HC Deb 04 February 1806 vol 6 cc147-8

The house having resolved itself into a committee on the bill for continuing the duties on land, malt, sugar, snuff, and tobacco;

Mr. Harrison

wished to know, whether this bill contained a clause of appeal from the summary jurisdiction of magistrates, in matters of penalty, to the courts of quarter session? In the malting counties, he observed, the persons dealing in that article, were under severe hardships, in consequence of their barley being often sweated by drippings and oozings of snow and rain, and also by other accidents, which were frequently taken or pretended by the exciseman to be taken, for illegal wetting; and this belief, sworn before the magistrates, subjected them to the heavy penalty of 200l. for each offence. If a clause of appeal, therefore, had hitherto been omitted, under these circumstances, it was necessary that the defect should be supplied.

Mr. S. Bourne

replied, that this bill was exactly in the same words as the bill of last year; but he was not aware, at present, of any objection to such a clause as that proposed; and he added, that, should it not, upon consideration, prove objectionable, a clause to that effect would be prepared by to-morrow.

Mr. Patteson

supported the objections made by the hon. gent.; observing, that the maltster was completely under the lash of the exciseman, who had the penalty inflicted by the magistrate, if he only swore that be believed the malt to have been wetted.

Mr. Fuller

observed, that in all justice there ought to be an appeal to the quarter sessions. The hardships sustained in the malt counties were intolerably severe; and people hying at a great distance were often under the necessity of paying the penalty, sooner than be at the trouble and expense of coming up to London to seek for redress. He loudly complained of sending visitors to inspect the malt, who had an interest in inflicting penalties; and thought the excise board ought to employ proper officers for that purpose.

Mr. Rose

said, that the officers of excise had no interest whatever in the penalty inflicted.

Mr. Patteson

insisted, that they had a considerable interest in the amount of such penalties as 200l. He knew himself, he said; of an instance, where an information against a person who employed 40 workmen, without ever going before the magistrates, was sent up to the exchequer, and the person sent to prison, upon the infliction of two penalties of 200l. each. He afterwards paid these tines, and immediately discharged his 40 servants, preferring to relinquish the business, sooner than be liable to so much severity and injustice.

Mr. Rose

asserted, that the dealers in malt were not under the lash of the excise-men, but of the magistrates. There was no branch of the revenue in which there were so many frauds, and so difficult to be detected.

The Attorney-General

observed, that though some hardships might have beets experienced by particular individuals, yet it was well known that the very circumstance now complained of was a most abundant source of frauds upon the revenue. The pretences of snow, rain, and other accidents, seldom turned out, upon examination, to be any other than frauds attempted on the revenue. He believed he recollected the case alluded to by the hon. gent., and, if he recollected right, the party was only subjected to one mitigated penalty; as it appeared that the fraud was attempted by a servant, without the apparent privity of the master. It was, however, rather singular, that the servant should wantonly, and of his own accord, have ventured on a fraud, in which, as a servant, he could have had fib interest. Upon the whole, it seldom failed to be made out to the satisfaction of juries, that what was called sweating, turned out to be an actual wetting of the malt; but, at the same time, he was ready to admit, that it might be right for the parties to have the power of appeal.—The report was ordered to be received to-morrow.

Back to