CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL. (Hansard, 25 July 1832)

§ Mr. Robinson
thought that the amount of penalty was not proportioned to the offence and the resources of the offenders. He would recommend the imposition of a larger penalty on those who hired persons for landing goods illegally. He was of opinion, that until the laws against com- 725 mon smugglers had expired, more severe measures should be taken against the principals in extensive contraband transactions. After the commission of the second or third offence, principals might justly be made liable to the punishment of transportation.

§ Mr. Spring Rice
said, that the question of the penalty, resolved itself into a matter of arithmetic. It should be recollected, that for every person hired, the penalty would be 100l., which, if ten were employed in landing the goods, would amount to 1,000l.

§ Mr. Courtenay
said, that the penalty would not operate with all its apparent severity, owing to the difficulty of proving the fact of hiring. He was inclined to believe, that an increased punishment after the first offence would be advisable.

Colonel Evans
said, they might inflict what punishment they pleased, but the only and the true way to prevent smuggling was to lower the duties.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
said, that at present there was a penalty on contraband running, but those who employed the runners could not be reached, and it was to meet this case that the penalty was imposed. As these men generally worked in gangs the penalty was sufficient, as it might amount at the rate of 100l. for every man employed, to 2,000l. or 3,000l. A very high amount would only defeat their object.

§ Mr. Robinson
proposed an Amendment to the clause, that for the second offence the fine should be 200l., or an imprisonment of one year, at the discretion of the Court before which the case might be tried. This would be a security against the higher class of smugglers.

Mr. Ewart
did not think the Amendment necessary.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
repeated, that in his opinion, the fines already proposed would be found sufficient, and he therefore could not agree to the Amendment.

Mr. Hume
hoped that the hon. Member would not press his Amendment. Let the Bill as it stood in that part have a fair trial.

§ Mr. Littleton
said, he had presented a petition from a wholesale druggist in 726 London, who would lose 4,000l. or. 5,000l. by the proposed alterations, and he begged to ask his Majesty's Government whether this loss might not be prevented.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
stated, that Government had taken the case into consideration, and had communications with the druggists. Drawbacks were out of the question, on account of the adulteration of drugs, and it was the general opinion of the trade, that it would be more for their advantage, to submit to the loss of having the duties removed at once, than to suffer from the stagnation of the trade which would be caused by any plan to reduce those duties six or nine months hence.

Mr. Hume
was glad of these reductions, as they would put a stop to adulteration. He wished to ask what duty was still imposed on bark?

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
It is removed.

§ Mr. Briscoe
objected, as this reduction would injure the British manufacturer. He knew one who would lose 5,000l. by the alteration.

Mr. Hume
approved of the member for Surry taking care of his constituents, but for the interest of the community, he should like to see this duty reduced to 6d. The oil might then be used for burning, and great quantities might be imported from India at a low rate.

Mr. Hodgson
wished, like the hon. member for Surry, that the interests of the home manufacturer should be taken care of. The duties ought not to be suddenly but gradually reduced.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
could assure hon. Members, that the representations sent into Government led him to believe, that the proposed alteration would not be injurious to the British manufacturer. The castor oil they manufactured was cold pressed, and quite different from that imported.

§ Sir Charles Forbes
supported the proposed reduction as an act of justice to our East-India colonies.

§ Lord Althorp
was persuaded from the representations made to Government, that the hon. member for Surry was labouring under a mistake. It was the wish of the great majority of the trade, that the 727 alteration should be made and made speedily.

§ Mr. Burge
rose to move a reduction of the duty on coffee, which he was sure would be beneficial both to the colonies and to this country. Coffee was the article, of all others, upon which free labour might be most beneficially employed, and the reduction of the duty would tend to the encouragement of free labour, while it would also promote the comforts of the people of this country, by placing the article more within their reach. As to the effect of the reduction of the duty upon the revenue, he could prove that the reductions which had hitherto taken place had been attended by a proportionate increase of consumption, and consequently had increased instead of diminishing the revenue. He moved that the duty on coffee imported from the West Indies be reduced from 6d. to 4d. per pound.

§ Lord Althorp
was quite ready to acknowledge that too high duties by no means tended to improve the revenue; but, on the other hand, if the reduction of duties proceeded beyond a certain limit, it must injure the revenue, because the consumption of an article could not extend beyond a certain quantity. He certainly was afraid, that the reduction proposed, as it was small, would not increase the consumption to any great extent. He was not prepared to say, that the reduction proposed by the hon. Gentleman would not increase consumption at all, and he should be very glad indeed if he could try the experiment. In the present state of the revenue, however, he did not feel that he should be justified in doing so. The reduction which the hon. Gentleman proposed would amount to 200,000l., if it were not made up by an increased consumption; and he doubted that such would be the case immediately, although it was very likely that in a few years it might occur. He could not, therefore, consent to give up so large an amount of revenue. He had had hopes of being able himself to propose a reduction, and in that case he should have moved that the duty should be reduced to threepence, as he thought that a very small reduction was not likely to produce the effect desired by the hon. Gentleman. He was sorry to be 728 obliged to oppose the Motion, but the present state of the finances compelled him to do so.

§ Mr. Courtenay
was willing to admit that the noble Lord had met this question in a very fair and candid manner; but if his hon. friend persevered in his Motion, he should give him his support. It was true, as the noble Lord had stated, that the reduction of the duty might not be followed immediately by an increased consumption of the article; but it should be remembered that the duty of 6d. per pound produces nearly twice as much to the revenue as the duty of 1s. per pound did. The noble Lord said, that the small reduction now proposed, could not be expected to produce a similar effect to that consequent upon a large reduction; but the proposed reduction of 2d., was one-third of the whole duty, almost equal to the largest reduction that had been proposed in the duty on sugar. With reference to the revenue, he had always been for reduction, even at the expense of a sinking fund. If, proceeding on any system at all, they were making both ends meet, he certainly should not be disposed to advocate an experiment of this kind, but the case was different with the revenue of the country in its present state. Next year it would be absolutely necessary that some general and strong measure should be adopted. He apprehended that there were many reasons why it was desirable to encourage the consumption of coffee. It was a stimulant to which the poorer classes generally resorted, and which was not productive of any mischievous consequences to themselves. If there ever was an article, with reference to which we had a right to predict that a reduction of duty would be followed by increased consumption, it was that to which the Motion of his hon. friend was directed. They were all, he hoped, advocates of an anti-slavery system, and those most anxious for the abolition of slavery, must be desirous to extend the cultivation of any article but sugar in the West Indies. He must add, that this reduction would, in his opinion, be attended with very little risk to the revenue; and, under all the circumstances, he thought that the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, might agree to the Motion.

§ Mr. Patrick Stewart
thought the revenue could not admit of this reduction; until the Treasury was in possession of a surplus 729 revenue, it would be dangerous to have recourse to such a measure. At present the price of coffee was on the rise, and it was looking more favourably than any other article of colonial produce. It was one of the last commodities therefore which he should select for a reduction of duty.

Mr. Hume
did not conceive, that the reduction would at all injure the revenue. He did not see why the noble Lord might not try it for a year. It would be, on the noble Lord's own showing, a small loss to the revenue, and a great boon to the planters, and he hoped that the Motion would be successful.

§ Mr. Dixon
was also of opinion that the reduction of duty would not affect the revenue. The remark that the price of coffee was rising, was an indication that the revenue would not suffer, and that the present was a proper time to make the reduction.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
said, he must oppose the Motion on the grounds stated by his noble friend. It should be recollected that when the duties were reduced before, it was some time before the consumption made up for the decrease of the revenue, although at that time there happened a concurrent reduction in the price of the article which could not be expected now. He certainly thought, that the reduction proposed, would benefit the coffee grower, but it would as certainly injure the finances; and the financial effect induced him to oppose the Motion.

§ Mr. Irving
opposed the reduction which the hon. member for Eye wished to be effected in the duty on coffee, because the advantage to the consumer would be incommensurate with the disadvantage which would accrue thereby to the revenue.

§ Mr. Alderman Venables
would support the Amendment of the hon. member for Eye.

§ Mr. Burge
said, in reply to the objections urged by the noble Lord, that the question had not been met by him on its proper footing; for he had objected to the reduction in the duty on coffee on the ground that the risk to the revenue was much greater than the advantage which the consumer would derive from the reduction, whereas the consumer was not so much interested in this question as the West-India grower of coffee, who would be greatly benefited by the reduction.

Lord Sandon
supported the Amendment, 730 because the reduction would both benefit the poor of this country and the suffering planters of the West Indies.

§ Mr. Burge
next proposed a reduction of the Duty on Colonial Vinegar from 1s. 6d. to 2d. per gallon.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
objected to the proposed reduction, on the ground that if the duty on colonial vinegar were reduced, a corresponding reduction must take place in the excise upon British vinegar, which could not be afforded at present. An opportunity of discussing the question more fully would arise when the whole subject came before the House, as it shortly would.

§ Mr. Kearsley
pressed the hon. member for Eye to take the sense of the House on his proposal.

§ Mr. Burge
withdrew it.

§ Mr. Burge
moved, that the duty on ginger of 10s. per cwt. be reduced to 1s. Negatived; as was also a motion made by the same Gentleman to reduce the duty on pimento from 5d. to 1d. per lb.

§ Mr. Dixon
next rose for the purpose of bringing forward his proposal for reducing the duties on rum. At present, the duties on rum imported into Scotland was 9s. the gallon, and he wished that reduced one half. The high duty on that article of colonial produce was extremely injurious to the West Indies and to England, because it operated to the advantage of the continental producer of spirits. He would, therefore, recommend that it be reduced to the same level with the duty on British spirits. In proof of his assertion, that high duties were injurious, he might quote the fact, that nearly the whole of the brandy and Geneva which were consumed in Scotland were prepared from whisky, which was coloured for the purpose of deception: thus the high duty defeated its own object. He begged to move, as an amendment, "That the duty on all rum imported from the West Indies into Ireland and Scotland be reduced to 4s. 10d. per gallon."

§ Lord Althorp
said, he was not then about to argue with the hon. Gentleman that the change he proposed would be any loss to the revenue, neither was he disposed to deny that the West Indies possessed a good claim to the reduction proposed; but, at the present period of the Session, it would be impossible to entertain such a question. From his own experience of 731 the House, he could undertake to say, that there would be the utmost difficulty in carrying through such an alteration at a time like this. When he heard that the hon. Gentleman gave notice of this proposition, it occasioned in his mind no small surprise that any Gentleman connected with Scotland should have made such a proposition; and of this he felt perfectly assured, that he would meet with very little support from Scotch or Irish members; strong opposition to such a change might, he was sure, be expected from both those classes of Members; and, considering that so many of them had left the House, it would be hardly fair to entertain any question in which they were so deeply interested, and which it was known they would resist to the utmost of their power; at the same time that he was perfectly ready to admit that a prohibitory duty on West-India produce ought not to continue, though he was sure most hon. Members would agree with him, that, under present circumstances, it would be impossible to make any change.

Mr. Hume
thought it was very desirable that a reduction of the duties on imported spirits from the colonies should take place; but he admitted, however desirable the reduction might be, that it was at present impracticable, owing to the Session of Parliament being so very near its close.

§ Mr. Andrew Johnston
said, that as respected Scotland, he should oppose any reduction of the duties now levied upon spirits imported from those colonies. The consumption of spirits in Scotland was already enormous, and calculated to destroy the morals of the people. He should, therefore, strenuously oppose a motion that would facilitate the supply of ardent spirits for the advantage merely of the hon. Member's constituents at Glasgow.

§ Mr. Patrick Stewart
would support the Amendment of the member for Glasgow, if he pressed it to division; but, looking at the state of the House, he advised his hon. friend to withdraw the Motion.

§ Mr. Dixon
regretted that a proposition of this importance should be discussed in so thin an attendance of Members, owing, he was afraid, to the practice of Members neglecting their duty in order to go canvassing amongst their constituents. It was not his fault that Members absented themselves when the most important mercantile Bill of the whole Session was 732 under discussion. The land-owners and others were eager enough to attend and support Ministers when their own interests were not concerned, but they forgot principles and duty when a measure touched their own pockets. How the advocates for free trade could resist a proposition for equalizing the duties on rum and other spirits he could not conceive. He regretted that the noble Lord, though he could not make this a Government question, did not even vouchsafe him his individual support.

Mr. Goulburn
hoped the noble Lord would take the subject into his serious consideration, both as respected the West-India interest, and as regarded the prevention of smuggling spirits from Scotland into this country, and adopt in the next Session some legislative regulations suitable to the emergency.

§ Sir Charles Forbes
had given notice of motions to reduce the duties on saltpetre imported from India from 6d. to 3d. per cwt.; on rice, from 1s. to 6d. per cwt.; and on pepper, from 1s. to 6d. per lb.; but understanding from the President of the Board of Control, that the whole of the duties on commodities imported from India were to undergo revision, he would not press his Motion. He could not, however, forbear from expressing his regret that the interests of India were so little attended to in that House. Neglect and injustice would, sooner or later, drive India to assert her rights. We might hold India by the sword, but it was the sword of the natives, and let them once turn against us, and our power would pass away instantly and for ever.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
thought that was not a proper occasion to complain of injustice to India, or even that her interests were neglected. The merchants trading with India had been consulted on the subject of this Bill, and of seventy articles on which they recommended a reduction of duty, on thirty-three the duty had been materially reduced, in some cases even fifty or sixty per cent lower than was demanded.

§ Sir Charles Forbes
admitted, that the Government had not altogether overlooked the subject, but the articles on which they had reduced the duty were of trifling importance compared to those on which no reduction had been made.

Lord Sandon
rose to submit a Motion for the reduction of the very high duties 733 now levied upon currants. This article was the only reliance of nearly 100,000 of our Ionian subjects; and yet it was still charged with the whole amount of the war-duty of 44s. 4d. per cwt., and was, perhaps, the only article on which no reduction had ever been granted. This duty was as 550 to 100 in relation to the price paid to the grower, a proportion unexampled in our taxation, except in the instance of tobacco. Between the years 1818 and 1824 the price of currants had risen very much, and an extraordinary stimulus was given to the cultivation; much land was given up to currants which had formerly been devoted to the growth of corn, and the result had been, such an increased production of the article, that the price had fallen to nearly one-fourth. At that point the price could not stand, inasmuch as it did not remunerate the grower, and, therefore, the cultivation would be diminished, until a diminished supply should have had the effect of raising the article to a remunerating price; indeed, that effect would have been already produced but for the hope and expectation that some alteration in the duty would soon be granted, a part of the benefit of which would fall to the share of the grower, and thus enable him to maintain the same extent of cultivation. Under the influence of the former low prices, the consumption in this country had risen from between 4,000 and 5,000 to 7,000 tons, giving employment to our shipping, which a diminished supply would again restrict, and also proving, that the low price of the article tended to extend its use. Indeed, if they knew not this fact from evidence, it might be inferred, because currants were an article of luxury to that numerous class in this country, the lower division of the middle class, which, though not rich, and, therefore, obliged to consider closely the prices of all that they consumed, were yet enabled to command the enjoyment of a vast variety of little superfluities from every quarter of the globe. Under the influence of low prices, the consumption had increased so far, as to produce a revenue amounting, in 1819, to 200,000l., and, in the last year, to 328,000l. But at that amount it could not remain. The supply would be diminished, the price would rise, the consumption fall off, and the revenue, fall back to its former amount. If the revenue from this article could not be maintained, would it not be better that the reduction 734 should be made at once by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; thus affording remuneration to the Ionian grower, additional employment to the shipper, the merchant, and the dealer, and a cheap luxury to a vast body of consumers in this country, than that he should wait, till it appeared upon the face of his Custom-house returns in the shape of diminished consumption, with all the accompanying circumstances, the very reverse of those he had enumerated? Even if it were thought impossible to reduce the duty, at once, to the amount it stood at before the war, from 44s. 4d. to 24s., a reduction of duty in proportion to the increase received last year upon the former year, namely, of one-fourth, or 11s., might be hazarded, for a higher amount than 250,000l. could not, for a continuance, be collected from currants. The noble Lord had better make the reduction in time, for if the destruction of the vines, which had begun, should be continued, no subsequent encouragement which he could offer, would bring back an equal quantity in less than five years, the period requisite for the perfection of the plant. The duty on currants, he must also remark, was excessive, as compared to the duty levied on raisins, which were not the produce of our own dependencies. On all these accounts, he would suggest, that a reduction of the duty, which was now 44s. per cwt., should take place, and that, in future, this article should only pay 28s. per cwt. duty on importation.

§ Mr. Poulett Thomson
said, he was desirous, as well as his colleagues, that this duty should have been reduced in amount; but he regretted to say, that revenue to so great an extent could not be spared from the fund raised for the public service in the present year.

Mr. Goulhurn
agreed with the right hon. Gentleman, that relief by any reduction of this duty this Session was out of the question, more particularly as the government, of the Ionian islands had refused to take off a tax which it now levied on the exportation of the commodity—a burthen loudly complained of by the trade and by the inhabitants of these islands.

Mr. Alderman Thompson
said, that the export duty was inconsiderable as would appear when he stated, that the price of currants on shipboard was not more than 8s. per cwt.; and further, that it was necessary, in order to defray the expenses of a government in the islands. He was 735 of opinion that our trade with the Ionian Islands must be altogether lost, unless a considerable reduction was made in the duty imposed on this their staple commodity. He thought that the duty ought not to exceed 20s. per cwt.

§ Mr. Alderman Venables
supported the recommendations of the noble Lord. He thought that the Government stood in a manner pledged to reduce this duty, and he could find no excuse for not doing it except that the revenue could not at present spare the sum.

§ Lord Althorp
thought, that the worthy Alderman had quite misunderstood the promises of Government which were conditional, and no case could, be made out, to justify the reduction of duty here, whilst the article continued to be taxed on its export from those colonies to England.