HC Deb 22 April 1853 vol 126 c304

said, he begged to call the attention of the right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer to that portion of the Resolutions to be submitted to the House, which proposed that the duty on raisins should be reduced from 15 s. to 10 s. per cwt. By the tariff, as it at present stood, and for some years past, the duty was the same upon currants and raisins; he wished to know whether it was intended to reduce the duty on currants in the same proportion as on raisins?


said, that, speaking from recollection, he thought the hon. Member was in error in stating that heretofore raisins and currants had paid the same rate of duty. In 1845, or about that time, when the duty upon currants was reduced, the duty on raisins was not reduced from 15 s., on account of some expectation of a negotiation with Spain. At the present moment the duty of 15 s. upon currants was not above half so heavy as a 15 s. duty upon raisins, and although the duty upon raisins would be reduced to 10 s., it would still leave that commodity paying a higher rate of duty ad valorem than 15 s. would be upon currants. If he were in a condition, in point of revenue, to propose a further considerable reduction of the duty upon currants, he should be happy to do so. Adverting to the present state of the supply, and the shortness of the recent crop, he should not feel confident of any rapid replacement of revenue from any further reduction of duty. There would be an immediate loss of revenue if the duty were to be reduced, such as would not be justified with due reference to the other alterations proposed.