§ MR. E. BALL
said, he wished to inquire if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had taken into his consideration the inconvenience and loss sustained by the maltster from his being obliged to find securities for the payment of malt duties, and the great hardship that persons so becoming securities made their entire property responsible for the said duties, and were prohibited from disposing of any portion of their estate in lands or houses?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
stated that the particular grievance of which the maltsters complained was, that after their bonds had been registered in the Court of Common Pleas, there was no cheap or ready mode by which their obligations might be removed, after the necessity for the continuance of those obligations had ceased. He had made inquiry into the state of the law on the 886 subject, and should be prepared to propose the extension of the regulations which were introduced with respect to the bonds given in the Customs Department under a recent Act of Parliament. He believed that the extension of the regulation, as now applied to the Customs, to the Inland Revenue Department, would be sufficient to remove the grievances complained of, and he should propose a clause, giving effect to that extension, in the Bill relating to the excise and stamp duties, which would come under the consideration of the House on Wednesday next.