Star.
London, England, 1801-02-18 00:00:00

REPEAL OF THE BROWN BREAD BILL.

Mr. RYDER moved, that the Bill for the Repeal
of the Aft of laR Seffion, prohibiting the manufac-
ture of Bread from fine Flour, (hould be read a
fecond time.

Mr. Wiessieroxca BIRD ra:cl, he did not rife to
oppofe the propofition of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man, but to requeft his particular attention to the
growing price of Corn. It appeared to him that
fome frauds or mifmanagement mull be praailed
from the time the Corn arrives in the River Thames
till it is brought to market; otherwife how came
it that, notwithltanding the meritorious economy
of all ranks of people, the vaft importation of
Grain, and that the warehowes from Limelioul'e
to Vs ellminfter-bridge were now glutted with
Wheat, no reduction had taken place in the price?
All experiments in Bread had been found to an-'
fwer no material purpofe: the fault lay elfewhere,
and it ought to be inquired into and corrected.
The learcaty was Rill fo diflreffing in diftant parts
of the country, whore markets were operated up-
on by the rates in London, that in the part he be-
longed to, the Poor Rates were railed from ns. in
the pound to 235. and that not in land merely hut
on aaual flock. The Houfe would form a judg-
ment how the middle clafres muff be affeaed,
when they were informed, that out of 26,000
perfons generally engaged in one branch of ma-
nufaaure (the filk), rB,OOO were now out of em-
ployment.
Mr. RYDER raid, the rubjea of fcarcity involved
a number of confederations, each of which the
Committee appointed for the purpore had en-
deavoured to attend to. They thankfully received,
and maturely invcftigated the information of every
man; and he fubmitted to the Hon. Gentleman
whether it would not be more prudent to make his
communications to that Committee, (as was the
praaice in all Inch cafes during the 'all Salon)
where he might be allured that any arguments he
fhould advance, or any remedy he Ihould purpofe,
would be molt rerpeafully confidered—than by
offering fuch ltatements in that Houk as could be
produaive of no praaical life, and might be taken
advantage of by evil.difrofed perfons for the moll
mifchicvous purpores.
Lord SHEEFIELD raid, he was lorry he was not
prefent yefterday when the Right Hon. Gentle.
man (Mr. Ryder) moved the entire repeal of the
Aa in quellion. He had underftood that it was
a partial repeal, or modification, that was pro-
' poled. Plc lhoul.l not at this time difpnte the ex-
pediency of repealing or modifying the Aa, yet i
he conceived the principle remained perfetly
found and good, and sex- by no means affeaed by
any of the evidence or arguments that have been
brought againft it. Ile obl'erved that no meafut e
had a chance of fuccefs which was to be maita7Ted 1
ant formed into a law by thole who did not

it well, and which was to be (44.175:1int:1 exectr•
tion by fome who have uniformly oppofed it. He
alfo obferved, that the flour or bread now made
under that AEt was much coarfer than was iii-
tended. It was originally propofed that from
about fix to about nine pound's of creole pollard,
according to the quality of the grain, fliould be
taken from a bufhel of wheat, but according to
the new mode of dreffing meal by the means of
bruflies through a wire cylinder, the whole of the
wheat may be made to pars through it, even wheat
of the worit qualities; and he o,feryed that cloths
drefs finer than wire, and foreign wheat requires
finer cloth to make equally good meal. It was
Paid the demand for inferior Britifh wheat was
decreafed, and ..vas much increafed for the fine,
which might be accounted for by this circum-
flance, that the fine are wanted to mix with the
coarfe pollards, which were taken from the flour
ufed before the At took place, and all() to mix
with the coarfe foreign wheat that was on hand..l
He laid the Al certainly had not had a lair ex-
periment ; the adulteration had been excti:ive.
He yielded to the acclamation for repeal, bee:ink ;
no effelual mode of preventing adulteration that
may be unwholefonie, or to decreafe the prejn. I
dices of the People, had been propoled. He de-
fired not to be under(lood to mean that adultera-
tion takes place only in refpe& to brown bread ;
full as great a degree of it was praClifed in making I
white bread; but the People were difpofed ;o
(wallow every thing contentedly that was given
them of the white fort. The fmall difference of
price between the white and the brown was
brought forward as an argument againft the ACT,
viz. ten !billings per lack, or leven farthings the
quartern loaf; he fetid, lie could not difcover why
the difference was not greater, but Inch experi-
ence as h 6 had, taught him that there might be
one-fourth difference. He had, before the Al
took place, circled a confiderable quantity of
bread, nearly of the quality intended by the ACI,
to be made and fold to particular dekriptions of
perfons at two-thirds of the price of London white
bread ; he did not conceive he had any great pro-
fit, but he was not a Infer, and the bread was fo
good and well liked that he could not completely
fatisfy the demand for it. He wifhcd to thew that
brown bread was wholefome when not adulter-
ated, and that it was not univerfally difliked ; it
was ufed in many places before the palling of the
Mt. He thought a total repeal would be a de-
claration againit the ufe of Inch bread ; that it
would raife a clamour againft all thole who had
exerted themfclves for the purpofe of diminillung
the confumption of wheat, and would. turn the
country look from all ideas of management. He
wifhed, therefore, fomething fhould be fubflituted
in the Bill of Repeal; it would only teaze and
perplex the country to have a Bill relative to
brown bread brought forward fome time hence,
and he delired it might be underctood that he did
not objett to the repeal of the limitation to one
kind of dour, becaufe the adulteration is fo great
that the flatutable bur is laid to difagree, parti-j
cularly with children, and he did not with to run
any rides in that refpett.
Mr. Buxroa dilapproved of the brown bread,
and fupported the Bill before the Houfe. He was
allured that from the fuperior conftruetion of the
machinery in mills, &c. at prcfent, as much of
the nutritious particles were obtained from the
dreffing of wheat as could poffibly be had, and
that the injurious flour in brown bread tended by
no means to augment the fupply, while the At
gave rife to the manufafture of a very had fpecies 1
of bread. He had a fpecimen fent up to him
from the country, which was fcandalous to difiri-
bute to any human creature. _ _ _

Mr. YoaKE laid, he gave his fupport to the A&
of laft Seffion at the time of its enaehnent, under
the opinion that it would be ferviceable in the el-
ating fcarcity, but he now found that it produced
no advantages to contravene the difficulties and
the complaints reftilting from the execution of it,
nor was it prodnelive of the laving that Gentle-
men expeeled. He oppofed the idea of intro-
ducing any claufes into the Bill before thr Houle
which might delay its progrefs—it Walk an ohjeet
to carry the Bill through as quick as poffible.
The views of thole Gentlemen who withed to give
Bakers the liberty of Rill making brown bread,
might be anfwered by bringing in a fcparate Bill.
In his opinion the itet of the 36th of tl,e King,
' which the Bill before the Houfe would leave an
full force, fecured to Bakers the licence demanded.
He concluded by feconding the idea of hii Right
Honourable Friend, that it would be far more
proper that fuck-faits as thole Rated by the Ho-
nourable Gentleman oppofite fhould be communi-
cated to the Committee.

Mr. VANS' TTTTT was againft the total repeal
of the Bill, conceiving that the stanufaCture of
various kinds of mixed bread, which was certainly
of material benefit, would be thereby difeantinued,
and might nut. be again efreftually introduced.
He thought it would be eafy to repeal all the corn-
pulfive parts of the Bill, and yet retain thofe elaufes
which were favourable to the manufaCture of
other fpecies of Bread betides Wheaten. '
Mr. \Visite roacr BIRD explained. He con-
felled his attendance at the Committee was not
very regular, but conceived it unjitft he fhould
therefore be deprived of the privilege of uttering
in that Houle whatever faits he might deem im-
portant, relative tri the fubjeEt in queftion.
Mr. RYDER %AMd to explain why it was
thought necegrary to repeal the Bill is tato. It was,
he laid, becaufe thole claufes which allowed the
manufaCture of other fpecies of Bread betides
Wheaten, were fo interwoven, by means of various
references, with the other part of the Bill, that
they crittia not be rendered of any ufe alone ; and
it fliould be remembered, that the difcontinuance
of the manufaaure Of mixed Bread, alluded to by
the Honourable Gentleman (Mr.Vanfittart) could
not take place, fince the repeal of this Bill wou'd
have the immediate effeet of reviving the Aft of
the 35th of his prefent Majefly, which went to
that precife objeft.
The Biil was then read a fecund time, paced
through a Committee, and was ordered to be
read a third time to-morrow, if then engroffed.—

LONDON.