§ The House in Committee on the Excise Acts.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomson moved, that a duty of 24s. per cwt. be charged on Sugar manufactured from Beet-root. He said he moved the resolution to enable him to 1669 bring in a bill to levy the duty through the medium of the excise department. Hitherto very little Beet-root had been grown in this country with a view to the manufacture of Sugar; but lately some attempts had been made to create a trade in Beet-root Sugar, and, unless some measure on the subject was adopted by Parliament, those attempts must, considering the present duty on Colonial Sugar, be attended with success. A duty of 24s. per cwt. was charged on Colonial Sugar; and as the price of Sugar, independent of the duty, varied from 24s. to 34s., the average charge to the consumer was, duty included, about 54s. per cwt. It was clear, therefore, if Beet-root Sugar could be manufactured and sold for 54s. per cwt., that, though the consumer would enjoy the benefit of a reduction of price, the revenue would be defrauded to a considerable extent. He would not at the present moment enter into the question whether the existing duty on Sugar was too high or too low; but the revenue of 5,000,000l. supplied by Sugar must, it was obvious, be raised somehow or other; and if the manufacture of Beet Root Sugar was allowed to go on untaxed, the consumer would not be able to obtain the article materially cheaper, but the large revenue which he had just mentioned would run a risk of being entirely lost. In fact, the duty on Colonial Sugar would serve as a bounty on the manufacture of Beet-root, unless a similar duty was imposed on the latter production; and it was for this reason he called on the Committee to adopt the resolution he had proposed.
§ Mr. Humeobjected to the motion on several grounds. He thought it impossible to introduce a new excise regulation which was to operate through the whole country at a time when Parliament was about to expire. There was no such pressing necessity for the measure, and it was one of so much importance that, in his opinion, it ought to be reserved for the meeting of Parliament when the House was full. He did not see that any great injury would result from a postponement of the question. He begged to ask why agriculture was to be deprived of the benefit which it would enjoy if the cultivation of Beet-root for the manufacture of Sugar were encouraged? Another suggestion he had to make was, that the duty of 24s. per cwt. be reduced. He wished the right hon. Gentleman would inform the House whether Beet- 1670 root Sugar had been made in any quantity, and at what expense? One of the grounds of his objection to the resolution was, that there was no information whatever before the House to enable them to form an opinion on the subject.
§ Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, he had been asked if any facts had come to his knowledge that induced him to press the Bill this Session? To this question he must reply that such facts had come to his knowledge. An attempt had been made in Ireland and another in the neighbourhood of London to establish the many facture of Beet-root Sugar, and a considerable amount of capital had been invested in the undertaking. These parties might come forward and ask for compensation if a law were passed which put an end to their manufacture. Before, however, it was established he and his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had stated, that if an attempt were made to manufacture Beet-root Sugar in this country, in consequence of the bounty afforded by the duty on foreign sugar, they should consider it their duty at once to bring in a Bill to impose a duty on the Beet-root Sugar. The parties who had engaged in the manufacture now said, though such a statement was made in Parliament, they unfortunately did not know anything about it. He thought it necessary for Parliament under these circumstances to interfere at the earliest possible moment, and pass a law which would put an end to any such pretensions. The hon. Member for Durham asked, why impose a duty of 24s.? His answer was, because that amount of duty was imposed on West Indian sugar. He objected to bolstering up the manufacture of this country, and maintaining it at the expense of the revenue. The artificial manufacture of sugar from Beet-root was so expensive that but for the duty operating as a bounty the Beet-root Sugar could not compete with the West Indian sugar. As regarded agriculture, he thought it would be an injury instead of a benefit to it to encourage the manufacture of Beet-root Sugar by such artificial manner.
§ The Committee divided:—Ayes 79; Noes 19: Majority 60.
| List of the AYES. | |
| Adam, Sir C. | Blake, M. J. |
| Alsager, Captain | Bowring, Dr. |
| Angerstein, J. | Brocklehurst, J. |
| Archdall, M. | Buller, C. |
| Burrell, Sir C. | Macleod, R. |
| Campbell, Sir J. | Martin, T. |
| Chalmers, P. | Morpeth, Viscount |
| Cole, hon. A. H. | Murray, rt. hon. J. A. |
| Dillwyn, L. W. | North, F. |
| Donkin, Sir R. | Palmer, G. |
| Elley, Sir J. | Palmerston, Viscount |
| Euston, Earl of | Parker, M. |
| Forster, C. S. | Parnell rt. hon. Sir H. |
| Goulburn, rt. hon. H. | Pechell, Captain |
| Goulburn, Sergeant | Rice, rt. hon. T. S. |
| Graham, rt. hon. Sir J. | Richards, R. |
| Grey, Sir G. | Rolfe, Sir R. M. |
| Grimston, hon. E. H. | Russell, Lord J. |
| Harvey, D. W. | Seymour, Lord |
| Hay, Sir A. L. | Shaw, right hon. F. |
| Hillsborough, Earl of | Smith, R. V. |
| Hinde, J. H. | Stanley, E. J. |
| Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J. | Steuart, It. |
| Hodges, T. L. | Stuart, V, |
| Hogg, J. W. | Talfourd, Sergeant |
| Howard, R. | Tancred, H. W. |
| Howick, Viscount | Thomson, rt. hon. C.P. |
| Hutt, W. | Townley, R. G. |
| Jackson, Sergeant | Verner, Colonel |
| Inglis, Sir R. H. | Vyvyan, Sir R. |
| Knatchbull, right hon. Sir E. | Wigney, J. N. |
| Williams, W. A. | |
| Knight, H. G. | Wood, C. |
| Labouchere, rt. hon. H. | Wood, Alderman |
| Lambton, H. | Woulfe, Sergeant |
| Law, hon. C. E. | Young, G. F. |
| Lefroy, rt. hon. T. | |
| Lennox, Lord G. | TELLERS. |
| Lennox, Lord A. | Gordon, R. |
| Mackenzie, T. | Parker, J. |
| List of the NOES. | |
| Aglionby, H. A. | Pease, J. |
| Brotherton, J. | Potter, R. |
| Buller, Sir J. Y. | Thompson, Colonel |
| Collier, J, | Tulk, C. A. |
| Crawford, W. S. | Vigors, N. A, |
| Ellice, E. | Wallace, R. |
| Elphinstone, H. | Williams, W. A. |
| Hastie, A. | Wilson, H. |
| Hindley, C. | TELLERS. |
| Howard, P, H. | Beauclerk, Major |
| Jervis, J. | Hume, J. |
§ Resolution agreed to. The House resumed.