Star.
London, England, 1811-03-09 00:00:00

that the sugar distilling could never injure the usage
of barley. Mr. Arthur Young, when consulted o
the average price of barley-, estimated it at 3Ss. per
quarter, and the present motion snowed it to be ust.d
below Sts. per quarter alone. He would
the present motion since he considered it as not tet,l-
ing to hurt agriculture, and at the Lune time proraJ.
ting the trade of their colonies, and-quickening pubiaz
prosperity.
Mr. CURWEN replied, there were at present no
purchasers of barley for the purpose of distilling, and
that statement would answer one °ldol arguments of
the Honourable Gentleman (Mr. Rose). A gentle.
man had informed him, and on whose knowledge ani
veracity he could depend, that the spirits distilled
from sugar were of a much more delicious flavour,
and more tempting to the purchaser than those
brought from malt.
Mr. CHARLES ELLIS said, he supported the
present ITIGLION as it afforded relief to the over.
stocked colonies of the West Indies. Yle hail listened.
very attentively to the arguments and statements sn
both sides of the House, and he was pretty well con-
vinced that the-shad been no distinct nor perspicuous
statement of the distillation from sugar and Irons
barley made by anrof the Hon. Gen.:le:nen, and Le
he was inclined to think that no person in the House
I had information on that intricate subject equal to u:3

task. int -by what had•been stated in the motirm,
he was assured that the sale of barley would be lit:le
injured in proportion to what the Hon. Gentlenua
(Mr. Curwen) had supposed. The inference which
• the Hon. Gentleman had drawn from supposing thn.:
• all sugars were of equal value and quality was quite
incorrect. because nothing .was more notorious thaa
that sugars varied mere. in their richness thm aey
other commodity. The cultivation of sugar bad not
that profit with it which barley frequently had, for
its price was almost equal to 'fixed, whereas barley
frequently on a sudden rise filled the pockets of the
firmer ; an acquisition in which the poor planter
could have little prospect from the stability of 1-,s
market-prices. Ad that he could wish was, that the
colonies sliould have an equal chance of profit, by a
fair competition with the farmers of the mother-coun-
try.—The present motion was equal to that, as such
it bad his hearty support. .
Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT would oppose any thing
which tended to be injurious to agriculture, now when.
we had the whole ports of the Continent shut against
supplying us. He concluded by supporting Mr.
Curwen.
Mr. BURROWS.eontended that the landed inte-
rests, so far from being neglected, as the Honourable
Gentleman (Mr. Curwen) had stated, had, on the
contrary, been much indulged, and. had felt none Of
' those heavy distresses which had troubled the Colonies,
•The great distresses to which the country has been
reduced first commenced in the Colonies, and they-
had suffered hardships and disorders in their trade for
years before it reached the mother-country. Those
Gentlemen of the landed interest were then tranquilly
filling their pockets, and disposing of their fields at
high and increasing rents. Could the Honourable
Gentleman say that agriculture was neglected for tisi
sake of the Colonies ? He contended against the se-
veral argnments used by Mr. Curwen on the subject
of the different qualities of sugar; the occasion was,
that the colonists were not even allowed to prepare
their own produce for the market. It is brought raw
to Britain, and boiled and dressed lip for sale by
persons ignorant of the mode of preparation, and
much of it is lost and more injured. Many had been
cheated with sugar spirits for those of barley, which
evinced there could be little difference in their flavour
or appearance, so he deemed there would: be a fair
rivalship between the two cOmmodities. He concluded
it to be extremely fair that the landed interest which
had enjoyed an unrivalled market 60 long, should al-
low their fellow countrymen an equal chance of par-
ticipating in the profits arising train public favour.—
He was surprised when those Gentlemen who had on
a former occasion lifted up their voices against mono-
poly, now considering it as fair and of good estima-
tion. He heartily concurred with the present motion,
since it would contrive to relieve the ccilonia, without
injuring ourselves.
Sir JOHN SEBRIGHT again rose.. He misted
the notion of monopoly in corn. Such monopoly,
however, was far from prejudicial, the monopolists
buying up corn when cheap, in order to enab.e the
farmer to procure the fair prices for grain.
Mr. Bun/tows and Mr. CUaWEN explained.
Mr. DAVIS GIDDY declared, that She thought
the interests of landholders were separated.from those
of the community he would oppose the measure
now pending, since no man felt more adverse to any
species of monopoly than he felt. The necetsity
for our importing of corn was acknowledged ; in this
dilemma it became them to weigh well the worth
of taking measures to increase the growth of corn
within the country, even if thia•visere done at more
1 eapence, in the first instanee, than. attended its ins.
t portation. Imagine the direful event of this country
becoming. a dependency of Franey. however improba-
ble that disaster, and what, he would ask, could lay
Us sooneratihe feet of France thin the circumstance
; of Our being compelled to resiatt yo her for sum.
trance? If apy Gentleman wished do to lean on foreign
couneiriesp.sibeir patriotism was-rather suspicious.—
(Hear.)—Distilleries had encouraged agriculture, al-
though he was trot displeased that the Right Ho-
. nourable Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Le-
-chequer), was about to lay an additional duty on
them—unfavourable as their produce was to the
health and morals of the community. It was a ques-
tion of policy, whether the duties on malt should be
increased. As to any combination amongst the
growers of corn, the very supposition of it was ground-
less ; the growers of barley were too scattered to be
capable of it. That the wash of sugar was better
than that o( grain he knew ; and that the West Indian.
Proprietors were entitled to great consideration, he
Iwas also willing to acknowledge ; yet, for the benefit
-of the country at hang ~ it was manifestly desirable
1 that a kreaterquantity of gr.tin should be producedin it.
Mr. FOSTER was clearly convinced that distill-
thin ought to be encouraged ; the frequent prolubi:
ti on
tarn of distillation from grain had, however, made it
altogether precarious, while the measure now pro-
posed was intended to remedy this latter evil. It
F might be advisable to extend the prohibition of grain
from 555..t0 38s. and, after this, allow our colonial
produce to come in fair competition with that ‘,I the
former.