Star.
London, England, 1824-03-16 00:00:00

97.7r1M"'!"'MpIMP

would not oppose the mp4oni—partirutirly ,s. he could I
prove, by calculation,4hatxhe,whole„yevehng might be
Collected, to,the amount of six millions :ster,ling:pithout,
any diferent.expense from that -incurred in colleCting
the Malt Duty, only. provided.the-whole Beer Duty were
transferred to mal;, ktistead of beiilg taken on lioth. This
doldge mode of taxation cost us in the. collection
300,0001. additional. It would perhaps be argued that
the mode. of estimating the expense of the collection was
not correctly taken. 'This hal been- disproved on a,
former occasion by ,an Honourable Member (Mr.
Hume), on an examination before a Committee. There
was no tax.on 'beer in' Ireland.; the whole tax was put
on malt.•- Now this was exactly what he wished to be
adopted in England.' An sAdt-had been passed in the
Ist and 2cl of this King's reign to prevent frauds in col-
lecting the Duties on Beer. This Act was a most harsh
restriction—indeed so much so, ;hat the Scotch Brewers

had appealed against it in a body, and •tlleged they
could not carry on their business- in consequence of.
thew. restrictions. The Bill proceeded on fahe,pre-
niise;, by interfering between the brewers arid their
custorncts. The S:otcli Brewers had in.theitkremnn-
sttance begged of Government to adopt the very ex•
pedieffc he new•su,,,, b I:)ested. The Lords of the Treasury
replied, the change could not be adopted except by en-
dangering this branch of revenue. Another extraordi-
nary thing in this Bill was, that the Lords of the Trea-
sury had themselves fixed the price of twn sorts of beer.
Now-he would ask why was this done, if not done in

the spirit trade, tea, stig.ir, or any other trade paying a
duty? In fact the practice was as fit to be adopted;
with respect to printed cottons, woollen goods, and all;
articles paying duty, as in the article of beer. Yet the
brewers were tlius, restricted by a fresh law; and a
short time had scarcely elapsed when both the price of
malt and hops had risen so on them,' that they could
wot sell at the price limited by the Treasury. The

brewers brewed of course a beer which was mere
trash, in order to save themselves,. for had thq
brewed as befolv they must have sustained a loss of
12.5. 6d. on every 71. l2s. expended. What was roostj
to be regretted w.is, chair the Public did no -get any;
benefit by it, nor
,did any one in fact benefit by it.:
No doubt fraud was prattised in the collection of the,
'duties on beer; nor could it be defeated as long as the.
duties were collected separately.. For instance; it wasr
notorious that the farmer often paid his men their wages.
in beer, the du.y on which was entirely lost to, the re-
venue, or, .at least, the whole of the difference between,
the dirty paid by the private and public brewer. It was.
' absurd to exempt the farmer's beer from tax,
.With
view to enable him to pay his labourers more
Was thisijust ? Certainly not. By this* Would pledge:
himself. there would be an equal amoupt. of revenue, if
the two duties were raised all on malt, witch would
put. the "sylple population on an equal footing. ' A pro-.
ject, he had heard, was in contemplation to equalise all
the duties on different sorts of' beer. " This would
died requirestrong laws to enforce it. 'How could the
Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chaocellor 'of thseTichequet)
advocate just principles in some inst4nces and oppose
them in'otheis ? After the reduction which took place
in the House and WindoW Duties, the Commissioners of
Taxes sent round a circular to the Collectors, directing
A fresh survey. • It was however put a stop to in conse-
quence of 'the feeling that Was excited thaoughout the
'country. "The Right Hon. Gentleman said that the only
Object of 'directing a new survey was to bring about
such regulations as would have the effect•of making the
duty pre.s equally on all classes. This was a fair and'
just principle of taxation. Now, however, the Right,
Hon: Gentleniartturned round ,upon his own principle
and refused to act upon it. He (Mr. Maberly) proposed
arlaitional duty on malt, thus Making the whole
duty 45:6.1. It did not follow, if atommittee was ap7
pointed; that.they would think the measure an advisable
tine. All he desired was inquiry. When the question,
of •the intermediate duties was agitated last Session, iF
was said that the public, by .such a coui se, avouldbe ens
abied to purchase a cheaper article than porter,• and • a
better one than table beer'. Now his plats would put it in,
the poweiof every person topUrchase beer at any degree
of strength he might with: Another advantage arising
-from this was that the brewers would 'have an oppor"
which.they had not a/ present of exercising their
skill. In consequence of the improvements-in chemistry, 11
it,avas piobable that more beer might be extracted from'
a: siren quantity of. malt than at present. There were
not, however, at present sufficient inducementita Make
the experiment. .-A third advantage would be to equa-
lise the • duties to the poor and the rich. The present
system was contrary to every principle of justice. • Mel
did oot.think, therefore, that the House would refuse
the appointment of a Committee. • _The: Hon. Member
concluded - by-moving 'that alelecvCommittee be- ap-
pointed tci.inquire intothe present mode of taxing'•beer
.and. .malt .separately; whether it was not expedient to
impose :the. tax on. malt alone; and whether, according
to the present mode of taxation, one class of his-41a-
jesty's subjects paid only 25.16 d. a' bushel on malt,-while,
another' paid 65..1}! sd. aud.ss.,Bd. a barrel
.on beer,
while the other paid 15s. Bd.
The C HA NC EL LOR of the EXCHEQUER said, he
was not disposed to deny what was asserted by the Hon.'
Gentleman, that the question had been imperfectly dis-
cussed last year. Ile could not flatter himself that the'
arguments he employed.then were sufriiient to convince
the Hon. Gentleman; but the reasons he stated appeared
to the House sufficiently convincing to support his view
of the subject. Nothing had since occurred to induce
him to alter the opinion he then expressed. Though he
did not think he could throw any new light on the
-question, he •would however shortly state the reasons
which bad led him to think that it would not be expe-
dient to‘ac,quiesce -in the motion. The Hon. Gentleman
stated two grounds for his proposition. The first rip-,
plied to their aaxiety•for economy, and the second to
the anxiety they should naturally feel for acting on a
just principle of taxation, bearing equally on all classes:
The Hun. Gentleman contended that the. present plan,
was productive of math greater expense in the collet-'
thn of the revenue than ,would attend that proposed
by hint ; and, in reference to the, justice of the case, he
said it was unfair to relieve the rich at the expense of
the poor. With respect to, the expense of collection, lie'
must repeat what Ire stated last Session, that the expense
of collecting the beer duty, though assigned to that ar-
i ticle alone n the Excise reruns, could not be easily as-
certained. The reason was this ; that the same indi-
vidual who collected the beer duty was employed to
collect the duty on other -articles also; such-as-soap,
candles, and, in tact, every article on which his services
ct-old be conveniently employed. Thus therewas always.
charged on the collection of, the malt.and :beer duties
eel Lira other expenses which' had nothing to*slo with
thwe tidies. The practice might be absurd. -fle would
nut :argue that point. S.ich, however, was the case;
anJ cousequeate vra,, t:rat it would be impossible

,-

to state-with -anytjting approaching to accuracy. what
-was the. expense incurred by the" collection of any of!
those duties particularly. But thought there were no
!leans of determining' the precise expense of collecting,
each, he could netadmitehat the saving would amount
the sum-of 29;5000/. The Hon. Gentlereati must
consider that if the duty on malt were doubled, it conld
not be collected at the same expense as when it was less
by half. If the duty were increased by 25., the stimulus
to evade it would be Of course doubled by the odera-
Eton, and a greater• degree of.,•vigilance would be ne-
cessary for the Aeteetion ()Maud. How this additional
degree of vigilance could be-exercised. without an in-
creased number of officers, he.was at a loss Co conceive,
It was• therefore a perfect fallacy to Suppose that there
could be anything like a saying of 295,000/. The Hon.
Gentleman contended that his plan-Would not have the
effect of diminishing' the revenue. and said it WAS, iioi
his wish that any diminution should take place. The,
beer duty last year produced "3,080,0001: and -the quan-
tity of malt consumed was 27 millions of blishels. This
at a 2s. duty 'on the bushel produced, 2,700,050/.
that lithe plan of the Hon. Gentleman had been a4upted
last Session, 'the revenue would have been deteriorated:
to the amount of 500,0001. The Hon. Gehtlernan might-
say that if -thereverrue fell off 'thekcould then lay an
additional duty on malt. But the House must consider
that.by thus increasing the duty they would necessarily
increase-the venaptations•rn evade the payment of it.—
Anbtherargtirtient of the Him:Gentleman was the in-
equality of the present dirty. He could not pretend to
say that, abstractedly speaking, it did not press un-
equally—(/Year; hear) front Mr. Moberly). Practi-
cally, however, he was quite confident tltat the effect
did not bearso severely on certain classes as had been
assumed. lie knew well, and indeed it must be cleat
to every person who considered the subject, that they
who brewed their. own• beer could 'not possibly have
Else article at the's'itme extiense of materials as the
Feat briwers.'. The' Hon. Gentleman assumed that all
who •paid the -duty on beer Avere poor, and all who
brewed their• own beer, rich. There could not be a.
'greater mistake. ' The fact was that the Nobility and
•Genrry of the2countrx, when they resided in London, paid
the beer dutir. as well as the poor ; for the beer con-
sumed-in their houses was that manufactured by those

who supiSlied the ether elasses-of society. The middle
classes who.redded• in country towns were not to be
classed with the poor, and they also paid the duty. It
was an uojust distinction, not at all Supported by facts,,
to sal- that none consumed beer -of- -their own brewing
lbat the rich. In the part of the country With ithich he
was best aerrainted, and also in the county-of York, he
knew there'were very poor • •pebple who brewed their-
OWn beer. It•would be inflicting a most severe hard-
ship on the'class of prior people who brewed their own
beer, and' drank it at home with their families, to im-
pose Thisadditional duty on malt. The effect would
be to drive them from home—to send them to a,public
,:house—(Hear, hear)—and introduce throughout • the
country a practice which in a moral point of view must
be highly injurious. 'the good therefore of the plan
proposed was not quite so Unqualified as the Honourable
Gentleman•seemedlo think.•-• The.Hotteurable Gentle-
man laughed at the idea that the present system of col-
lection had agtendenCy to secure to the consumer a good
article, and to &event the use of improper ih4redients in
the manufacture of beer. Let the cOnSinher; said he, be al-
lowed to judge fdrhimielf in this ts-iriother articles, and
there is liule fear that he will allow himself to bg deceived.
He (the Chancellor of the'Etehequer) was•rt disposed
to attach more importance to this cirdietqance than
belonged-to it, hut he 'did 'not:Make so ligl:tly of it as
the' Honourable 'GentteMan. 'lf they could a/F(srd to
remit a Ittic;•'And that this were' the only 'ar'ganient
against it, he did .riciV Mean •to say: that it ought to be
tsuffirient, but; iv ought -to have some-weight .wherr the ,
mere question. .was:•cas -to =the transference- of-4a :tax
from one article to another. It was not so _very easy
lorahe cohsualerlo !detect 'frauds in the uP•of ingre-
dients as thc: Honourable- Gentleman-seemed to think.
He-recollected -tip: instances- of'tletection- et:c pt. those
brought about by servants, or. byjbe vigilance of the
&ease. • :The. Hvnibbitible Gentleman objected to the
measure adopgd ialseiSessibn;--• indltitrositaced by him
(the Chancellor of tho:Excheqber). He said the duties
were levied.under most: inconvenient: restrictions:: He
(the .Chancallorof the. Exchequer) 'lever- said that he
expected much from that- measure. • It was proposed
rather by way of. experiment. And he was not at all
insensible to- the objections to which it was open. He
therefore applied his Mind. to devise some means by
which the restrictions complained of might be remedied,
Ind he thought there were means by' which all or the
greater part of the .inconvenience 'might be removed.
He had nOW'inerejy repented the' same arguments he
employed last Session : liEhadribthing new to. advance.
Looking, however, at the subject With all the attention
'it o:as'in Ills poorer to bestowsupon it, he coed not come
to the conclusion,' that' it was desirable or expedient to''
transfer the duty-frbav beer to malt. He would there-
fore recommend to the ifoute to diisent from the Motion.
Mr. HUME supported the motion. Ile contended
that a great saving would. arise in the collection of the
duties if the plan of his Hon. Friend were adopted. It
would then be unnecesstrry to' employ sO many officers-
The time they-now employed in the breweries would be
entirely saved,:for Tthete Aveard be no occasion for
gauging, !measuring, or keeping. stick. The' ime being
saved, it was clear that the 4iamber might be reduced.
With respect to the inecinality of the tax, it was so great
as to press heavily on the -p00r..7 By the plan proposed
the consumption vi?huld bso much increased as to pre-
vent any injury to the revenue. It would also be pro-
ductive of the great advantagerof freeing the bre% ers
from the- presence of the ailicers. •
'Mr. WODEHOUSE 'said, as it .could• hot be denied
that the' Tax on Beer stfetted the --lotfer • Orders un-
equally, there was, he believed; naperson in the HOUSE
who weuld not be disposed to-remedy, the inequality if
it were possible.- It appeared; however, a most prepos-
terous assertion to that all the beer which paid- duty.
was consumed by the indigent -.[Mr. NI-ABiRLY:
made no such assertionj.—He -appealed to the House
whether the Honourable Gentlernan• did not speak to
that effecr, and say that his Right Honourable Friend.
(the. Chancellor of the, Exchequer), -was held to the
course he now pursued, by a base compliance -with the
• wishes of the 'agricultural interest? The Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Moberly) made a magnificent asset tion
last Session, and said ha could expose them. This, he
supposed, was the attempt. The proposal was to im-
fose a duty of. 4.05.,a • quarter on malt in place of 295.
It was inipoi,ible that sueli. a change should. nut pro-
duce a consideQrbleoffect 'with respect to the„growers
Of barley. Ia the years 1791, 1792, and 170, the
averagc COns&rption•of malt wastreater than is 18121;
182 4 ar.d 1S). Sqrysattitle•stibjat to an itiereascii

umr-r...grrequ

duty.of excise decreased iii consumption.. The same
must follow If the duty on malt should be itised.
Mr. DENISON supported the motion. Though the
Nobility and Gentry used beer that r! aid duty, they
had it ISO, or at least 100 per cent: cheaper than the
poor. If the plan proposed were adopted, he believed
the consumption would bc much increased, and dram
drinking diminished.
Mr. CRIMPS opposed the Motion.-*There was no tax
more evaded than that on malt. These were many
'small maltster; in the countiy who did not pay it—There
were no corppiaints of the 'tax on beer, and they were
bound thereforeto coni:lude that the people did not con-
sider it as pressing vn:.aitly on any class. He sincerely
wished, however, that a plan should L,e adni•ted for ana-
lysing the article supplied by the brewer in every stage,
that the Public might be protected from the use of de-
leterious ingredieut. The consumption of grain would

tlitvi. be grv:itly inctea.ed.
Mr. NIONCK opposed the Motion. The duty on beer
Was as cad as the Excise It was not till the time

. ••

of William that the duty on malt was introduced. By
adopting, the system now propo,.et3, they would occasion
the very inequality thatwascomplained of. The landed
interest paid.their full proportion of the taxes, and they
bore exclUsively . the bnrthen of poor rates,. of re-
moving .patipers, and of highways. The middle classes
were,as ninth benefited by the precent•rate of duty .qn
malt ..rs the rich ; and by increasing it many of the poor
also would he deprived of a wholesome beverage. A
cliff:rent system,. it was true, prevailed in Iceland ; but
the same arguments did not.apply to both countries. In
Ireland the,Landed Interest were highly favoured, for
they. paid neither poors' rates nor land tax.
Lord ALTHORP was of.opinion, that doubling the
duty on malt would greatly diminish'the revenue, and
would drive the hiewer to the use of drugs.
Alderman C. SMITH thought, if the duty on malt
was much increased, it would drivithose who uow brew

themselves to public-houses for their beer. •
The question beini loudly called for, Mi. MittIEELY
replied; and the Hutise divided.
Ayes - 26 • •
Noes - - 130
Majority against the appointment of a Committee—W4
THE ARMY—CORPORAL. PUNISHMENTS. •
On the motion that the Mutiny Bill he read a third time,
Mr. HUME moved the addition of a clans& to
prohibit the infliction of corporal punishments on sol-
diers not employed on fo, eign service or in active ope-
rations. He was unable, he said, to enfOrce his propo-
sition by any stronger argumenfs than-had already bees
urged in support of it on fornier occasions.. But he
Could fortify his case by -one circumstance which had
very recently come to his knowledge. In the time of
the late- King- .if Wirtemberg flogging prevailed in his
I army to a very great extent; *the punishments being
,exceedingly frequent-though 'not of extraordinary see •
rim the number of lashes inflicted seldom exceeding
,100. The. frequency of the punishments, however, ren-
dered the Men so indifferent, that a man Who had once
been punished feeling hi mselt disgraced, became careless,
and the same individual being brought out for punish-
ment- from month to month, became at length a bar.
defied and determined vicious character. On the acces-
slim of the present King, a different system was adopted.
The consequence had been that the number of offences
and punishments had greatly diminished. The mode of
'punishment adopted was that by solitary confinement, .
and it s% ould perhaps surprise many lionnurable
tlemen to hear that the longest period of confinetnent •
ordered was ten days. The degrees Of p(nrisitment were
three days, six days, and ten days, either of simple con-
finement, or of confinement insirons, according to the da•
tuFe of the offence; and when a man had been punished
twice for the same offence, he was considered *as no
longer fit to remain in the regular army, but were ierit
to what were called the conderunedtattalions. Theib•
iroduction of this change in thee discipline of the Ittiny
•was strongly objected to by.many Oflicers of conside-
ration and experience, who stated•that-in•their opinions
the punishment' of flogging was necessary to the main-
, tenance of diicipline in the army. • Rut their otriaidns
had entirely changed on witnessing theresults of the il-
teration ; for • they found the genet al character' of, the
men to have been much improved by the new system ;
and there- could, be no reason, in his estimation,-for
thinking that the same effect tt:ould not be proilifcedpy
a similar change of system in this country. tle did not
know 'what Might be the hopes of promotion-held out
,to private soldiers by way of encouragement is the army
of 'tbit country, but he itarect they were very Slight in-
-deed,•and not such as to -induce young med of active
Minds to enter into the service ; anti he was qtiite
fled that many weft deterred from emitting by the ex-
isting system of punishment. He milli! not 'consider
the interference of the Hoinse by legWating iitis'sdb-
ject as any interference with the duties of the Com-
mander-in-Chief; and he therefore hoped the Noble
Lord (Palmerstony would not oppose the bringing up
of the clause.
Sir HUSSEY VIVIAN rose, in consequence of what
had been said upon this subject on a fmmerevening,
as well as on the present occasion, to state, that during
the time he had had the honour to command a regi-
ment, he had endeavoured by every means in his power
to do away, .as far as possible, with the Use of corporal
punishments ; and he believed that every Officer in the
service had a strong and anxious feeling on the subject,
and would wish to do away with them altogether, if
any means could be devised of maintrining the disci-
pline of the Krmy withoutthem. lie considered' it no
slight reflection on the illustrious individual who elks at
the head of the army, and who had at all times shewn
hitn,,elf to be the friend of the soldier ;• he considered it
no reflection on the character' of the Of of
the Bnitish ar;11, to think that if it were shewn to be
practicab e,.consistently with the interests of the service,
they wonld.not most cheerfully and cordially accede to
any proposition for the abolition of corporal punishment.
He was sure that the Officers of the British Army had
heal is as responsive to the feelings of humanity as' those
of the ttarmest advocates of -tine abolition of such pu-
nishments, and he had never yet' spoken with any one
'Officer upon the subject; w ho wrath: not have been glad
to get lid of them it he could; but all whit whom he
had spoken concutred,io saying; that no one proposition
which they had ever heard- appeared to the.a, to bt cal=
culated to i•ffeet.thit temembeted that about
ten year's he
.o,rorsindiel. a
,in..girrielit • orr thousand
.strong,-and use period th at. the n.en ive:e
much more in fis;ular inquired the
cause, and the AdjtitAnf-tarne.to trim arid -.said the fact
was, that the men had got' it into their heads 'that' Sir
F. Bandett. liad done aavv with cnrpor.l punishment,
and there:was no getting them to attend to rtnything..
Co‘oparitiins had been drawn 'between the army of
France and that of this country is point of -discipline,
ill oia: to lOUIId AR 4.rgutnent agaihst the use 01 arpo-
.
_ 4

~;.
,~:

.