The Sun.
London, England, 1829-09-25 00:00:00

a reform in the. law on this subject is indispen-
sably necessary there can be no doubt. The
stationary nature of the consumption of the arti-
cle in question is an irrefragible proof that there
is something rotten in the system pursued ; and
vhen it is considered that the malt liquor forms
not only the main luxury, but also one of the
principal necessaries of the working classes, we
think it will be agreed on all hands that the
Legislature could not well be better employed
than in endeavouring to furnish them with this
beverage in the greatest quantity, and of the best
quality.
The public is, in fact, but little aware that
the Government receives an ad valorem duty of
no less than 150 per cent., or rather more, on
every bushel of malt that is manufactured into
beer, or, in plainer language, that there is paid
to Government 14,-d. out of every pint of beer
that is consumed in the metropolis—the remain-
ing penny being all that the farmer, the maltster,
the brewer, and the victualler, receive for their
grain, hope, expence of manufacturing, and re-
tailing
For example—
The Malt duty amounts to £3,340,000
The Beer duty to
Maltsters' licences 20,000
Brewers' licences
Hop duty 441,000

Total _ £7,165,000

No article but one of primary necessity cou

have withstood such an overwhelming load of
taxation, as that which, we have now shown,
presses on the consumption of beer ; and no
one, we are confident, who looks at the amount
for a moment can doubt that it is needless
to travel farther in search of the causes
which have kept its consumption stationary
in point of quantity, and greatly dimi-
nished it when the increased population of
the country is taken into the account. But the
amount of the duty is not the only evil ; the tax
is partial in its operation, and falls with the
greatest severity on those who are least able to
pi), it, and at the same time are least able to
dispense with the taxed commodity. The malt
tax, for example, must be paid, by all who ma-
nufacture or buy malt ; and, however severe in
its pressure, may, in consequence, be said to be
• a fair tax; but not so with the beer duty; for
while those who brew beer for their own con-
sumption only pay no tax, all who brew strong
beer, intermediate beer, or table beer for sale,
are taxed at the rate, in the one case, of
10d. per barrel—in the second, at the rate of
4s. 11d. ! On this subject the writer of the
article in the Edinburgh Review observes that—
" As rich people generally use only beer rnanu.
factored in their own houses, and as the poor, from
their inability to brew at home, are obliged to buy
their beer entirely from public-houses, the real
effect of the tax is to impose a heavy burden
on the working classes, from which the nobility
and gentry of the country are wholly exempted.
The hard working labourer cannot get a glass of
ale to invigorate his constitution, without paying a
duty upon it at the rate of Os. 101 a barrel, while
the nobleman, merchant, or banker, in the receipt,
probably, of 10,000!. or 20,0001. a-year, may con-
sume any quantity he pleases, either at his own
table, or that of his servants, without having to pay
one farthing of duty ! That a tax so scandalously
partial should ever have been imposed, or that it
should still be continued, and so little outcry be
raised against it, is indeed extraordinary. It is,
without any question, the most objectionable tax in
our fiscal system. The country has rung with well-
founded complaints of the unjust preference afforded
by discriminating duties to West Indian over East
Indian sugars. But what is this preference, when
compared with that we havi3 now pointed out ?
Here we have the rich and the great enacting a law,
by which a heavy duty is laid on the beer consumed

by the poor, from which that used by themselves is
entirely free. It is ludicrous, while such a law is
suffered to disgrace the statute-book, to talk about
the fairness and equality of our system of taxation.
We do not believe that the legislation of Algiers
can furnish a more glaring example of partiality of
preference than the one in question."
For such barefaced preference of the rich to
the poor—such an atrocious grinding of the
latter, and impudent passing over of the former—
there is no apology, as there is also no parallel to
be found to it in the history of any country ; but,
like every species of injustice, whatever form it
may assume, it recoils with double violence on
• the heads of its authors. The direct operation
of the heavy amount of the tax,
and its partial
apportionment between the two great classes of
society, is to diminish the amount and the price
of the barley consumed in malt ; and though the
land-owner gets his home-brewed cheaper than
the brewer can possibly manufacture his, he pays
dearly for it, by having more waste land on his
estates, and less rent than he would otherwise re-
ceive. All parties are, in fact, seriously injured
by such injudicious and unjust taxation—the la-
bouring man in being able to purchase a smaller
quantity of a healthful beverage than he other-
wise would—the farmer in getting a less
price for his barley (for a greater demand for it
would necessarily raise the price)—and the land-
owner in a diminished rent for his land. Let us

now ask whether it is possible to produce, or to
demand, more convincing proofs of the impolicy
of a tax than those which we have now furnished
of the taxes which are levied on malt and beer ?
We think not ; and we think also that if our sa-
pient Legislators have any spark of common
sense left—any regard for their own interests,
or any bowels of compassion for the wants and
distressed condition of the poor,—their first
and best attention will be given to the subject
which we have now been handling. 'We are
often told by them that the distress of the agri-
cultural interest is owing mainly to the importa-
tion of foreign corn ; but here, we will venture
to add, is a tax which, in its pernicious effects
on agriculture, more than counterbalances the
greatest quantity of foreign grain which. has ever
been introduced in any one year into the United
Kingdom.—Morning Advertiser.

A gentleman recently arrived in this town
__ . _

from St. Petersburgh describes the enthusiasm of the
people in favour of the Turkish war to be now as great, as
was their dissatisfaction at the close of the last campaign.
Illuminations had been frequent. The Emperor .NiciloLas
is much liked, and had rendered himself very popular by
various reforms, such as abolishing the fees—in other
words, the bi ihes—heretolore taken by Custom-house
officers, many of whom with a salary of about 8 or 101.
sterling a year, lived at the rate of 200 or 3001. Elpion-
nage and the secret
police are however still in active ope-
ration.—Brighton Gazette.

CEDAR OF LEBANON.—There is to be seen,
at the present period, at the yard of Messrs. BOLTON and
HumennEr, a singulatly beautiful specimen of the wood
of the Cedar of Lebanon, grown not merely in England,
hut in the county of York, in fact at Cottingham, four
miles from this town, The tree front which the specimen
we have seen was taken, was cut down on the premises of
the late N. SYKES, Esq. and purchased by Messrs. B.
about twelvemonths since, but only within these few days
been sawn up. On cutting throush the log they were
perfectly astonished at the tine grain and beautiful pattern
it disclosed. It is figured equal to the finest foreign wood,
and bears a most exquisite polish. Without ocular in-
spection it is not possible to form any notion of its extreme
beauty. The age of the tree when cut down is unknown ;
it was of large bulk, but net lofty.... Hull Packet,