4| y

ani

_ LF

mL

Zia iR n TT

216 On the Public Brewery.[May

from a quarter of malt. By a calculation, ſimilar to that above, ($. 25,) it reſults, that a quarter of malt, in the laſt caſe, pays- but Il. 45. 4d.; whereas 1n ale, 1t appeared to pay Il. 12s. ód.; a premium this of 8s. 2d. per‘guarter, to encourage its con- fumption in ſtrong beer inſtead of ale; for preferring 2 ſmaller quantity of an intox’tating liquor to a larger quantity of that which can only nouriſh the body and invigorate the mind,

XXVII. There is another conſideration which ought to have prevented this enormous exciſe on the beer of the poor; they who buy in ſmall quantities of the publican, are fotced to remu- nerate his perſonal trouble and houſe-rent,-by a farther advance of 4d. per gallon.‘Thus, the pint of ale, for which the labourer pays. 2d. is exciſed by government a() halfpenny; the publican’s advance is a(4) halfpenny more; and the monopoly,(explained in the former part of theſe obſervations,) doubtleſs impoſes ano- ther advance: if that amount to a farthing on the pint, five far- things of che eight are already gone,—an impoſition ſcarcely paral- leted in the nmoft luxurious articles of importation! while the richer man, on his pint of ale, is exciſed a ſingle half-farthing— one-tenth of the exaQións on his poorer neighbour!;

XXIX. Thus have I endeavoured to explain, at ſome length, the two evils which are moſt prominent in the Britiſh brewery: the monopoly, and the uncgual preſſure of the duty. In applying 2 remedy to the latter evil, we may, perbaps, find a compenſation to the brewer for the diſſolution of his monopoly, It may, per- haps, appear in the ſequel, that an EQUALIZATION OF THE DUTY on all beer-drinkers, will indiſputably benefit the public revenue, indemnify the brewer for throwing the trade open, and more than all, do an ad of ſolid juſtice neceſſary to vindicate the legiſlative morality-of“ the high court of Parliament.”

XXX. An equalization ot duty may obviouſty be efffected by impoſing a fufficient duty on the malt, to make up the ſame total as at preſent reſults from the malt and beer duties together. In the account preſented to Parliament for the year‘1794, the net amount of the two malt-duties is 1,146,790l.—of the beer-duty, 1,970,378). Total of the duties, 4,117,1684. Tothe malt-duty of 8s. 4d. per quarter, the 4d. may be fuppoſed ſubtraÑed from the net-amount for the expence of colleâtion, if that expence be taken at(ov) 4 per cent, This raiſes the grofs amount to (w) 1,194,729).‘As an augmentation of the rate of duty would

(1) See before,$. 25.

(az) He uſually pays the brewer xs. per gall. and retails ale at 1s. 4d.

(2) In Mr.Roſe’s laſt ſeptennial pamphlet it appears,that the expence of col- leiing the exciſe is diminiſhed from 4l. 12s. 1d.(1797,) to 31. 145. 6d. per c, (x798.) But as this diminution chiefly reſults trom heavier duties impoſed on ome articles, the ſaving is on them, Therefore, 4 per cent. on malt 18 2 very reaſonable ſuppoſition.-

(w) Four-pence is a 24th part of 85,—thérefore add 1-24th to 1,146,790l, the total is 1,194,7291. y.