SUGAR DISTILLATION. (Hansard, 23 June 1808)

§ Earl Bathurst
rose and observed, that it was not necessary for him to detain their lordships by any minute explanation of 999 the measure now proposed. It was one, which, when fairly considered, would be found highly expedient under all the circumstances of the present moment. The country was now completely excluded from any supplies of corn from the continent of Europe, and from America. A scarcity of provisions had been felt in many parts of the united kingdom; in Scotland, oats were scarce, and had risen in price; in Ireland the potatoe crop had in a great degree failed, which produced a greater consumption of corn, so that prudence dictated a measure which, while it seasonably provided against a scarcity in one quarter, would afford relief in another, where distress had arisen from a superabundance of other articles. There was now a glut in the market, of West India produce, which proved highly injurious to the interests of the West Indian proprietor. This glut would be relieved by encouraging distillation from sugar, without producing any detriment whatever to the interests and improvement of agriculture. He trusted, therefore, the measure would be cheerfully acquiesced in.

The Earl of Selkirk
thought the measure pregnant with the most injurious consequences to the agricultural interests of! the country. He admitted that what was used in the distilleries, or in other purposes different from that of immediate sustenance in a year of plenty, might come in aid of the supply in a year of scarcity, and that it might, in consequence of scarcity, become absolutely necessary to stop the distilleries; but, generally speaking, it was much better to leave agriculture and distillation to themselves; if the price of grain became so high in consequence of scarcity that the distillation of it would not yield a profit, the distilleries must of course stop. The high price of grain would also be an encouragement to further cultivation; the produce of which being brought to market would lower the price. The high price of grain might have the effect of inducing the conversion of a portion of grass land into tillage, which would immediately tend to lower the price of grain; and if only a thirtieth part of the grass land in the united kingdom was converted into tillage, he believed there would be no necessity for the importation of grain. He objected to the bill, as tending to lessen the cultivation of grain, and to render the operations of agriculture unsteady and fluctuating. The distilleries, besides, had already stopped, 1000 and no more grain of the produce of the last harvest would be distilled; the deficiency therefore in the last harvest could be no ground for the bill; it must apply to the ensuing harvest, and of that there was at present the fairest prospect; Conceiving the bill to be an unnecessary interference with the agriculture of the country, he must oppose it.

Lord Holland
had heard nothing to induce him to withdraw that support which he intended to give to the present bill. He could see no reason why, it the quantity of grain consumed in a year of plenty, for purposes different from necessary sustenance, was to come in aid of a year of scarcity, it might not also come in aid of a deficiency of importation. The great object in this case was the relief of the West India interest, now in a state of great distress, and to prevent that ruin in which they must be involved if something was not done to take off a part of that pressure which weighed so heavily upon them. If this could be done, as he contended it could, not only without injuring the interests of agriculture, but with ultimate benefit to those interests, as the West India Islands must, in the present state of affairs, be in a great measure dependant upon this country for provisions; and if some relief was afforded in the present instance, those connected with them would be the better enabled to purchase supplies, he saw no reason why the present measure should not be carried into effect, merely because it was contrary to a general principle.

§ Viscount Sidmouth
thought it impolitic to interfere with the agriculture of the country. Let every thing be left to price, and that would be found a much better regulator of the amount of the supply in the market, than any legislative measure. He could not agree with the policy of sacrificing one interest for the benefit of another; it was much better, in his opinion, that competition should be left to its effect. With respect to the West India interest, he thought it would be much better to resort to other measures of a more permanent nature for their relief.

§ The Earl of Albemarle
had not heard any necessity shewn for the present measure; nor could he agree, that the West India interest ought to be relieved at the expence of the agricultural interests of the country. With respect to importation of grain, he was of opinion, that the land now in cultivation would, if properly managed, 1001 produce a sufficient supply without the necessity of importation.

Lord De Dunstanville
did not think the agricultural interests of the country would be injured by the present measure, and he could not help thinking it hard upon the West India interest, if, whilst compelled to bring their sugar to this country, they should be precluded from the means, which would be afforded by this measure, of disposing of a part of that produce.

The Duke of Montrose
urged the deficiency in the supply of oats and barley in Scotland, as a strong ground for the present measure.

The Earl of Lauderdale
contended that the Report of the committee of the house of commons on this subject, did not clearly state the grounds on which the present measure was founded. He condemned the principle of sacrificing the interests of the grower of barley to the grower of sugar, observing that the same principle might be extended in a most injurious manner to different trades and manufactures, and contended, that the throwing back upon the market the quantity of barley which would otherwise be consumed in the distilleries, would necessarily cause a great diminution of price, and greatly injure the agricultural interests of the country.

§ Lord Hawkesbury
contended that the agricultural interests of the country, who were already protected by law in the price fixed, until which, no importation of grain could take place, had no right to complain of the relief now wished to be afforded to another great interest of the country. No one could be more convinced than himself of the importance of supporting the agriculture of the country; he had always considered the agriculture and the navigation of the country, as the two great leading interests on which the prosperity of the country rested. In this case, however, the interests of the whole community required that means should be adopted to prevent the evil consequences of a deficiency of grain arising from there being no importation, and though at present there was every prospect of an abundant harvest, still it should be recollected that the critical period with respect to the future hopes of that harvest had not yet passed. It was in this point of view, added to the actual deficiency which existed in Scotland and Ireland, that he supported the present measure.—The Bill was then read a second time.