Star.
London, England, 1827-10-18 00:00:00

THE MALT TRADE.

-.UP- -
THE DEPUTATION OF 111 A LTSTERS AND LORD

GOOKIIICH.

Tuesday, Lord GODERICH, in company with Mr.
FRARKLARD LEWIS, tie :Secretary, and Mr. CARR, the
Solicitor to the Excise, recei►ed a Deputation from the
Maltsters, Brewers, and others, as:enibled in the Metro.
polis from different parts of England, to consider what
was to be done in consequence of the check gi►en to
their trade, the los: of property, and the injury done to
commerce by the operati m of the new Act for fixing
the excise on malt. Tt•e Derutatii n consisted rf

Mr. C. Brown, of Norwich ; Mr. E. H. Buchanan, of Stowtnar-
ket, Suffolk ; Mr. E. Chuck, of Ware ; Mr. G. Craven, of Wake-
field ; Mr. P. Dowson, of Great Yarmouth ; Mr. W. Ford, of
Nine Elmo, Surrey; Mr. W. Hawkes, Norwich; Mr. Hartpath,
of Bristol; Mr. T. Salmon, of Stoke' Norfolk; Mr. P. Steed, of
Great Yarmouth; and Mr. Barclay, the brewer.
The first point to which Mr. Hawn, their Foreman, called his
Lordship's attention, was their allegation that one third deduction
of malt in ninety-six hours from the cistern, was not sufficient. Ile
adduced many instances where it exceeded the dried barley, or couch
guage, ten, fifteen, or twenty percent.
Mr. Cana, in reply, said, that although there was that increase,
charged in the duty, there was no proof that when the malt was
acted off, and screened, it did not amount to the estimated guage.
Mr. Foan, of Nine Elms, immediately produced an account of
his having wetted 40 quarters 4 bushels of barley, the charge by the
guage, within ninety-six hours; deducting only one child, it
anieunted to 47 quarters. B. ing dried, screened, and measured by
the imperial bushel, it amounted only to 41 quarters, 5 bushels. Au
additional duty, therefore, was chat ged, amounting to Sf. 11,. Id.
or 2s. ed. per quarter more than could equitably be taken.
Mr. Baows, in the course of some arguments in support of this
statement, declared, that in consequence of the uncertainty which
would be produced by the mode of taking the duty adopted in the
Act, it was Impossible to make any contracts except as gambling
speculations. According to the variation of the atmosphere, during
the process of malting, would be the increase of bulk in the malt,
and consequently the amount of duty paid upon it, since it was re-
solved to have the duty upon the malt and not on the barley.
Mr. Foau, to stew the variable nature of the tax when levied
upon this principle, mentioned that the malt made in the cold
months of December, January, and February, would pay is. 6d.
per quarter less duty than the malt manufactured dining the usual
periods of October and April.
In answer further to the allegations made by Mr. Carr, that
there was no proof of the ultimate measure of the malt when
the process was completed, not being less than the measure taken at
that part of the process when the duty was charged,
Mr. &town, Mr. BUCH•DAX, Mr. CHUCK, Mr. BALMOM,aIId Mr.
Seam, who said their united manufacture was upwards of one hun-
dred thousand quieter' per annum, all declared that upon theses-
rage of the last six years they had not delivered so much in measure
as malt as they had steeped as barley.
Mr. Ila , of Bristol, pressed upon the comideration of his
Lordship the injury acme by the Act to the Bristol Maltsters, who
were. In the habit of sprinkling their malt alter the 12th day, by
which they gut au increase of from 9 to 10 per cent. in measure.
lie contended that these maltsters ought nut to be charged for the
additional quantity to which it was increased by strong vegetation,
more than the makers of brown malt, who obtained a similar in-
crease in measure by fire, or drying in the kiln, and were allowed
a reduction of Is per cent. Not to make the same reduction in
favour of the Bristol Malt was to suppress it.
Mr. CAR. said they ought to pay for every bushel of malt made,
and persisted in the principle that the duty ought to be charged on
the malt, and not en the barley.
Mr. Folio wished to have it explained, since the principle stated
by the Solicitor for the Excise was to pervade the Act, why that
malt which was increased in bulk by fire should be allowed a deduc-
tion of eighteen per cent. whilst that which was increased in bulk
by sprinkling, was to be charged a duty upon such increase, parti-
cularly as both were deteriorated in value by their increase in bulk ?
Alf. BARCLAY (the brewer) said it was decidedly an erroneous
principle to charge the duty upon the malt instead of the barley.--
The mak that he was in the habit of using always fell short of the
quantity of barley steeped. Ile observed also, that the West Country,
or sprinkled malt, though increased in bulk by the process tiled
there, was not increased in value by it, in proportion to the increased
hulk. It was, therefore, unfair to charge a duty upon such increase.
When they were in the habit of giving in London per quarter
for. the fine Ware malt, they could purchase the West Country
malt at SS,. which was about its relative value.

Mr. &town then pointed out various extreme ill consequences
which, he said, resulted from the clause relative to the draining of
the water in the cistern, and from that compelling them to keep
the corn an extra four hours in the couch. These injurious effects
co the trade and the commodity Were unattended by one iota of
additional advantage or protection to the revenue.
Mr. CARS expressed himself, from the want of technical know.
lege, unequal to the discussion of these clause.; but he supposed
they had been suggested by experienced officers,
Lord Gasolinic', expressed his surprise that these matters had not
been canvassed, and the facts stated by the Gentlemen of the De-
putation.brought forward during the progress of the Bill.
Mr. FORD said, they never knew of them. He resided in the
Meteopols, aid was not Implicit aware of the existence of moth a
Hill, until after it had been read a second time in July.
Mr. Disown said, that before the third reading of the Bill, he was
one of the Deputation who waited on Mr. Denies. They were
then promised, as lie understood, various alterations. He under-
, stood Mr. Carr distinctly to promise that the old iniplenients should
be protected by a clause. When the Bill cattle out, they found
fore of the alterations in it.

Lord GGDIRICII, after some further observations had been made,
admitted, that a fair statement had been made of the difficulties
arising from the MI; and he promiied that he would take it into
his immediate consideration, and give as early an answer as pos-
sible, being well aware of the confused state in which the different
interests were at present placed.,
'The Deputation then thanked his Lordship for the polite atten-
tion be had given them, and withdrew.
Mr. Cifl7ClC. the Deputy from Ware, announced before the De-
putalon separated, that he had just received information, that a
wetting of barley there, guaged within ninety-sk hours from the
cistern, made an increase of duty of nearly 20 per cent. Fufty•three
inklt.houses at Ware had discontinued steeping, and business Was
at a stop.
Mr. 13enwx said, he had heaps of letters from all parts of the
country, giving an account of the devastation to the trade, and their
property, which the Aet made.
' One Gentleman mentioned, that since the passlng of the Act, h
should be glad to sell his premises for 5,000‘. less than ue the
before it became a law.
It was stated also, skit the loss incurrred by the Revenue dull,
'the short time the Act had bean in op,ratiust, must b: at e
so,000t• and that the trade had suffered propettionAy.