJILLINIORE maintained the necessity for support-
ing the authority of the House.
Sir J. NIAUINTOSH considered the present as a most seri-
ous instance of contempt of the authurity of the House of
Commons ; and he considered it necessary, in order to teach
all persons in future that such conduct could not be pursued
with impunity, Hutto allow it to pass unnoticed.
The motion was then agreed to.
Sir R. HERON then moved, that Nlr. Hugh Manners be
taken into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms.
Mr. S. BOURNE considered it as doubtful whether or not
the summons had been properly served on this individual.
After a short conversation, in which Sir R. Heron, Mr.
Wynn, Mr. Goulburn and Mr. S. Bourne participated, Sir It.
Heron agreed to withdraw the motion; and Mr. Manners was
ordered to attend that House on Monday.
Sir R. HERON lastly moved, that William Atter be taken
in the custody' of the Serjeant at Arms.
Mr. TENNYSON, on the ground that it did not appear
certain that Alter was aware that he was disobeying the
orders of the Home, moved, as an amendment, that he be or-
dered to attend on Monday.
A discussion ensued, in which Mr. Wynn, Sir J. Newport,
Mr. S. ILurne, Mr. Serjeant Onslow, Dr. Lushington, Mr.
It. Smith, Sir J. Macintosh, and Sir R. Heron participated.
Eventually the Gallery was cleared, but on cur return we
were given tw understand that there had been nu division, and
that the original motion was agreed to.

TITHES IN IRELAND,.
Sir H. PARNELL, rose to make his promised Motion rely.
tire to Tithes in Ireland. It was aelinowiedged un all hand's
that the Bill which had been brougkt in three years ago to
enable ecclesiastical persons in Ireland to make leases of
tithes was a very advantageous measure, and he wished it to
be revived. 'The Honourable Baronet, after entering into
a detail of the inconveniences arising from the existing sys-
tem in Ireland, said his intention was, thnt the Bill which he
intended to introduce shOuld be read a first time and printed,
in order to give Members an opportunity of discussii.-g the
subject next. Session. He then moved for leave to bring in a
Bill to amend the existing mode of letting leaves and of col-
lecting tithes in Ireland.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT seconded the motion.
Lord CASTLEItEAGH did nut object to the Bill being
printed, but be wished it to be understood as nut affecting a
commutation of tithes.

Mr. M. FITZGERALD and Mr. LOCKHART .upporte.l
the motion.

Mr. C. GRANT supported the Bill, reserving to himself
to suggest such alterations as he night think exp.:dicta.
Mr. NEWMAN spoke ni favour of the Bill.
Sir H. PARR ELT. shortly *culled.
After Which leave was granted to bring in the Bill.
TOBAGO.

Lord NUGENT rose to move fin. an humble Address to his
Majesty, for Copies of Correspondence between the Secretary
of State for the Colonial Department, and the Governor and
Chief Justice of the island of Tobago, relating to certain
charges preferred by the late Attorney-General of that Island.
The Noble Lord said, if the correspondence were produced,
he would submit a motion to the House respecting the juris-
prudence of that island. He regretted to say, that charges of
cruelty and oppression had been made, though he did not
charge the Governor of the Island with any abuse of power.
Whatever 01 abuse or of oppression might hare occurred,
proceeded from causes over which he had no controvil.
After a few observations from Mr. GOULBURN, the mo•
lion was agreed to.
COMMITTEE OF SVIPPLY.—THE LATE KING'S
SERVANTS, &c.

CHANCELLORttheresoiveditsel
intoO f the
acoEnx):
:cut:C:l
victleutoEl'aer ,smittlopt etpi:Eynl.o(u) of the
Lord CASTLERRAGH Said, he would shortly state
the grounds of the motion lie now intended to
bring forward. On the death of the Qt-teen thete
was effected a general reduction of 180;0001. sAving
a provision of 18,0001. for her Majesty's Serv.anti.
On the dent:se of his late Majesty, a saving arose
of 160,0001. Against this, however, as be had
stated Ott a former occasion, there was a set-off of
24,0001. provision for :he household servants.—
The provision made in former cases for the ser-
vants of former Queens was much greater than in
the instance of her 14te Majesty. The reason of
that was, that no provision whatever was intended
to be made fur the State Officers of her Majesty.
The menial servants were alone intended to be
provided' for. Government thought it their duty.
to folio tY ;I)is 121.ncipl; 4ltdcr Ott: present cirCuln:

skin Les of the Country.—(dear, hear
respect to his Majesty's servants, these were of
far different descriptions, which he intended to
propose; the first for a sum of 90001. odd hun-
dred pounds provision for the servants who were
in the immediate employment of the late King at
the time of his decease ; 40001. odd hundred
pounds for those servants who had been in his
Majesty's family et the breaking up of the Wind-
sor establishment about a year ago, and who had
been then thrown upon his Majesty's Privy
Purse, and ten thousand pounds for a class of
claimants, who had received provision out of his
Majesty's Privy Purse, and who for long and
faithful services were objects of his grace and fa-
vour—of those his Majesty bad himself placed
on the Privy Purse claims to the amount of 80001.
He would only say, that the same principle of
economy pursued with respect to her Majesty, was
adopted with respect to the servants of the late
King. No State Officers, none but menials, were
to receive any provision. It was by no means
the intention of Government to submit the claims
of all those who had received pensions from his
Majesty, but those persons alone of the descrip-
tion he had already mentioned. There was ano-
ther class of persons, namely servants who had
been but a short time in the Royal service ; to
those it was intended to give one year's wages.
Mr. BANKS opposed the grant, as intending to
put a permanent burthen on the country.
Mr. Hum& observed, that although the Noble
Lord professed to proceed in this case upon the
precedent of the provision made in 1819 for the
Queen's servants, there was this remediable dis-
crepancy, that in the precedent quoted the ser-
vants were only allowed about three-fouro,s of
their salary, while, in the present case, it was
proposed to grant the servants of his late M ,jesty
the whole of their salary. There was also another
discrepancy, that while in the grant of 1819 those
servants only who had served eight years 've►a
provided for, those who had only been one year
in the King's service, were to have their whole
salary fur life. The Honourable Member quoted
several instances to sustain his assertion, and after
animadverting upon the prodigality of Ministers,
in applying to the public purse for these grants,
instead of providing for them from the Pen4ott

Lists of Eng! end, Ireland,l and Scotland, ex-
pressed his intention to make a motion upon the
subject, with a view to reduce the proposed al-
lowance to the standard of the precedent alluded
to by the Noble Lord.
Mr. \TM. SMITH thought those who were call-
ed the Great Officers of State, mid whom he con-
sidered as a sort of halt menial servants, s!iould
have no pecuniaty allowance whatever, and that
as they deemed it' an honour and dignity to serve
the Crown in this capacity, they should do s's
without any salary, money certainly contribtving
to advance the digni;y of their station. Here
the Hon. Gentleman took a review of the Pen-
sions granted from the Privy Purse of the late
King, expressing his astonishment to find, that
while only 4001. was allowed to the jiiffly cele-
brated Sir Wm. Herschel!, above 1001. a year
was granted to several musicians ; he was also
surprised to hear, that the Pension granted hyltis
late Majesty to that distinguished painter Mr.
West was withdrawn some time before the demise
of the Crown, and at a time when, he under-
stood, that great artist was much in want of
money._

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER vindicated
the arrangement proposed, stating that every
practicable reduction was made, and that this.
provision arose out of the uncommon circum-
stance of two Royal Households having existed at
the same petiod. It was known that the Prince
Regent's Establishment was 'complete lung In fore
the death of the late King, and that therefore
the servants of his Majesty could nit, as %yds the
case heretofore, be transferred to his snceessoi.
Hence the necessity of making the present appeal
to the liberality of Parliament. But that appeal
referring to meritorious servants would not, he
thought, be made in vain. He instanced particu-
larly the merit of the Pages, who had closdy at-
tended his Majesty throughout his lamented ill-
ness, without having ever divulged any of those
anecdotes which were too often propagated on
sue II melancholy occasions.—(Hear !)---With re-
speict to Mr. West, ;be fact was, that his salary,
wh ch was not paid from the Privy Purse, hut
(torn the Lord Chamberlain's department, for
taking care of his Majesty's pictures, was never
witlsdrawn from that eminent artist.

Mr. WILLIAMS entorced Mr. Hume's view of
the purposed grants, thinking, that according to
the precedent referred to by the Noble Lot d, they
ought to be reduced at least one-fifth.
Mr. HusrussoN stated, that according to the
recommendation of a Committee upon the si.b.
ject, there was a compensation granted to the
Queen's servants in lien of perquisites, in addi-
tion to the vote alluded to by the Honourable
Member for Aberdeen, and therefore tl►at Hun.
Member's comparison was erroneous. With re-
gard to Mr. West, he was enabled to say, that
not only the allowance from the Lord Chamber-
lain's Department was continued to that illus-
trious artist to the end of his life, but to add, that
to his knowledge Mr. West received 1,0001. a
year from the privy purse of Iris Majesty, with a.
view to encourage tl►e arts,-anti that the whole of
the sum thus granted by his Majesty, whose pa-
tronage of the arts was proverbial, amounted to
no less titan 40,0001.

Mr. W. SMITH expressed himself peculiarly
glad to learn, that he was misintornted with re-
spect to the treatment of Mr. West, adding that
he never doubted the I-ire King's munificence to-
wards that eminent individual, or towards the fine

arts in general.
. Mr. Hums moved an Amendment. that instead
of 90001., the sum of 7,6001. shua/d be voted for
the purpose referred to, but this Amendment was
negatived.
Certain stints were revoted which were granted
for the use of the King's Household; 60,000! for
the use of the Veteran Battalions in Great &1.-
main, and 20,0001. for the Veteran B ttalion•
Ireland were also voted, on the motion of Lord
Palmerston.—The House resumed, and the Re-
port was otdered to he brought up I, to-morrow.
H
Lord CASTLEREATGHEn ClkoUvhe%r the appointment
of a Commit'.et to ex4zine the Journals of the

Itonse of 'na., in order to ascertain whether any
And what proceedings had taken place in that
'House with respect to her Majesty, and to report
their opinion thereupon to the House.—The mo-
ion was agreed to, and the Committee was ap-
pointed accordingly
The Noble Lord then said, that he bad sub-
mitted this motion with the view which it implied;
and if, from the report of she Committee, it
should appear that the other House had instituted
any proceeding, he should then consider whether,
pending that proceediwz, the notice of a motion
which he had given for to-morrow should not be
dropped; and also whether he should not to-
morrow move the reading of the Order for taking
his Majesty's Message into consideration on Eli-
day, with u view of moving the postponement
of that order until grime future day. This post-
ponement he should feel to be proper, its ostler
that the House might wait the result of 'the pro-
ceedings in the House of Louis. still reserving to
itself the right of taking his Majesty's Message
into consideration, it that should he thought ne-
cessary. But until the result of the proceedings of
the Lords should he made known, be sobmitted
that it would be very inconvenient for that House
to adopt any tneas,ae.
Sir J. NRWPORT asked, whether it was the in-
tention of the Noble Lotd to keep the order
wl:ich was fixed for Friday in abeyance, until the
Lords should pronounce their decision upon the
subject ? observing, that if such were the Noble
-Lord's intew ism, it would be a very uncommon
• course of proceeding.
Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that the proceed-
its instituted by the Lords might never be brought
in any legislative way bt fore that House, and
therefore he proposed only that the order for con-
sidering his Majesty's Message should be delayed,
but -tluit the House should by no means abandon
its right of Inquiry upon the subject.
bit- M. W. RIDLEY expressed his hope that the
House would not agree to the course proposed by
the Noble Lord, declaring, tlrat if no other Mem-
ber would take the sense of the lionse upon the
subject, lie should'hituself feel it his duty to do
-so—(hear, hear, hear !)