WINE DUTIES. (Hansard, 7 September 1831)

§ Lord Althorp
moved, that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on the Wine Duties Bill.

§ Mr. George Robinson
said, he should defer to another opportunity his intended refutation of certain charges which had been made against him personally, with reference to his conduct in opposing this Bill. He had conscientiously opposed it all along, on the ground that it was a direct departure from the principles which had hitherto regulated the export trade of this country. The hon. Member added, that there had been no opportunity of fully discussing the subject, and he was determined to oppose the future progress of the Bill unless that opportunity should be given.

Mr. Hume
regretted, that an opportunity had not been afforded to discuss so important a measure as this. He thought that, as respected the arrangement of duties on French and Portuguese wines, his Majesty's Ministers ought to be supported; and so far he differed from the hon. member for Worcester. It was the policy of this country to form commercial relations with France. Indeed, such a course of proceeding would prove advantageous to both countries. He doubted, however, by raising the duty on Port wines, whether the revenue would be increased in proportion; and he should have preferred seeing the duty on French wines lowered, in order to get rid of the difference between the duties imposed on them and Portuguese wines, which was the object of increasing the duties on the latter. In whatever arrangement was made, he hoped and trusted that the compact between the merchants of the Cape of Good Hope and Government would not be departed from.

Mr. Keith Douglas
begged the noble Lord, to state what advantages Cape wines would have, by his proposed plan, over what they had at present. The existing duty was 2s. 5d. per gallon, and the prospective duty would gradually raise it to 3s.

§ Lord Althorp
said, that according to the present arrangement, the advantages given to the manufacturers of Cape wine were similar to those which had been granted them by the agreement which Government had come to with the merchants engaged in commercial transactions 1230 with the colony. He had never stated that Cape wine was to have any advantage beyond what had already been given it in the Bill. It now paid 2s. 5d., and in 1833 the duty would be increased to 3s. giving it an advantage over the present duty on Portuguese wines of 1s. 10d. per gallon. As he proposed to raise the duties on Portuguese wines to 5s. 6d., the difference would be 2s. 6d. which was rather more than the existing difference.

§ Mr. Courtenay
would enter into the subject at a future stage.

§ Lord Althorp
explained, in answer to a question from Mr. Hume, that he meant to raise the duty on Cape wine 4d., because the duty on Portuguese wines had been raised 8d.

Mr. Hume
complained, that the understanding between the merchants trading to that colony, and Government, made in 1824, had been departed from. It was then understood that the duty on Cape wine should be fixed at 2s. 5d. per gallon; capital was embarked in the transactions on that faith; but now the duty was to be 2s. 9d., and increased two years hence. He must condemn such a species of taxation as impolitic, and he could not help declaring, that it was a complete departure from that solemn compact, entered into by a preceding Government and the merchants whose capital was employed in this trade. This departure from that engagement would, he was fully persuaded, have the effect of ruining thousands of individuals. It would shake the confidence of persons engaged in commercial transactions. He called upon the noble Lord, before he signed the death-warrant of public confidence, as respected colonial affairs, to pause and reconsider the plan. He had understood that the noble Lord had abandoned all intention of altering the duties on Cape wines, but it appeared that he was mistaken. He, however, hoped, before so dangerous an enterprise as this was undertaken, the measure would be maturely considered. Acts of Parliament and proclamations were not to be trifled with; and if the noble Lord would only postpone this measure, he would prove, that millions of dollars had been advanced by merchants, on the faith that the arrangement would not be departed 1231 from. Persons acquainted with the subject of raising wines, and the process of wine-making, know well how long a time it was before any beneficial return was made to the capital advanced. In consequence, however, of the encouragement held out by Government, capital to a large extent had been expended in the colony; and now, as these vineyards were about to yield their produce, so as to afford a fair profit for the outlay, in stepped his Majesty's Chancellor of the Exchequer, and, by this measure, deprived the merchant of his profit. Did the Committee forget how much of the colonial expenditure of the country was borne by the payment of these very duties? How was it possible that these taxes could be paid by the colony, if the trade was, as he contended it would be, thus destroyed? The Governor of the colony had an arbitrary power, the people had no Representation, and now this measure would prove ruinous to their commerce. He would entreat the noble Lord not to violate the contract by pressing forward his Bill. He begged of him to pause, and let it go to a Committee above stairs, when he would prove, to the satisfaction of the noble Lord, the satisfaction of the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, and to the whole House, that the compact which had been made ought not to be departed from, and that many persons had engaged in the commercial transactions of the colony, on the faith which they entertained that Government would not shrink from fulfilling the obligations entered into. If the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursued his plan, he would ruin many thousands of persons, and, instead of increasing the revenue, he would diminish it, besides fixing the burthens of the colony upon the British public. He had no interest whatever in the proceeding, but he would not allow this act of injustice, this violation of a solemn compact, to pass without expressing his opinions. With respect to the arrangement of the duties on French and Portuguese wines, he entirely concurred in the view taken by the noble Lord; and it was with great sorrow that he perceived the plan laid down as to the alteration of the duties on Cape wines.

§ Lord Althorp
had never listened to a more violent and unnecessary speech than that just addressed to the Committee by his hon. friend, respecting a proposition 1232 now before the Committee. His hon. friend had spoken of the violation of a solemn compact made between Government and the merchants of the colony. What was this compact? That the duties on Cape wine should be 2s. 5d. a gallon, that being an advantage to the manufacturers of that species of wine over the Portuguese merchant; and it was now proposed to raise this duty in the proportion of the increased duty to be laid on port wine. The protection at present afforded to Cape wine was 2s. 5d. a gallon, and that protection would be raised, by the increased duty on Portuguese wines, to 2s. 9d., and this was to ruin the merchants of the colony. This was, according to his hon. friend's view, to destroy the hopes of the grower, to shake public confidence, and involve the whole country in ruin and distress. He really would appeal to the Committee, whether any such injury could possibly arise to the persons engaged in the commercial transactions with that colony; and he felt still stronger assurance that the measure could not have the effect which his hon. friend seemed to think as to the general distress of the colony, or the destruction of all commercial confidence.

Mr. Keith Douglas
said, that in his opinion the proposed measure would have a most injurious effect, and it would not increase the revenue. There were many persons who were enabled to pay their 1s. 6d. or 2s. a bottle for Cape wine, who could not afford to drink more costly wines; and these individuals would be thus cut off from the indulgence of what to them was, probably, deemed a luxury. There ought not to have been the least deviation from the compact which had been so frequently alluded to in the course of the discussion on this Bill.

§ Mr. Courtenay
said, that the proposition of the noble Lord was strictly in accordance with the engagement entered into by the Government on the one hand, and the merchants on the other, which was, that the wines of the Cape of Good Hope were only to pay half the duty imposed on those of Portugal. When the duty on the wines of Portugal was 4s. l0d., Cape wines paid 2s. 5d.; and now that the former was to be raised to 5s. 6d. the latter was to be increased to 2s. 9d. The advantage which the merchants were to have by the compact was continued by this plan, as the duties were proportional. 1233 He did not agree in the proposition for a prospective increase of the duties and if no other Member did, he would, at the proper time, oppose it.

§ Lord Althorp
expected from the right hon. Gentleman's candour nothing less than what he had just asserted. Although he differed from the right hon. Gentleman on many points, he had always found him extremely candid in the communications which they had necessarily had together.

§ Mr. Alderman Venables
wished to know if the prospective arrangement of 1833 was intended to be permanent.

§ Lord Althorp
said, it would be subject to future regulation.

Mr. Hume
said, that notwithstanding what the noble Lord had stated, he considered that the compact had not been kept. He would not detain the Committee by now expatiating upon the subject, but he should certainly, when the report was brought up, take an opportunity of entering at length into his objections, and on that occasion would take the sense of the House. He believed he should be able to show, that increasing the duties on Cape wine was a highly injurious measure.

Mr. Stuart Wortley
thought that the mode of laying on the duty would be injurious to commercial credit, for the uncertainty as to what was to be done had created great difficulty and embarrassment since February last in those connected with that trade. He thought the change altogether uncalled for, particularly after the encouragement given to the cultivation of Cape wine in the first instance.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
denied that the proposed regulations had created any uncertainty. It was known, that no increase beyond half the duty of the wines of Portugal could take place for two years.

Mr. Hume
contended, that any proposed alteration in the value of the article, even at the end of two years, must occasion an unsettled state of the trade.

Mr. Stuart Wortley
begged the noble Lord's attention to the wording of the clause: if passed as it now stood, no duty could be claimed under it.

§ Lord Althorp
would have an alteration made, as he saw the force of the hon. Gentleman's remark.

Mr. Hume
regretted the hon. Gentleman had noticed it: he had hoped the error would have passed unnoticed, and thus no duty would have been paid under it.

Mr. Keith Douglas
said, the wording was very indistinct; he feared it would have the effect of raising the duty to 3s. 4d. instead of 2s. 9d.

§ Lord Althorp
said, he could not conceive that there could be any such meaning attached to the words as the hon. Gentleman apprehended.

Mr. Hume
believed it was the general understanding, that in making an immediate alteration of 4d. in the duty, the increase to 3s. was to be postponed.

§ Mr. George Robinson
said, he approved of the noble Lord's proposition. He was one of those, and he believed the Government went with him, who wished to discourage the cultivation of wines at the Cape altogether. But the system of Government appeared to be, to induce the people to buy up low-priced French wines, and import them at a high price, instead of the good wholesome Cape wines, which might be had cheap. The operations of Government had destroyed all confidence in commercial transactions with regard to our foreign transactions, but he had full confidence in their integrity. His hon. friend, the member for Middlesex, was most inconsistent, for he now pretended to be a friend to the Colonies, after supporting the questions relative to the Baltic timber, the Silk-trade, and the Canada question.

Mr. Hume
said, his hon. friend had endeavoured to draw a parallel between the present case and that of the timber duties, when the fact was, that when Government wished to reduce the former scale of duties, his hon. friend opposed, and beat them. It was now proposed to increase duties, which wholly destroyed the similarity of the cases. The hon. Member and his friends had joined with those with whom they differed on almost all other questions, in raising the opposition, which could only have the effect of making the people pay dearer for the timber they consumed than they ought to pay.

§ Sir Richard Vyvyan
was surprised at the error of the hon. member for Middlesex, for originally the questions were the same in both instances. In both it was the intention of Government to raise the duty upon colonial productions. They found it expedient to modify their intention in making Canada timber dearer, but they had not abandoned the intention of 1235 laying an indirect burthen upon that country, and the hon. Member was very wrong if he supposed that a reduction in the duties of Baltic timber was not a question affecting our North American Colonies. He was surprised, however, at the hon. Member defending the principle of Colonial preference (the doctrine had hitherto been "purchase in the cheapest markets"); the same principle he had exhibited on this question, might make him an advocate for the Corn-laws in due season. To turn to his hon. friend, the member for Worcester, he was a little at a loss, after he had disapproved of the conduct of the Government on all matters relating to foreign and Colonial policy and finance, to find him stating that he had confidence in the integrity of the Ministers, as far as our domestic affairs were concerned. Perhaps his hon. friend meant to confine his remarks to the Reform Bill. He was of opinion, respecting the question immediately before the Committee, that to increase the duties on Portuguese wines, would be injurious to the best interests of the country, for our exports to Portugal exceeded those to France. The French would not admit our manufactures—we, therefore, sacrificed the certainty of an existing trade to Portugal, under the delusive hope of an increase on the other side. If Government continued to trifle with and disquiet each Colony in its turn, our colonies would cease to regard the Legislature with confidence and kindness, and they had hitherto stood by us through all reports, evil and good.

Mr. Hume
said, the hon. Baronet had accused him of inconsistency—his course had always been, to advocate the removal of all prohibitions and to lower all high duties, and he defied the hon. Baronet to find an example to the contrary.

§ Mr. Burge
said, the instant Government induced persons to settle in colonies, those persons had a right to its protection, and more particularly they had a right to this when relying on the faith extended to them by public Acts. They had laid out considerable sums in improvements. But it now appeared that other systems were to be established, and, forgetting all that we had hitherto done, we had suddenly become enamoured of foreign principles of Government and trade, to which our old opinions were to be sacrificed. British interests had became a secondary consideration, and were made to give way to 1236 foreign ideas. We gave up our most ancient allies, and all the principles which should regulate our commercial intercourse, our good faith, with the rest. He regarded the present as a flagrant instance of this new theory, both as regarded the protection due from the parent State to the colony, and the express Acts of the Legislature, which had exempted the wines of the Cape from the duty which it was now proposed to fix upon them. Persons had been encouraged to invest their capital in trade, and now their securities for a return were destroyed. He should on those grounds, oppose the Bill on all occasions, and to the utmost extent of his power.

Mr. Warre
said, the subject had been completely exhausted in the former debate, all the objections that had been urged had been replied to. It was of no use to attempt again to revive them.

§ Mr. Briscoe
firmly believed, that it was illegal to increase the duty on Cape wines. The Act Geo. 4th had declared, that up to January, 1833 the duty should remain at 2s. 2d. per gallon, and if that was now repealed or modified, many persons who had embarked large sums on the faith of it would be utterly ruined. They would be unable to sell one pipe of wine. He had also great doubts whether the proposed alteration would benefit the revenue. He would merely state, that in 1825, when the duties on French wines were 6s. Portuguese and others 4s., and Cape 2s. per gallon, the total quantity imported was seven millions of gallons. In the following year the duties were increased on French wines to 7s. 3d., Portuguese and others 4s. 10d., and Cape 2s. 5d. and the result was, that the consumption decreased more than a million of gallons, and the duty fell off one-third. The habits of the people must also be considered; French wines were not in general repute.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
said, the hon. Gentleman had unfortunately made a small mistake; the measures had been increased from the common gallon to the imperial in 1826: the duties and quantities remained the same, the difference was in the measure.

Mr. Robert Gordon
said, as the hon. member for Surrey had declared there was a provision in the Act of Parliament that the duty on Cape wines should not be increased for two years—he begged to be informed if that was the case.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
did not deny it.

Mr. Robert Gordon
then it seemed they were called on to legislate in opposition to an Act of Parliament. That would be regarded as a proof of what was already more than hinted in the Colonies—namely, that the present Government was hostile to Colonial interests.

§ Lord Althorp
the duty, as arranged by the Act alluded to, was to be half the sum on Cape wines, that was imposed on Spanish and Portuguese wines. These duties were 2s. 5d. for the first, and 4s. 10d. for the latter. The duty on other wines it was now proposed to increase, and therefore he could not see that there was any breach of contract or of faith in raising the Cape wines in proportion to the rise in the duties on other wines, namely to 5s. 6d. and 2s. 9d. respectively.

§ Mr. Briscoe
had only committed one error. His argument relating to the revenue decreasing, had not been refuted.

Mr. Fyshe Palmer
said, no injury could be done by the alteration—the comparative difference of duties remained the same. He was quite sure, if the wine growers at the Cape paid attention to the cultivation, a much better article could be produced; but as long as such a difference was made in the duties, they could expect no better wine from that Colony.

§ Mr. Hunt
said, after the explanation which had been given by the noble Lord, he was satisfied that the Colony at the Cape had no good reason to complain. The stuff generally sold as Cape wine was an abominable compound, which everybody reprobated.

Mr. Hume
was surprised at the doctrine laid down, which seemed to imply, that an Act of Parliament that had been passed for the purpose of remaining in operation a certain number of years, specified therein, was not to be regarded as fully in force for that term, and was not to be considered as a contract solemnly entered into by the House. He should wish hon. Gentlemen to consider what they would think, if an Act of Parliament had been passed, by which they were entitled to a certain pension, if some other hon. Gentleman came forward and proposed it should be reduced? As a specific period had been fixed, it most assuredly ought to be abided by, or Parliament would break its faith.

Mr. Maberly
differed wholly from the hon. member for Middlesex. He saw no breach of contract whatever. The case was this; when the duty on foreign wines 1238 was fixed, it was thought expedient to give the Cape wine-grower an advantage equal to one-half. They now were about to increase the duties on the wines of other countries, and they thought of raising the duty on Cape wines in the same proportion. He would ask hon. Gentlemen, if they did not consider that an equal moiety was a pretty handsome protection in favour of the Colony?

§ Mr. Courtenay
was an advocate for the duty remaining as it was until the fixed time should expire. The wines had been recommended by physicians as very useful in certain diseases: this was another consideration, in addition to that of what was due to the Colonies, why these duties ought not to be hereafter increased.

Mr. Alderman Thompson
said, the proposed increase of duty could not be justified on the plea of preserving the relative prices of all sorts of wines, because, by the proposition now before them, it was intended to destroy the proportion in which French and other foreign wines stood with regard to each other. If the whole relative proportions had been adhered to, much complaint on the part of the Cape winegrowers would have been groundless, but as that was not the case, he was opposed to any alteration until the expiration of the Act of Parliament alluded to so frequently in the course of the debate.

Mr. Robert Gordon
said, he must recommend the hon. member for Abingdon to consult the Act by which the duties on Cape wines were fixed, and he was sure he would then acknowledge, that Parliament had no possible right to increase the duty on or before the year 1834, beyond which period the provisions of the Act did not extend. That Act did not say one word about relative proportions. It fixed certain rates of duty, to be levied for a certain time: until that time had expired the House had no right whatever to interfere.

§ Sir Richard Vyvyan
said, the growers of Cape wines never could have had any other impression than that the pledges as to the duty on their productions should have reference to no other wine than the wines of Portugal; and that such was the understanding was apparent when the amount of the duty on Cape wines was considered. It was evident they looked to be charged only half the duty on Portuguese wines. The principal object, however, he had in view was, to remark upon 1239 the speech of the hon. member for Preston. That hon. Gentleman professed to be the friend and advocate of the poor, and yet he was ready to agree to a motion that would tend to place the only foreign wines they could obtain out of their reach. Instead of being of that bad quality which the hon. Gentleman had described, they had been declared, by able and professional gentlemen, to be wholesome, and very advantageous in cases of debility. As far as medical qualities went, they were equal to any other wines.

§ Mr. Hunt
said, if he thought the increase of duty would trench upon the comforts of the poor, he was the last man to support the proposition; but as far as Cape wines went, he was ready again to declare, they were very bad, and if given to sick persons would only make them worse.