<^, ,0 -V*>. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) .^T^ IX) ||_U_ 11.25 £ us 12.0 U 11.6 i^l PhGtographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. M5S0 (716) 872-4503 \ •SJ <^ V CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microraproductions / Institut Canadian de microraproductions historiques I Tachnlcal and Bibliographio Notaa/Notat tachniquaa at bibllographiquaa Th( to Tha Inatituta haa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba bibllographically unlqua, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproductlon, or which may aignificantly changa tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chackad balow. D D D n Colourad covara/ Couvartura da coulaur I I Covara damagad/ Couvartura andommagAa Covara raatorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura raataur^a at/ou palllcuMa Covar titia miaaing/ La titra da couvartura manqua Colourad mapa/ Cartaa gAographlquaa an coulaur Colourad inic (i.a. othar than blua or black)/ Encra da coulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou nolral I I Colourad plataa and/or illuatrationa/ D Planchaa at/ou illuatrationa an coulaur Bound with othar matarlal/ RallA avac d'autra? documanta Tight binding may cauac ahadowa or diatortion along intarior margin/ La r9 liura aarria paut cauaar da i'ombra ou da la diatortion la long da la marga intArlaura Blank iaavaa addad during raatoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar poaaibia, thaaa hava baan omittad from filming/ II aa paut qua cartainaa pagaa blanchaa aJout4aa lora d'una ruatauratlon apparalasant dana la taxta, mala, loraqua cala Atait poaaibia, caa pagaa n'ont paa 4t6 fllmAaa. Additional commanta:/ Commantairaa aupplAmantairaa.- L'Inatitut a microfilm^ la malllaur axampiaira qu'll lui a it* poaaibia da aa procurar. Laa ditaila da oat axampiaira qui sont paut-Atra uniquaa du point da vua bibliographiqua, qu! nauvant modiflar una imaga raprodulta. ou qui p'j'jvant axigar una modification dana la mAthoda iiormala da flimaga aont indiquAa ci-daaaoua. □ D D n E n n n Colourad pagaa/ Pagaa da coulaur Pagaa damagad/ Pagaa andomn.agiaa Pagaa raatorad and/or laminatad/ Pagaa raataurAaa at/ou palliculAaa Pagaa diacolourad, atainad or foxad/ Pagaa dAcoloriaa, tachatiaa ou piquAaa Pagaa datachad/ Pagaa ditachAaa Showthrough/ Tranaparanca Quality of print.variaa/ Quallt* InAgala da I'impraaalon Includaa aupplamantary matarlal/ Comprand du material suppiimantaira Only adition availabia/ Saula idltion diaponlbia Pagaa wholly or partially obacurad by arrata allpa, tiaauas, ate, hava baan rafilmad to anaura tha baat poaaibia Imaga/ Laa pagaa totaiamant ou partialiamant obacurciaa par un faulllat d'arrata, una palura. ate ont At A fllmAaa A nouvaau da fapon h obtanir la malllaura imaga poaaibia. Th po of fllr on ba th< aio oti fin aio or Th ah Til w» Ml dif an ba rig ra( m( Thia Itam la fiimad at tha raductlon ratio chackad balow/ Ca documant aat film* au taux da rMuctlon IndiquA ci-daaaoua. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X n/ 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X Th« copy fllm«d h«r« Hm b—n reproduced thanks to tho oonoroslty of: Library of tha Public Archivat of Canada L'axamplaira f llmA fut raprodult grica A la OAnAroait* da: La bibiiothAqua das Archivas pubiiquas d» Canada Tha Imagaa appearing hara ara tha baat quality possibia conaidaring tha condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original coMlaa in printed fMiper oovera are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the leat page with a printed or illuatrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copiea ara filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated Imprea- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or iliustratad impreaaion. Tha last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain tha symbol -^ (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. < «• Maps, plates, clfarta, etc., may be /limed, at different reduction ratios. Thoaa too large to be" entirely included in one expoaura ara filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, aa many framea aa required. The following diagrams llluatrate the method: Lea Images suivantas ont *t* reproduites avac la plus grand soin, compta tanu de la condition at da la nattet* da raxemplaira film*, at •n conformity avac las conditions du contrat de filmaga. Lea axemplairaa originaux dont la couvartura an papier eat ImprimAa sont fllmAs en common9ant par la premier plat at •n terminant soit par la darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'Impreasion ou d'illustration. soit par la Mcond plat, salon la caa. Tous las autres axempiairas originaux sont fllmAs 9n commen^ant par la pramiAre page qui comporte une empreinte d'Impreasion ou d'illustration at en terminant par la darnlAre pege qui compokte une taile empreinte. Un dee symbolea suivants apparattra sur la dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon la cas: la aymbole — ► signifie "A 8UIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre f llmAa A das tAux de rAduction dif f Aranta. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour Atra raprodult an un aaul ciichA, 11 est filmA A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut an baa, en prenant la nombre d'Imagaa nAcaaaaira. Les diagrammes suivants lllustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 /■ SI ^ INQUIRY " ^" '" "'' -^'^l INTO TU£ POLICY AND JUSTICE Ol' THE PROHIBITION OF THE USE OF GRAIN IN THE DISTILLERIES : INCLUniNO OBSEaVATIONS ON THE NATURE ANU VHEH OF A VENT TO SUPERFLUOUS LAND.PRODUCE ; AND A PARTICULAR APPLICATION OF TUB- GENERAL QUESTION TO THE PRESENT SITUATION OF THE COLONIAL INTERESTS. BY ARCHIBALD BELL, ESQ. ADVOCATE. EDINBURGH: Printed bjf George Ramsay and Companj/, AND SOLD BY ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND CO. EDINBUROH ; BRASH AND REID, GLASGOW; AND JOHN MUUBAY, FLEET STREET, LONDON. 1808. CONTENTS. Introduction, Page 1 Sect. I. Of the 0{)cration of Distilleries in a Country nrhich supplies its own Consumption, or af« fords a surplus for Exportation, II I. Of their Operation in Years of Ayerage Produce, ibid. II. Of their Operation in Years of I)e(icient Produce, 27 Sect. II. Of the Operation of Distilleries in a Country which Imports a part of its supplies, 50 Ik Of their Operation in Years of Average Im porta. tion, ibid. II. Of their Operation in Years of Deficient Impor- tation, 60 Sect. III. How far the present distresses of the Colonial Proprietors alone, afford a just ground for the suspension of the use of Grain in Distilleries, 71 I. How far the present distresses of the Colonists are entitled to any relief from the Public, .... ibid. II. How far the mode of relief at present suggested is a proper one, • , 74 -t-«l.^lK*.»,'r.»r^ ' ^ I I .' ' » r-;r^'.-^=i-'>-^:J' ..y-o i , t ufr.'.'* '■ !' » ■■ * » :» t t^t.*, ,j«l' '• 'I ' .r..?. ^ ..f i...' ♦ Ui .V ',:* ■W'i -''jFt ri4-J -^=:;#va '. ^,J; ") M\] > ■*? •Miii 4 I , 1- ' :. J^'' ::'• .; ; .y ADVERTISEMENT. To those who arc familiar with the doctrines of political economy, the minuteness of illustration and detail, in the following remarks, may appear superfluous. But when we consider how important it is, in a popular government like ours, that the public be possessed of just notions on schemes of national policy ; and, when we see such fundamen- tal and exploded errors advanced on a subject so in- teresting as the present, I am hopeful that they who least require a detailed explanation, will be the most sensible of its utility. .i'.-.i It will also be found, that the principles which I have endeavoured to establish are of general ap- plication, and may enable us to judge, not merely of the present measure, but of all similar schemes of policy. They indeed involve the most extensive and fundamental doctrines in the science of political economy. ':mi I likewise hope that some of the facts and rea- sonings which 1 have advanced, may tend to dissipate^ ?l those grouiulli'ss alarms on the suhjcct of scarcity, which »onie persons seem at present to feel ; a pas- hion which, of all others, is the most apt to hcwil- der the puhlic opinion, and to urge a headlong adoption of those measures which are the most like- ly to create or aggravate such a calamity. The present situation of our colonies I shall also touch upon, as connected with the more general questions which arise on the present subject : though on this, as being less important iu itself, and less within my opportunities of information, I shall be more brief. The Report of the Committee of the House of Commons, relative to the distillation of sugar, and tlu; very large and important mass of evidence con- tained in the Appendix, I have had the benefit of perusing. Any testimony of mine to the ability, patience, and candour with which that respectable body have conducted their researches, would be im- pertinent. I have taken the liberty of dissenting from their opinion ; but I have stated the grounds of my dissent, and, I hope, with that becoming de- ference and moderation which should always ac- company free inquiry. If any thing material in the evidence laid before the Committee should have escaped me, it will perhaps be excused, from the shortness of the time allowed for its perusal. A copy of the Report is subjoined in an Appendix. Vll Since these remarks were sent to the press, the subject came iimler the discussion of tlie House of Commons on Friday the *i()th of May. It appear- ed, by what fell from Ix)rd Binning, the Chairman of the ('ommittee, on that occasion, that there was an intention of making some change on the sug- gestion in the Report, to suspend the distillation of grain for one year from the 1st July 1808, by pro- posing a restriction for some shorter period. No variation of that kind, howev* r, can influence the grounds on which I maintain the following argu- ment. ■f) il,i ' i«^4 .. i I • »J I " ' < I < • , • INQUIRY 1 IMTU Till POLICY AND JUSTICE . \, t ' or riic PRoiiinmoN OF THE use of grain lit IN THB ♦ / DISTILLEUiES, &c. . ..I :»i"h , I . > ' ' The distress of* our West India Colonies has ibr some time excited the public attention ; and as the persons chiefly interested in colonial produce, though a small, are not an unimpor- tant class of the community, endowed with the spirit, and possessing the weight and j^ctivity of an affluent corporation, it is by no means surprising that their complaints have been heard. They have laid them before the pub- lic in various shapes ; and, with the common propensity of human nature, in examining into the source of their distresses, they have found A ^ every one to blame but themselves. 'I'liey iiave aeeounted for the present stagnation of their eommodity in their iiands by every eause but the true one, — their own imprudent speeu- lation. . - That the present glut of sugar has arisen from an over cultivation of that produce, so as to overstock the market of the world ; and that oui* planters must sooner or later diminish their cultivation, now that more fertile soils are re- viving, and entering the competition ; seem to me truths, which can hardly be doubted by any whose opinion is not in some degree bias- sed by their interest. The thing is probable in theory ; and, were any confirmation of it want- ed, it would be derived from the inadequate causes assigned for their present difficulties by the colonists themselves. It may perhaps be doubted, whether persons so suffering, are en- titled to any relief from the public ; or, whether they ought not to be left to that correction which the immutable laws of nature have pro- vided for rash speculation. This is a question, however, on which I at present forbear to enter. My chief purpose is, to inquire how far, if any relief is to be granted, that which has been pro- posed, of confining the home distillation to sugar, be a proper one. I shall endeavour to 5 shew, that it is improper in every view ; im- politic in ref;ard to the public interest; and unjust towards our home cultivators. • When the subject of j)rohibiting distillation iirom grain was so nuich agitated a few years ago, the complexion of the question differed materially from what it is at present. It was then debated entirely on general grounds. Tlie onlyinterests considered were those of the public, and of the home grower ; the consumer and producer of our domestic supplies. The inter- ests of the colonists were not at all insisted on. Indeed the idea of distilling from sugar does not then seem to have been generally enter- tained. The question was argued as if the stoppage of the di^itillery would altogether suj*- pend the formation of ardent spirit ; and hence two arguments were applied to it, on either side, which do not touch it in its present shape. The one was in favour of the distillery, on the score of its use to the revenue : the other against it, on the effects of the consumption of distilled spirit on th*^ health, morals, and happi- ness, of the people. * As an object of revenue, the distillery cer- tainly has its advantages, chiefly in the view of collection. In any other liffht, it seems easy Jess important, ^s the giain used there, if con- suined iu the support oi' any other speciies of industry, would aHbrd the same, or nearly the same revenue, levied on the produce of that industry, whatever it might he. The objection to distillation, on the score of its moral effects, has, I confess, always appear- ed to me by far the strongest counterpoise to the great benefits which it yields. When I consider the excessive indulgence in ardent spirits, which always attends their abundance ; the destruction which it occasions to the liealth, morals, economy, and industry, of the people ; the ruin of natural affection,, and the general depravity and misery which it brings on the lower orders, and their families ; I am some- times staggered in my prepossession of leaving all industry free, and inclined to prohibit a manufacture of poison, as I would any other public nuisance. 1 have need to recollect the other great benefits arising from the practice ; the general encouragement which it gives to agriculture, and the resources which it yields in occasional scarcity, before I can reconcile myself to its public toleration. In considering this objection, it is somewhat amusing to re- flect on the different impression of arguments on thfferent minds. This, which I look upon as so weighty, and indeed the only one of the .5 smallest weight against distilleries, has, I sup- pose, never been a feather in the balance in determining the legal provisions on the subject. The minds of statesmen and legislators are swayed by far other considerations. Indeed I fear I shall risk any little credit my other no- tions might gain, by dwelling on so simple an objection. But liowever this may be, tlie above objec- tion is no otherwise important to the present inquiry, than as a curious s[)eculation ; for whether the measure now proposed be adopt- ed or not, the quantity of distilled spirit will probubly not be diminished. The only question is, whether it shall be manufactured from grain or from sugar? I believe the spirit distilled from sugar is rather more noxious than that distilled from grain ; but this difference is probably not so material as much to affect the argument. Neither, on the other hand, does the question of revenue enter into consideration, for the quantity of manufactured spirit, and conse- quently the duties, will probably remain much the same. The interest of the Distillers seems likewise to be pretty much unconnected with the present question. For though it appears, by the evi- dence before the Committee, on the one hand, * I , . 6 that corn is in general preferred for distillation; and, on the other, that the suspension might profit individuals ^ho have speculated in tlie view of its taking place ; it would seem, that an arrangement of duties may make the matter pretty nearly indifferent to them as a body*. . A new and important interest, however, has made its appearance on the present occasion, which was scarcely thought of formerly, — that of our Colonial Proprietors. They have, some time ago, applied to Parliament for assistance in their present distresses ; have suggested the suspension of the corn distillery as one mode of relief; and have had sufficient influence with the Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to inquire into their case, to in- duce them to recommend it ; after having fail- ed in a like suggestion to a former Committee f. • See the efideace of Mr T. Smith (of Brentford), and Mr T. Smith (of the house of Stein, Smith, & Co.), in the Appendix to the Report, particularly p. 34-81. Mr D. Montgomeric, p. 120.8. + *' The result, therefore, of the inquiry of the Committee \i ** that howerrr strongly they may feel the distreflses and the dlflfu '^ cultics under which the West Indian trade at present labours ; ** however anxious vhey may be to recommend the adoption of *' any measure which may tend to afford, even a temporary relief, *^ from a pressure so heavy and alarming, they do not think th« '^ njeasurc of permitting the use of sugar and molasses, for a time m ~/ Like all bodies too who call for monopolies, they have not limited their argument, in sug- gesting tlie present measure, to their own ne- cessities. They have endeavoured to persuade their countrymen, that the public interest is as much concerned in the suspension of the corn dis- tillery as that of the colonists ; and, as is usual, they have persuaded many unmterested per- sons that this is the case. We have been told so even from very high authority, and are daily told so in a mass of crude speculation on this sub- ject, which now overflows the country. The Re- port of the Committee like wise, though, of course, it enlarges on the colonial difficulties, does, how- ever, urge certain grounds for the adoption of the oresent measure, on public views, connected with the present state of our foreign relations. This makes it necessary to consider the quCi^- tion on general principles, as well as with a particular view to the present distresses of the colonists. Nor are such general principles confmed in their application to the question now agitated, but will enable us to judge of the same, or similar proposals, at all I ^' to be limited, in the breweries and distilleries, one that would <' give to the West Indian tiadcany relief adequate to its distresses, ^^ consistent with the interests of other branches of the community , *' or with the safety of the revenue." Rep. fr^m the Pl»tillory Committee, Feb. 1807. . t . times and seasons. It is useful to be set right in regard to first principles, even if we should occasionally depart from them. We shall thus be better able to estimate the grounds alleged for such departure, as well as to determine its nature and limits. The present inquiry, therefore, divides itself into two branches. T'he First involves the ques- tion. Are there any grounds, in the present cir- cumstances of this country, independent of the distresses of the colonists, to justify the sus- pension of distillation from grain \ The Second involves the question, Supposing there are no such grounds, is the interest of the sugar colo- nists a sufficient reason for such a measure ? Tlie First or general inquiry further subdi- vides itelf into two branches. Tlie present cir- cumstances of this country, unconnected with the interest of the colonists, may be considered, in i\iQ first place more generally, as relative to a great nation producing its own supplies, and at amity with all the world. In the second place, under its present peculiar aspect, as im- porting ?i part of its supplies ffom foreign states ; while there is a chance of these supplies being interrupted, from the violence of war, in the present extraordinary combination against us. These two branches I shall consider in the two first sections, and I think they will exhaust 9 • all the views which have been taken of the sub- ject unconnected with the interest of the colo- nists. In the Second place, sup|)osing it to be made out, that, on all and each of tliese general grounds, the proposed suspension of the distil- lery would be unadvisable, I shall next en- quire, Whether the present distresses of the co- lonists are a sufficient ground for granting them relieft by the suspension of the distillery of grain, either in the viewof justice to the home cultivator, or policy towards the public ? This will form the subject of a third section. » f*. 1 ,:' " In all speculations regarding public measures, the great object of inquiry is the interest of the public. The interest of individuals, or classes of individuals, must be considered only as su- bordinate to this great interest. It is not to be inferred from this, that I maintain that injus- tice is to be^ committed towards smaller classes, when the interest of the public requires it; be- cause I believe it to be a rule without one ex- ception, that it never can be for the public ad- vantage, to prefer one class before another in the free direction of their industry. In the fol- lowing observations, therefore, when I speak of the interest of the home grower, or of the cclo- 10 V 1^ nist, I always speak of i^ not in exclusive relation to either oi' those classes of individuals, hut as subordinate to the interest of the public. When I speak of any thinpf tending to the prosperity or discouragement of our liirmers, I mean only in so far as the public interest is concerned in that prospei y or discouragement. When I speak of the propriety or impropriety of granting relief to the colonists, or of the mode of relief at pre- sent suggested, I speak of it, neither with fa- vour nor dislike towards them as a body, but only in as far as it is for the public interest that any relief, or that such relief) should be granted. It is further to be attended to, that the mea- sure now in agitation is not merely the fi:ee permission of importing sugar, or, what is the « same thing, an equalization of the duties on sugar, and on corn, used in distilleries. It will be seen that, according to all the principles on which the following argument is maintained, I not only approve of such free importation as a temporary measure, but as a permanent system. What is proposed in the Report of the Com- mittee, and what I object to, is the monopoly of the distilleries granted to the colonist, and the forcible exclusion of the home grower f irom the competition* u ' - * 4i SECT. I. U, Of the Operation qf DiatUkries in a Countri/ which supplies its own Consumption, or offordi a Surplus beyond it, . . i . The operation of distilleries on a country producing its own siKppiies, or afll'ording a sur- plus, may be considered uifdiT two views : L In years of* average home produce ; and, IF. In years of scarcity from deficient nome pro- duce. I. To enlarge on the importance of a flou- rishing agriculture, to the strength and prosj)e- rity of a state, does not seem at present neces- sary ; for it is a truth whicli the most errone- lous systems of cEConomical policy never could entirely hide, and is one on which the public opinion seems now to be j)retty well awaken- ed, although the general views on this subject are still far from being wholly just. The land produce of a state, though not the only source of wealth (as some of its indiscreet favourers have maintained) is at least the most import- ant branch of it, the foundation of all the rest, and the measure of their extent and limits. In a large territory, the amount of subsistence which can be imported, must necessarily be ■9 12 I Hinall * ; and as tlic |)<)[)iilalion oi a sttate is re- gulated hy its moans of snbsistenco, a larj^e territory (|uul t'xteiil of territory, anil ruise an equal prcnltice, and one* contain ten millions ofinliabitants, the other itvelir mil- lions ; in tlio forniCM*, the i(NKl \ni\\\^ vlividcd in hirger shares amont; thr pcopU* than in {\\v lat- ter, the former people will enjt>y greater eom- fbrt and happiness than the latter, in common and average years. , But although the f^mss amount of pro- duce, in pro[x)rtion to territory, and its re/tf- tive amount, in [)ro[)ortion to |K)pulation, be different tilings, and it be possible to conceive the gross produce, in proportion to territory, to be large, while the relative produce is small, and the people but moderately supplied (wliich I believe is the case in China) ; yet I imagine, in general, large gross produce and relative abun- dance uniformly go together, wliere no impolitic laws or usages encourage a superfluous popula- tion, or interrupt the commerce of grain. — ' Wherever these are left free to the operation of nature, a Vdv^c gross produce is uniformly attend- ed with a relative abundance among the people. In regard, again, to the* public strength of a country, as opposed to other states, it is need- less to shew how much this depends on the amount of its land produce, in proportion to the land produce of other states. If two neigh- bouring nations are equal in extent of territory. I I I 'c I 14 tlint wliirli prcxiticrfi thr larp^ent Riipfitics will nmintairi the lurt;rst pojuilution, oiid n ^ivcMi |iro|N)rtioii of tlitit popiiltition uill, of course^ coiifttitiitr u larger iurcr. than the name |>n>por- tioii of tlu* other )M)|)iihitioii. On thf othf^r haiid, if two lUM^^hhcuiriti^: natioiiH are of iine- f]Mal si/(>, tho sinulltT may, by a su|K*ri()r agri- ciilttiro, Mipport un c'(|iml |M)|)iilati()ti, ami, of -cont^f, ('(jiiul annirs. In the particular rir- curnstaiuTs, thi'rc'torf, of every state, its ibrce Tnn«osing the gross produce of both countries to be the same ; their respective numbers to be the same ; and the projmrtion of these numbers ivhich they maintain in war, also the same. But, strictly speaking, the power of a nation to maintain armies does not depend so much on the amount of its population, compared with the population of other states, as on the amount of its supplies, ' compared with tli^ supplies of other states. I have observed that, though jx)- pulation always bears a 7ieur relation to Ripply, yet it does not always bear exact It/ the same relation I« to it. In one nation the slJ|>|);ie^ ndxy hv riiorr ' abundunt in |m»|M>rlion to the nut: ucr^or, whul u the 8ame thin^, tlie |m.'o|>Ic \vm nunierou» in proportion to the hupphes than in another na- tion. Now, in Hiieh eircutiistanciN, the naaoii >vhose abundance is the ^natest» though it use itM wlioU^supphes in |>eace by the various niodeii of eonsuniption, may, in war, by a retrencii- nient of its couHuniptiou, yield hir^tT supphen than its ()oorer neighbour can do, to the niain- tenance of an army, and of those arts nccesMiry to the supply of an army, and, of course, su|>- port a larger army. Its |)opulation, though in numbers only equal to that of its rival, yieldM in war a greater disposable proportion without diminishing the land produce, provided the consumption in the richer nation be diminish- ed in the same proportion. The richer nation can support an army of 120,000 men, ct/uaih/ well appointed and supplied, as the poorer can support an army of 100,000 men. — Or, the - richer nation can support an army of 100,000 men better appointed and supplied than the poorer nation can support the same num- ber. It appears, therefore, that the public strength of a state, as, well as its domestic prosperity, is in proportion to the amount of its supplies. la I The encouragement of a great land pro- duce, therefore, becomes the first of all ob- jects, towards both the domestic ha[)piness and the pubhc security of a state ; and while on this subject, it is pleasnig to reflect, that the example of our own country is the best confirmation of the above doctrines. No long settled community, of equal extent, has, perhaps, ever yielded so large a produce as Great Britain ; has supported its population in such general abundance ; or [K)ssessed such prodigious resources for offence and security. The average land ).roduce of Greti Britain is as much superior to that of other nations, as her manufactures and commerce*. This she has attained, not from the perfect rectitude of her policy in regard to agriculture, but because the errors she has committed have been fewer than those committed bv other nations ; and the consequences of them have been more com- pletely palliated. The first of these advantages she has derived from the influence of the pub- lic voice and interejt over her public councils ; * Mr Ar. Young (the justness and importance of whr^ prac- tical observations in political economy shine through the uncc , tainty of his general principles) has remarked, that England has always been as much superior to France in agriculture as in other branches of industry. By his calculation, the produce of this country was to that of France when he travelled (1789-OS) Mi% 'to 18.— See note (A.) J7 the second from the freedom of individual exer- tion, overcoming the restraints of an injudicious poHcy. . Such, then, being the importance of increas- ing the actual land produce of a country, it may be laid down as an a-^afim, that every po- sitive restriction, vi^hich limits the power of the farmer to augment the land produce, is imme- diately injurious to him, and consequentially injurious to the community. I say every posi- tive restriction^ which gives the preierence to some other branch of industry ov^r his ; for, as far as respects a free competition^ though that may sometimes diminish the farmer*s profits in the mean time, it will be for the advantage of the community. It is only when the farmer asks some monopoly, that his interest and that of the public can ever be opposed. •> '^ It is the interest of the farmer to have an abundant produce, but yet somewhat under the demand of the market It is the interest of the public that the produce should be abun- dant, and the market pretty fully supplie_d. In other words, the farmer wishes for plenty, and tolerably high ^prices ; the public for plenty, and tolerably low prices. But while, on the one hand, it is not the interest of the farmer to have ^00 high prices^ which can only proceed B I 18 from very deficient produce; on the other hand/ it is not the interest of the public to have too low prices, proceeding from over-abundance, which may discourage the fanner, and induce him to retrench his cultivation. Such retrench- ment naturally \eiiO^ back to scarcity, and a change of this kind, from plenty to scarcity, is a much greater evil than if the produce had never exceeded the lowest point of the vibra- tion. Though it be the interest of the public, therefore, that grain should be cheap, it never can be its interest that grain should be so cheap as to injure the cuhivator. Such an over- cheapness may sometimes arise in the course of nature, by the faimer's improvident over" trading, and, in such a case, should be lefl to remedy itself by natural means. It will, hoW'» ever, scarcely ever amount to an evil, if things be left to their own course, and nothing ob- struct the natural efforts of competition to re-* lieve itself. But whenever the cheapness is produced artificially, or by forcible means, it may be pronounced pernicious, as injurLOiUs to the public in the long-run, as immediatdy to the grower. Cheapness and dearness, it is to he observed, are variable terms, importing the relation be- tween the demand and the actual supply. It is therr^fbre impossible to fix them by any dc-r 4 19 finite standard, or determine when either in excessive. Wlien matters are lefk free each will accurately adapt itself to the actual a- mount of supplies. Corn will never be cheap bu* when it ought to be cheap, nor cheaper than it ought to be : — It will never be dear unless when it ought to be dear, nor dearer than it ought to be. The cultivator's com- plaints of low prices on the one hand, or, as it is usually termed, the want of adequate returns to the grower, are just as unreasonable as the public complaints of high prices on the other. The return in the market, when matters are left free, must be the adequate and proper return, in proportion to the amount of produce. If this last be too large, the farmer has overtraded, by advancing cultivation too rapidly, and must di- minish it. This is the only sense in which I use the word oyer-cbeapness, when arising firom na- tural causes, and the only remedy I would pro- pose, however low prices might fall. There are two modes in which the farmer's profits may be lowered, and abundance created by forced expedients, which, in a course of average seasons, have nearly the same effect ; namely, the stoppage of his market, and the increase of produce ; — the one professing to at- tain its end by restraint, the other by encou- ragement I 1^ (1 r •H 20 . , In the annals of legislation, we arc no stran- gers to various schemes of policy which have professed to lower the price of grain by forced limitations of the market. I'lie fiimous mini- ster Colbert, wishing to encourage the manu- factures of France, bethought himself of in- creasing the plenty, anci lowering the price of grain, by prohibiting its export. In this way, no doubt, there was suddenly thrown buck on the home market the whole quantity usually exported, and the consequence must have been an immediate plenty and cheapness. But all the effect of this was very soon over ; for the farmers finding a glut of their commodity on their hands, and the prices so low as to yield them no adequate return, (an expression which in this case might be used with propriety), were forced to retrench their cultivation, and thus re- duce the produce to what it was formerly, e^cli^- sive of the expert. The object desired, therefore, was almost immediately defeated. But this is by no means stating the full amount of the evil. For the discouragement to agriculture, from the closing up an indefinite vei>t to its produce, will always diminish that produce, or prevent its gradual increase, in a proportion far beyond the actual amount consumed by that vent at the time of the restriction. The policy of M. Colbert, therefore, not merely defeated its own end j not merely did not pro- mote the cheapness, and advant!e the industry which he favoured ; but was probably greatly in- jurious to it. He snatched at a hasty advan- tage by sacrificing thv. spring which was to prolong and augment it. The character of his policy (to use the illustration of Montesquieu on another subject) resembled the eagerness of the savage who, to get at the fruit, cuts down the tree. The analogy between the above policy and that of prohibiting distillation from corn, is obvious and complete. The di/itillery af- fords the farmer a steady, convenient, and profitable market for his produce, exactly in the same way as export. It is also indefi- nite in extent ; and if the vent which it fur- nishes be in general more limited than that of export, it is nearer, more sure, and not de- pendent, like the other, on the demand of other states, or our connection with them. Like the former, it encourages a considerably larger produce than it actually consumes*. . . * This opinion is distinctly expressed by that very intelligent cultiTator Mr Wakefield, in his evidence before the Commit. tee, . App. to Rep. p. 109-111. The operation of even a very limited ve&t in encouraging produce is described by Mr A. Young^ in his evidence before the Committee. — ^See note (B.) The qtian. tity of grain used in the distilleries of the united liingdom, is stat- II Tlic efft'ct of a stoppage of this vent, like that of the other, is to throw the whole grain used there into the common market, which, while it occasions a tnnisiiory cheapness, will lower the farmer's profits, and finally reduce his cul- tivation to the full amount of the .a:rain usually distilled, and prohahly much further. In short, the analogy, so remarkahle in other instances, hetween produce and population ap- plies perfectly here. A free emigration in- creases the numhers of the people in the same manner as a free export, or other vent^ in- creases produce. All attempts to force either, by direct encouragements, are unavailing. All at- tempts to stop their natural vents lead to the very decrease that is feared *. There are, however, certain reasoners who have denied that the home grower would sus- cd in the Report to amount to 781,000 qrs. 470,000 in Britain, «nd 311,000 in Ireland. * They who doubt of the effects of a free and regular emigra- tion in increasing numbers may, I think, be convinced by per- using Mr Malthus's account of the irruption of the barbarous na- tions of the north of Europe. That author has completely soWed the problem of their excessiTe numbers, which had puzzled so many of his predecessors. Dr Ferguson has compared the attempts to increase population to the assisting a water.fall with an oar. The fears of its decay from emigration resemble the fears of the river running out, and Icaviog its channel dry. See this matter enlarged on, and practically applied, in Lord Selkirk'! excellent treatise on the Highland Emigrations. 125 tain any loss from the stoppag^t* of distillation* He woiilil save as nuicli, according to tlieni, in the reduced wa^'s of labour and poor rates, the easier maintenance of his lamily, &c. con- Bequent on the cheapness, as he would lose by the full of grain. If this be true, the price of grain is of no consequence to the farmer, and the fixation of a maximum, however low, would be to him a matter of indilf'erence. By the Bame reasoning we may satisfy the woollen manufacturer, that a fall in the price of cloth is nothing against his interest, as 'he might then clothe his workmen, servants* and family cheaper than before. It is painful, at this time of day, to be obliged to reply seriously to such folly. Were the argument intended to convince those only whom it professes to address (the farmer or manufacturer), it would be idle, indeed, to take notice of it. Their interest and experience tell them its ab- surdity too plainly to allow them to be deceiv- ed. Let others be convinced, from what is observed of their conduct (if unable to see it themselves), that a forced decrease in the price of any commodity is never compensated to the dealer by the lower wages of his workmen, or any other consequences of the fall. If the far- mers in this country consider the stoppage of 1^1 r 24 the distillery as ii iimtter of indifference to them, 1 have done witii my objections. Such, then, will be the consequence of stop- ping distillation, or any other natural vent to home produce, in a course of average years. Tlie effect of taking away a vent to produce, in case of the occurrence of scarcity, I shall afterwards att(nid to. But the forced limitation of the market is not the only device that has been fallen \\\)on to increase abundance, and lower prices. Some persons expecting to attain the same end by encouragement, as in the former case was ex- pected by restraint, have proposed a bounty on the improvement of wastes, or breaking up grass lands. But it seems evident, that, in as far as this is /o/c^rf beyond the natural demand of the market, the former cultivation will just sufler in proportion as the new cultivation increases; and the supplies w ill merely be raised in different places, while their aggregate amount will re- main the same. But, indeed, any encourage- ment of this kind must be so insignificant, that I rather think it will produce no effect at all. The effects of such a measure as to scarcity, and with the view of diminishing importation, I shall afterwards consider. But while the direct encouragement of home produce is unavailing, or injurious to the farm- 25 cr, and, iti noithcr view, will leaii to ativ in- crease of supplies, all obstacles to its free pro- gress should be removed. This is indeed tlm whole length that the encounigemcnt to iui* provinj^ wastes, or turninf,' i^rass lands into til- lage, should or can go ; and, while thus free, the interest of the farmer and the piiblic al- ' ways go together. Tlie farmer, like the undertaker of every other branch of industry, must lay his account with the competition of every other person * who pursues the same, or any other trade, in a lawful manner. If any other person pursue his trade in the way of breaking up waste lands, he does no more than he is entitled to, and has no preference over those who cultivate the more improved soils. The too rapid cultiva- tion of wastes is a thing impossible, if lefl wholly to private interest and industry, because the inducement to that practice is only in [)ro- portion to the high price, or scarcity of land produce ; and as the scarcity is relieved, or prices fall, the inducement to cultivate wastes must fall in proportion. The operation of im- proving wastes must therefore be gradual, and suited to the public demands. The public de- mands, on the other hand, will adjust them- selves to this natural and permanent increase of produce, and the community will receive a II l! n . ft6 lasting benefit, while the eluss of cultivutom will sutier no injury. An unalofjfy has heeti y tlif stispriision of tlit; (Ustillrrif^A. Did uiiy oi'uur colonists grow rice, and did \vc give it some exclusive cncouniKcmcnt in uiir mar- ket, the case would ho just the same, at least in averai^c seasons. Such encoura^eni"nts, liow- ever, never have heen given to foreign grow- ers. They are never even allowed the tiiir com- petition ot'our market, (wliich I tliink hoth they and the colonial propric^tors ought to bv), but all that they send in conunon years is loaded witli heavy duties. Were the colonists at pr^ sent asking no more iavour than the utmost tliat has l>een ever extended to tlie foreign growers of corn, during average years, I should Ibe far from objecting to their demands. The discouragement of the British grower, therefore, from the improvement ol* wastes or * ]mf)ortation, can never bear any resemblance to liis discouragement from the stoppage of his market, while the one is free, tlie other com- pulsive. II. I have thus, I think, sufficiently shewn the beneficial eiiect of distilleries, and other vents, in encouraging cultivation in common and average years ; and the injurious conse- quence of a forced suspension of them, both to the home grower and the public. I now pro- ceed to inquire into the nature of their opera- tion in seasons of scarcity, nnd the conscqucnrc of their sus|HMisioti in such an event. The scar- city to which I at present alhicle, is that which * uriseH from deficient lioine iinnhice, as I am now consi(h'rin>( the question ahstracted from the cinMunslance oi'iniportation. They who have ^iven the attention which it dcMTves to the exull(?nt work of Mr Malthus, must he awnre of the unif()rrn rehition main- tained hetween the population of any coimtry and its means of support ; of the ccuistant ten- dency of the tormer to encroach upon the latter; and of tlie inade(juacy of the utmost assip^nahh; [irochice in any country to maintain the people in [)lenty and happiness, unless the natural ten- dency to increase bt; repressed by some forcible check, either directly or indirectly, a certain . length below the means of subsistence. Whenever the means of subsistence, how- ever, arc, from any cause, unusually abundant, and the people enjoy ^reat comparative ease and comfbri, the disposition to early marriage will speedily augment their numbers, which will rise till they begin to press against the li- mits of subsistence. This will bring a gradual decrease in the comforts of the people, and a- gain reduce their numbers, till they fall below the decreased means of support, and arc then prel OSc'l |)4T lan< pn*|>arron the whole, it would be far better f<)r a people to have u Mteady supply, though not lar^'cr than the lowest amount in tlu^ scale of vibration just stated. Vi:t th(^ evib though far from li^ht, would be trillin^^ compared with wluit it really amounts to, were the products of the soil expo- sed to no other casualty than such a f;radual periotiical vibration as the above, only influen- ced by the increase or decrease of population. Wen; the products of the soil, like the product.s of other manufactures, wholly drpendcnt on the exertions of man, they might suit them- iielves pretty accurately to the demand through- out every year, or series of years, and increase or diminish the sup))lies to a known and defi- nite amount. But in (hUermining the amount of land produce, another power must co-ope- rate, over which man has no controul, namely, the influence of the seasons. This may occa- sion a sudden dis])roportion in the supplies, which can occur in no branch of industry whol- ly dependent on human exertion ; while, at the same time, a deficiency of supply in tliis can much less be endured than in any other. It i« 90 not, therefore, a siiificieiit security against far mine tyiat a nation yields such a produce as to maintain ail its pt M)le moderately in average years, if that produce really he all consumed as human food. It is necessary that a consider- ahle surplus he raised for consumption in some other wav than as human food, which mav ex- ist as a resource on a sudden deficiency, and may he thus turned from whatever other pur- pose it was destined for, to the use of man. To dispose of this surplus in average years, the fol- lowing methods seem to be the chief: 1. Stor- ing up in granaries at the puhlic expence, to be opened in times of scarcity. 2. Sloring up by private individuals engaged in the com- merv^e of grain. 3. A degree of waste in con- sumption and preparation, as the food of man, and the maintenance of inferior animals for* lur.ury, which may be denominated prof me consumptkn, 4. Export ♦o foreign countries; and, 5. The distillery and brewery. In the two fi?st of these ways, superfluous prod ace is disposed of by accumulation, in the three last by consumption. If the grain disposed of in any or all of these ways amount nearly to ihe utmost deficiency to he expected from an unfavourable season, the security against extreme v/ant is as great as the nature of things will pevmit. They all ierve 91 the double purpose of an indefinite vent and encouragement to increased production in <;om- mon years ; and of a security against scarcity, both by repressing the over-increase of popula- tion in counnon years, and by yielding, in bad seasons, for the food of man, the supphes which were raised for their market. 1. The first of these methods of disposing of Mirplus prockice, the storing up in pubHc gra- naries, is by fiir the worst of the whole ; and never need be resorted to in any country where impolitic vestrictions do not impede the natural oj)eration of the rest. Vi^hen such a system of public storing is adopted, it can only be carried into effect by means of a tax on the people ; and we may be sure that the fund so raised will be expended under the direction of Govern- ment, with much less judgment and ecoiiomy, and the grain purchased will be much worse preserved, and more improperly applied, than if the same end were pursued by individuals engaged in the commerce of grain, urvder tho free protection of thij law, Their own interest will direct such men when and how far to pur* chase and store up, and w^hen and how far to sell, in the manner best for the interest of the community. Accordingly, in most of the cif vilized nations of the world, the duty of storing iip h^s been pretty much relinquished by goi I 52 vernment, and left to individual dealers. In the despotic and barbarous nations of the East, howefver, where ap^riculture labours under so many oppressions, tlie practice is still adhered to from necessity. In China, where an un- wieldy government, and absurd prejudices a- mong the people, combine to fetter internal in- dustry, and forbid the export of corn, the prac- tice of storing up grain for the public is carried to a considerable length ; and, at the same time, we learn its inefficacy to relieve the fre- quent scarcities which occur in *^h ' country. We are told, that when a scarcity occurs, and the emperor's granaries are ordered to be open- ed, they are often found nearly empty, from the knavery of those having charge of them. Many difficulties are thrown in the way of transporting the grain, and the poor people are allowed to die in such numbers, as to redu'ie them within the limits of the subsistence w^'iv^i they can procure for themselves*. These .; vernment of China, are inherent in all such schemes of preserving a public supply. As al- ready said, such schemes can never be needed * See Barrow's Account of China, .^nd Life of Loru 'tTacarU He/, .1:3 where that matter is entirely committed to free individual exertion. 2. It has been the pojicy of all barbarous go- vernments to discourage large dealers in corn, from the idea that their accumulation of grain might produce artificial scarcity ; and this po- licy, with other prejudices of the same kind, has thrown the task, as already hinted, into much worse hands, that of the governments themselves. I need not mention the follies which have filled our statute-book on this sub- ject, nor the disgraceful prejudices which ap- j^oared upon it during the last scarcity ; even in those whose public station left no excuse for their ignorance. It is only, indeed, because our laws have yielded to the general feeling of public interest, and are not enforced, that we are not all made sensible of their mischief. Were corn-dealers generally to be prevented from pur- chasing, or forced to sell, at the will of the Le- gislature, or of judges, we should feel by expe- rience the miseries of deficient supply. The interest of the corn-dealer, where he is left free, necessarily, in all respects, coincides with that of the public. It leads him to accumulate when corn is cheap, and thus takes an useless surplus out of the market ; and to sell sparingly as scarcity increases, which diminishes consump- c i <( 1 34 tion, and preserves the supplies from absolute failure bt'fbre the eusuin,t( crop. Any iiiterfe-* rence with this operation by the law must, as ikr as it .^oes, produce mischief to the public as well as to him *. 3. The vent of a luxurious home consump- tion in the food of man, and the inferior ani- mals, is probably in all countries the most im- portant resource in seasons of scarcity. It is both the greatest in extent, and has the singu* lar advantage of being less liable to interrup- 1 than the rest from the interference of go- vernments. The degree of waste in the pre- paration of food by the richer orders of society ; the maintenance of a number of horses, and other animals, for luxury ; as well as the over abundant feeding of those which are necessary ; all occasion a vast consumption of corn, and of herbage, from land that may be turned to corn, which in common years disposes of a large sur- plus, beyond the necessary consumption of man ; in so far repressies the population in those years ; and affords an important supply to be set free for the use of man in times of scarcity. Those well meaning persons who lament the waste of luxury, and the number of useless anin * See Smith's Wealth of Nations, B. 4^ c, 5. .15 hials that consume the food of man in this coun- try, may hence see how ill-lbumlcd are their re- grets and apprehensions. Were every useless horse sent out of the kingdom, the number of those useful diminished as far as possible, and were all fed in the most frugal manner, the plenty of the people would no doubt be in the mean time increased ; but the population quickly augmenting, (as well as produce dimi- nishing in various ways, from so absurd a mej** sure,) the people would soon arrive at the same point of relation to the means of support, and their comforts would remain unaltered. All the advantage would be an actual increase of numbers even in common years. But if a scar- city were to occur, the situation of the people would be much worse. There would be no produce raised beyond what was annually con sumed by man ; any retrenchment from the usual moderate supply would occasion the se- verest suffering ; and deficiency to any consi- derable amount would create absolute famine. Accordingly, it is in China, where the inferior animals are extremely few in proportion to man, that this dreadfjl calamity most fre- quently occurs. In Great Britain, where the number of the inferior animals in proportion to vmn is unusually large, scarcity has proba* .in bly been less felt tliau in any country on the globe ♦. It may be said, indeed, that the food wasted in luxurious preparation, or consumed by the lower animal, in common years, is a resource in time of scarcity, only on the supposition that the waste is then retrenched, and the consump- tion of the lower animals diminished or sus- pended at such a season ; whereas, the rich, it piay be said, will continue to pamper them- selves and their useh^ss horses, though the peo^ pie should starve. But to this it may be re- plied, that the interests of the public are for-* innately not left to depend on the feelings of pioral duty on such occasions, but are enforcedl * The consumption of the aggregate number of horses kept in Great Britain, has been calculated by a Tery competent judge, pr Coventry, Professor of Agriculture in the UniTersity of Edin. burgh, in an estimate which he has favoured me with, at the pro. duce of sixteen millions of acres ^ which, at the rate of /our quar. ters per acre, might yield sixty "four millions of quarters of grain. In thus explaining, however, the useof a number of horses, or other inferior animals, I would not be understood to approve of that waste of labour which we often see, especially in England, in the employment of unnecessary horses for carriage or agriculture. These, in regard to labour, are absolutely useless, yielding neither profit nor pleasure ; and though the keeping of them we see hai( some advantage, it is paying too dear for it. We might as well throw the grain they consume into the sea. Besides, if dismissed, they x/ould probably not altogether disappear^ but be turned td^ Viorc useful purposes. 37 by the infaHii>lo provisions of nature. The rise of prices, which musf hjipperi on a scarcit\% will force the ric^h, in spite of themselves to re- trench their superfluities; and it is in the ad- mitting; of this retrenchment that the hahitunl existence of a superfluity is so useful. The de- licacies of the table must he retrenched, the maintenance of all inferior animals must be re- duced, and the number of those merely kept for luxury or convenience must be lessened, through all classes of the community, (except, perhaps, among a small nunriber of the most affluent) by the natural pressure of scarcity and high prices, however ill disposed individuals may be tb such retrenchments ; and the food raised to supply the luxurious consumption, will necessarily be turned to the use of man*. 4. The export to foreign countries, when * The aboTe considerations (as already hinted) may rclicTe the fears of certain well meaning people, as to the political evils at least (contradistinguished from the moral evils) of excessive lux*> ury. The greater the general luxurious consumption of a coun. try, the better is it secured against the risk of scarcity ; nor can it go to a further extreme in this respect, than will be for its its own advantage. Neither can I help taking notice of the amu!«ing inconsistency of certain reasoners, who in one breath lament the luxury and cor- ruption of the times, and the next exclaim against the load of taxes. Now it is very apparent, that the more we are relieved of taxes, the more luxurious, and (as far as it depends on luX' Hry) the more corrupted we shall become. I 1;. it': J8 the state of our produce aduiits of it, affords no doubt u very useful vent. In as iar, tlieivfore, as perfect freedom of ex|H>rt goes, this vent ou.i;lit to be encouraged ; but, it is less to be relied on than those which exist within the country. For, in the Jirst place, it de[)ends for its contiiuiance on tlie state of supplies in the foreign importing countries; and should their agricultural pro- duce increase, so as to equal tlieir demands, 6ur market with them must gradually be clos* ed. The plan of persisting to force a market by a bounty on export, has been recommended by very able men * ; yet I cannot but think it a vain and firivolous attempt, useless, if our pro* duce be so abundant as naturally to yield asur- plus for export, and ineffectual, if it be not. Secondly, not only is the vent of export subject to this gradual stoppage, by the natural rise in the prosperity of the foreign countries ; but if on a scarcity at home this exported surplus be retained for our own necessities, the import* ing nations whom we used to supply, on find- ing that we withdraw this supply occasionally for our own relief, will suffer so much that they will cease to depend on it, and use every exer- tion to increase their home growth, or seek for their supplies elsewhere. Thirdly, a year of * Malthtts, Efsajr on Pop. B. 3. c. 7—10. 30 plenty may occur, us well as of scarcity. In a year of pleiify, the rorei«;n market may not ex- tend to admit of an enlarged export. It may even be interrupted by tem|>orary causes. A glut then returns upon our own market, which discourages cultivation so as to reduce our pro- duce to our own su[)ply. I'he vent of export, thereibre, depends on variable causes, and has not that principle of continuance, nor that power of suiting itself to circumstances, which the modes of home consum[)tion [)ossess. While, therefore, for the above reasons, I think the vent of export less to be depended on than the other vents which we command at home; and that it is idle to attempt its en* couragement by a positive bounty; I still con* sider it to be a very useful resource, when the state of our home produce, compared with that of other countries, naturally leads to it. It should be encouraged as far as perfect freedom of ex- port goes ; and while, on the one hand, I dis- approve of its extension by a bounty ; on the other hand, I think it should never be imped- ed, even m seasons of scarcity, but left to suit itself naturally to our home demand. The analogy between this and the other forms of disposing of superfluous produce, is complete. The interest of the corn dealer in exporting, is precisely similar to his interest in accu^ il i[| 40 7 I 1 tnulatiiig. lie never will ex|K>rt when high prices nmkc it his interest, unci tlie interest of the inibUc, that he sltould accuniulute. lie nv ^nlutes tlie one and the other in the way most beneficial to liimscU* and the pnhhc, when Icfl wholly free. It is as inexpedient to ini|>ede or contronl him in regard to the one, as in re- gard to the other. 5. The distillery and brewery afford a vent to the home produce^ which resembles all the former, and, as far as it goes, is attended w ilh the very same good effects. In average years, it takes out of the market a certain quantity of corn beyond what is necessary for human sub- sistence, thus encouraging increased produce, and repressing population ; and when scarcity occurs, it yields this surplus to be turned to human food. As fornlerly hinted, too, this disposal of superfluous produce, like the three first mentioned, has an advantage over the vent of foreign export, as affording a market nearer, more certain, more under the eye of the farmer, and less dependent on our relations to other states, or their internal regulation and prosperity. While always ready to give up its consumption naturally when necessity requires, and to yield the produce raised for that consumption to the use of man, it is a market equally ready to revive on the recur- 41 i-eiicc of plenty, to suit its consumption to the htate of proiluc(% and thus equuli/c^ the supplies throughout successive years. The operation of distilleries in this way is precisely analogous to that of the corn dealer and exporter, and tlie })rejudices on the one suhjeet exactly re- semble those on the other ♦. The r(!sult of the above obscn'ations seems ' to be, that the four latter modes of superHuous consumption (which have a stron/aj analogy to each other) are all eminently useful in common years, as aHbrding an encouragement to land produce, while they somewhat repress the con- sequent increase of population ; and, on the re- currence of scarcity, yield a sure and valuable resource. That while, on the one hand, it is absurd to encourage them for the interest of cultivation by positive bounties ; on the other hand, it is wrong to repress them for the public supply, even in the greatest necessity, because they then naturally suit themselves to the pub- lic wants in the best possible manner, when lefl alone. In applying the above general principles more particularly to the measure of suspend- ing the corn distillery, now in agitation, it is • natural to inquire. First, Whether there does at present exist any necessity for throwing the 4 \A /■ I » ■ •I • Soc Note (D.) 41 p^n iistmlly ron»uinec1 there into the ooinmon market, from a Hcarclty of proviNJons? Sccondh/, If not, what will in* the coiiMMjiienee oi' cloin^ bO prematurely, and Iwfbre the ner(*Hcnt. In hhort, the prieen vtrv. at this moment h)wer than they have heen, at an average, for M)mo years past, utid have not risei^ materially sinco last harvest There is at present rather aii abnndance than a Kcarcity in the country *, It is no doubt true, that oats ami barley arc comparatively at high prices, but this is obvi* ously noticing to the pur|>osc in the view of scarcity ; and is besides owing to teni)>orary' causes, wluch cannot be expected to iniluenco another crop. In the view of scarcity, it is not the relative abundance or price of paiticnlar kinds of produce; still less of the smaller Endless important; but the actual amount of the whole consumable produce in the countryi or the standard price of bread-corn, that is the * See a Statement of tke Pricei of Corn for lome years patf| Note (R.). The abundance of the lait crop of wheat, the pre- sent moderate state of prices, the small import, and the sufllciencjr of thb covntrjr to supply itself, are also stated by Mr Wakefield, App. to Rep. p. lia Mr Claud Scott, p. 110-17. Mr Kent, p. 121. Mr Mackenzie, p. 13^.S-4. Dy far the best proof, howeter, of the present comparative plenty, is the state of prices, for serenl years past, giTeo in the Note. The prices are given for two months in each year, — October, when the crop recentl*' gjithered may be supposed to have produced its fuU effect^ aaid May, yrhich corresponds with the present time. J II I 44 \ 6nly matter of importance. Tli(3 uh'uidance of the; i^eople depends on the quantity of hu- man subsistence ; and it is idle to talk of the people suffering from the want of oats nnd barley, when wheat is plenty. The distillers have, it is slid, in some places, tried to intro- duce wheat into their manufacture, yet even this has not sensibly affected the price of that article. But further, the present relative scarcity and high prices of oats and barley, have arisen from temporary causes; — partly from both being com- paratively an under crop last seasoii, particu- larly in Scotland ; — partly from the general failure of the pulse crop • — a nd partly frora the jsudden demand from the distilleries, which the prospect of the present measure has occasioned. None of these causes can be reckoned UQon for another season ♦. That there is no call for stopping the dis- tillation from any presrnt want of subsistence in the country, is therefore apparent. The people are at present eating bread as cheap as they have done for some years past, indeed ra- ther cheaper ; and no ground now exists for * Notwithstanding these causes, (as to uliich all the agricul. tural gcGtlemen agree), the price of barley, though certainly high, does not seem to be very extravagant. See Statement of Prices^ Note (E.) : and Mr Mackenzie's Eridencc, App. to Rep. p. 135* 45 such a Ciieasure, that has not existed for all that time. That there may he want in some particular tlistricts at pre ^ent, I will not deny. This may he a good reason for aflfordiiig them relief from the abundaiice of other di itricts, but is none for a general measure like stopping distillation, when the state of prices shews that there is a general plenty in the country. But, sccondlt/. It is said, that although no scarcity now exists, the present or future crops may fdii. It may then exist; and we must take precautions against that event. To this I reply, that the present or future crops have as good a chance of being abundant as dehoient. This is a contingency which no man can foresee ; and there can be no reason for takirig the precaution now, which vill not always exist. TYiiss^^iemoi perpetual precautiout therefore, just amounts to a standing prohibi- tion of the distillery of grain. But in case the calamity of deficient pro*, duce should ai some future tii.*e actually befall us, what will be the effect of this premature precaution ? The grain raised for distillation b'jing forced back on the grower, or dealer, and the general prices falling, he will cease to raise the same quantity by the whole a- Q^ount pf what was usually distilledx probably ' * I ■ ^';: 'Pi il i \ I'll 1,1 '■ :1 ifl 46 s. by a good deal more. Tliis quantity uill tliere- ibre disappear from the market. If it had been disj)1aced by corn, even forcibly encouraged from waste lands, or im|)orted by a bounty, as formerly mentioned, the same, or nearly the same, quantity of subsistence would still have been within the country ; and that part of it consumed by the distillerj% would still have remained to be set free for human use on the occurrence of scarcity. But, in the present case, the giuin displaced, is replaced by sugar, a commodity which, in the utmost necessity, cannot be turned to human support. No re- source will therefore remain from the suspen- sion of distillation, when necessity shall call for that measure, if we now adopt it without any necessity. But, thirdly, it may be said, that it is no longer time to betake ourselves to this re- source, when the necessity has arrived, for then the corn will have been actually distil- led. To this I reply, that there will be abun- dant time to take the precaution ; and, indeed, the remedy will ap] 'y itself in the best way, without any such precaution. The grain rais- ed for distillation is not all distilled in one day or week ; it is done gradually. As grain becomes scarce, and prices rise, it will be dis- f ijled more slowly every day, because the dis- 47 tiller can less ufTord to purchase it, or, if he has purchased, lie will cease to distil it, as spirits Tall in price, from the jKiople giving up the consinnptiqn of them *. This will happen the booner, if the importation of sugar he at the same tim(i free. The distiller will thus either leave his stores to the corn-dealer, or become the corn-dealer himself The evil thus nec3s- sarily cures itself, without any public interfe- rence. In the same manner, at such seasons the luxurious consumption of individuals will be retrenched ; superfluous horses will be un- derfed, or dismissed ; export will cease ; the corn-dealer will be enabled to accumulate, as far as his capital will permit ; and the more he accumulates, the greater is the public security, that the scarcity will not be increased to famine. No stoppa' c(m be put to luxurious consump- tion, tarther th.m an hat moral duty and inte- rest enforce. Mone 'should be put to export or J' (i * This idea i» very justly expressed by ^ir Ferguson, in hift evidence before the Committee. '* ^ cannut judge with regard to *>' the powers of merchants in importing grain; but it has always ^< appeared to me, that one of the greatest n4 best founded secu. *' cities against the effects of a famine cq promote the flQurish« *' ing of the distilleries, the conpoqn<^Qce of which would be| << that when a famine really occurred, people would give up the '^ use of spirits, which is not a qecessary of life, and leave the <' grain for food, which used in favouiable yean to be applie(| ta f < t|ie prodiictioB of spirits."-— App. to Rep. p^ 15S|* ^ 48 distillation, otherwise a [mvt of the produce is forced on the market, which there is no capital to store up, and retrenchment is prevened from taking place among the people so soon as it ought to do. Corn will never be exported, when a good price can be got at home : — It will never be distilled, when it can be sold higher for food. No stop should be put to the accu- mulation of the corn-dealer, whose storing up helps to enforce early retrenchment, and whose stores come forth as scarcity increases, and pre- vent that extreme of misery which a rash over- consumption would have occasioned. The same rule of perfect freedom equally applies to all these modes of consumption. The arrange- ments of nature need no assistance from the feeble and presumptuous efforts of man, whose interference only disturbs what it cannot amend. In the system of human improvement, that knowledge, I believe, is as important and aa slowly acquired, which informs us what we can- not do, as that which informs us what we Can. It may perhaps be prudent to prohibit ex- port and distillation, when these vents are nearly closing of their own accord, to pacify the ex- cusable prejudices of the people *n times of sev^ i scarcity. As to the coin-dealer, no in- terference with him should ever be attempt- ed. The people may be assured, that any 49 immediate relief received in that way will sooner or later lead to aggravated misery ♦. It appears, on the whole, then, that the ope- ration of distilleries is to lead to an augmenta- tion of produce, heyond the amount which they consume ; and that they should never be sus- pended, except in extreme necessity, which does not at present exist, nor is likely to exist, (from deficient home produce,) in this country. The above doctrines seem to be just, with re- gard to a country which produces the full sup- ply of its inhabitants. But some persons con- ce^'^e, that the circumstance of our importing a part of our subsistence from abroad, together with the present strange and gloomy aspect of our foreign relations, alters the application of the above principles, and justifies a departure from them now, which, at other times, might be wrong. This leads me to the second branch of my inquiry^ in which I shall endeavour to shew, that our peculiar situation, as an import- ing country, makes no exception to the prin- ciples above laid down, but rather lends them additional weight. ' * There is not a more irrational sentiment than one which we often see entertained, of indignation at the profits of farmers and corn*dealers. There is no class of the community in whose hands tihe accumulation of capital tends so directly to the public good . I, 50 .». SECT. II. Of the Operation qf Distilleries in a Count rt/ which imports a part qf its Supplies, The operation of distilleries, with respect to importation, may be considered under two views, analogous to those taken in the last sec- tion.— I. In regard to average years of impor- tafion, that is, where our supplies from abroad are liable to no interruption. — II. In re- gard to years of interruption to our foreign supplies; which may proceed either from a bad season in the exporting country, or from war. i. It is not material to the present question, that I should ascertain very accurately the amount of our importation, in proportion to our demand, for some years back. It has never, I believe, been determined with great certain- ty ; and though my own suspicion is, that it is considerably smaller than has been supposed, I feel little concern in the inquiry, even in a general view, because I think it a matter of very trifling moment*. I am disposed to agree ^ The aterage smonnt of corn impotted into fhis country, for 'fite years pa^t, is stated in tht Report at 770,000 quarters. — Sea bote 0P») Brst from this Tctmt be deducted our exports, to as* certain the balance ^ import. 'Our asporti tolh«ooUHMM«r« •tated at note (G.) 51 with Dr Smitli, that the Imported supplies of a large territory never can bear any considrr- able pro|)ortion to its consumption ; still less in a country like this, where the agriculture is su- perior to that of* any on. the globe. I believe the importation dixis not now amount, nor is ever likely to amount, nearly to the supply which is carried oft' by the various monies of su- perfluous consumption in average years. I be- lieve, therefore, we may n^gard, without much apprehension, the utmost possible limits to which importation can extend. There have been very able heads, however, who have entertained different notions. Mr Malthus, in particular, adgurs, from the pro- gressive increase of importation, the gradual decline of our own agriculture, and the final ruin of the country *. And this view, it is to be observed, is distinct from tlie advantages of an export, and the loss of subsisting by import, in case of a sudden deficiency of home produce : For this length I am not unwilling to go ; though I think the danger, even here, kss than is com- monly apprehended. But the above authbf surely argues with an inconsistency very un- usual with him, when he in one page prognos- ticates the progressive decline c^ our agricul^ f f|i » » Essay on Pop. B. 8. c. 9, 10. 4to«ditr .52 ture, from the progre^isivc increase of import to n great extejit ; and, in the next, founds upon Dr » Smith's assumption, tlmt in an extensive coun- try, importation never can be carried far. This is not the time for exposing farther the above fallacy ; nor is it, indeed, any part of my busi- ness so to do : for the greater the amount of ' our importation ; — the more hkely it is to ex- tend ; — and the more ruinous the consequences ' to follow from it ; — the more useful is the vent of distillation, and the more inexpedient the stoppage of it. I am fairly entitled to use the argument of the disadvantage of importation against the sup- porters of the present measure, as they have enlarged on the danger of that circumstance, and have, indeed, approved of the stoppage of the distilleries, as the means of lessening it. Many great authorities have agreed in the same notions respecting importation ; and although I cannot go their length on general views, I certainly consider the opposite state of produce, which yields an export, as more desirable, (when the natural circumstances of a country lead to it,) chiefly as a resource against the oc- casional deficiency of home supplies. Assum- ing, therefore, that it would be better for us were the balance of our corn trade with foreign nations turned the other way; or, at least, that 55 we supplied ourselves ; the question comes to be, Is the operation of distilleries ilivouruble or unfavourable towards diminishing importation, and attaining this end P In the formtir section I endeavoured to shew, that the effect of every indefinite vent for home produce was progressively to increase that produce, and that in a larger |)roportion than the vent actually consumed : and, on the other hand, that tlie forcible stoppage of any vent, not merely diminished the produce to the amount thereby consumed, but mucii further. The vent of free export, when a country yields a sur[)liis for that purpose, cre- ates an additional su[)ply, much larger than the surplus actually exported ; and, on the other hand, when this vent is shut up (as wa? done by Colbert) it will probably diminish pro- duce, not merely to the amount which had been usually exported, but much further. Exactly the same principle applies to dis- tilleries, and that whether the country where they are permitted possess also a surplus to export, or whether, like this country, it need imported supplies. The distilleries yield an in- definite vent to home produce, and probably create a much further production than they consume themselves ; and, on the other hand, the stoppage of this vent will occasion a great- 54 «r clinunntion of |)rof)rted grain is itsed there. The more t^iere!i)rc this market is extended, the greater chance will our home growers have of increasing their pro- duce, of gradually forcing thrfbreignimportation out of the market, and finally turningthe balance the other way. On the other hand, the stop|)age of distillation in so tar diminishes the capital of our home growers, lessens their produce to a greater amount than was consumed by that vent, and in so far gives a greater advantage in the competition to the grower of foreign corn. The same causes, in short, which lead to an increase of home produce in a country which ])r()ducesits own supj)lies, or exports a surplus, lead equally to such increase in a country that impoAs; and tend to diminish importation. The vent of the distillery is one of these causes ; tends obviously to diminish importation ; and, as fiir as that is an evil, is therefore more essential in a country wliere im{)ortation pre- vails, than in one which supplies itself. Mr Malthus accordingly, and others who join v/ith him in the apprehension of an in- i Si I created dependence on foreign supplies, liave pro|)osi€Hl, CLs the ineanM of pn^venting this evil, u bounty on the ex|)ort of rorn ; thun endea- vouring, ior the encouragement gf the farmer, to font: a vent i(»r hin produce which did not exlKt of itself. Tluit author must he a little flurpriiied to sec |>ers(ins, proiensing the same opinion with him, endeavouring to attain the same end by stopping up a vent i(>r home pro- duce in the suspension of distilleries. I am far from approving of the first of those mea- 5ur(;s, because I think it, as conmionly applied, ineffectual toward either encouraging home pro- duce, or diminishing importation ; and, if rais- ed, so absurdly high as to produce a tem))orary effect tliat way, would be pernicious. The same objections sUited in last section to the attempt of forcing cultivation, in the view of increasing produce, apply to the attempt to force culti- vation or export, in the view of diminishing im|Kjrtation. I think the evil of importation is not such as to require any remedy, and, if it did, that the remedy proposed would not cure the evil. But, certainly, on the principles of those who hold the necessity of forcible means to diminish im|)ortation, the plan of a bounty on production or export, a direct encourage- ment to home produce, seems more feasible than the stoppage of the distillery, a direct il m i»i i .56 dirw!Oiimp^mont to it. I Iwliovo tin* ' formiT will iK)t flo the ^ood intendrd, hut it will at leuMt not iiicn*a.sr thi; evil (riirtnl, which thu latter aNsuredly will. While on this siihjcct, I cannot help adding one ol>8ervation. The Lc^fpslatiire, infhH*nccd hy the iears of a decreasing home produce, lately returned to the measure o<' grantinf^ a bounty on the export of corn, aller having for- merly virtually taken it away ♦. 1 do not in- quire whether this was a wise measure or not; but surely those by whom it was adopted con- sidered it as an encouragement lo the British farmer, and that the British farmer stocxl in need of such encouragement. But if the state of our home produce was such as t<> itquire this forcible enlargement of its market, and if it still continues to need it, with what consis- tency can the same Legislature forcibly close another market to this produce, much more beneficial, I believe, than all the advantage it has reaped from the bounty ? Both of these expedients may be wrong, as I believe they are ; but it is quite impossible, I should think, that both can be right. . ♦ By the Corn Act of 1773. By this act, the bounty price was Idwered from 48s. to 44^. the quarter. The same rate was continued by the Corn Act 1701. It was again raised hy thf late act in 1804. V. !rj \. But it is said by mnw porsons timt the* rorn flispltici'd by tbt* present iiieiiHiire Trofn tbe ete witb tbe foreij^n growers, and wbolly prevent im|)ortn- tion, tbey will still less be able to do so when prices are furtber reduced by tbe stoppage of tbe distillery. Noboily surely iujagines tbat tlie small im|)ortation wbieb we at present need arises from our having no spare land to produce it ourselves. It is because, in t!r present circumstances of tbe country, ibrei/ru growers can supply us witb tbat small quanti- ty cheaper than our home growers can supply us :. And it is proper tbe foreign growei-s should do so, when tbe circumstances of the country naturally require it. It is clear, therefore, that if importation be no further burdened than at j)resent, tbe foreign growers will quickly dis- place our home growers to tbe whole amount set free from distillation, probably somewhat fiirtber. Here, however, the advocates of a restric- tive policy are at no loss ; but, according to 58 1 their usual mode, proceed to rectify one error by committing another. They liave a beautiful scale of gradations regarding home and foreign prices, wliereby they relieve nature of her cares ibr man, and tako into their own skilful hands the adaptation of his wants and supplies *. As prices are forced dmvn by the stoppage of the distillery, tlie duties on importation are forced vp, and the discouragement of our home grow* er is compiensated by the equal discouragement of the foreign grower. This plan, therefore, proceeds on the grand principle of the mer- cantile system, the advancing ourselves, not by a just protection of our own industry, but by repressing that of others. But, like all the feeble and meddling devices of that policy, it will produce the mischief without the good in- tended. The foreign grower will be injured, but the home grower will not be relieved in the same proportion. The free vent of distiU lation will not nearly be made up to him by all the ris^e of duties on the imported corn. He will raise less than he did ; less will be in^- ported than before, from the additional duty ; the prices on both will rise, and the general supply of the country will be diminislied. J- * In arranging this scale our landed intcicst hare too much in. terfcrcd, and have set an ill example, which is now turned against thcmschc'S.. » But even supposing, what will not lmppen» that, by the rise of* duty on importation, tlie whole com set free from the distillery is forced on the common market, and displaces foreign produce to that extent, so that the home grow- er suflf'ers nothing, and the general amount of subsistence raised in the country remains the same ; — what happens in the case of a deficient season^ There is no fund fit for human subsis- tence consumed in the distillery. The article used there is sugar, which cannot on any necessity ba turned to such a purpose. In so fais therefore^ as that fimd goes, the public is deprived of the resource altogether. The way in which the British farmer will bs enabled (if ever) to displace tlie foreign grow- er in the home market, and, perhaps, to turn the scale of exportation the other way, is not by giving him the vain encouragement of a boun- ty : still less by forcibly closing any of the vents to his produce, even ifj to make amends, the fo- reign grower is also repressed at the expence of the public ; — but by permitting him the frcQ disposal of his produce, protecting him in the ' exercise of all his rights, removing obstructions in his way, avoiding all further interference in his concerns, and leaving him to t;ie natural competition of the market. I think it is then pretty clearly made out, that the efi'ect ot' distilleries, in average years of I 60 importation, is to leaci to a progressive increase of home produce, and consequently to a pro- gressive diminution of import ; and that their suspension tends directly the other way. But it is said, that although this may be the case when there is no probability of the sudden in- terruption of supplies, yet, in the present strange and melancholy aspect of public affairs, when we must expect the certain suspension of supplies from abroad, it is advisable to throw the grain usually consumed in distillation, into the com-' mon market. This I shall now consider. II. The sudden failure of supplies from a- broad, may be occasioned either by a deficient season there, or by the shutting of their ports against us in war. With regard to both, I think it may be shewn in the Jirst place, That there is no such probability of either taking place, at present, as to call for any change in our • policy ; and secondlt/, If they should take place, at a future time, that the best way of preventing their bad consequences is to continue^ not to suspend, the distillation from grain, i*s a gene- , ral system. And even if the deficiency should happen during next season, that the forcible sus- pension of the distillery is unnecessary. With regard to a bad season in the exports ing countries, it is an accident which we cannot look forward to with certainty, any more than to a bad season at home. The argument for- merly applied to the one equally applies to the otiier. If we are to abolish distillation at pre- sent, on such a contingency, we may abolish it always. If the contingency does not happen when expected, we have not only taken a need- less step, but have deprived ourselves of the re- source which would have relieved us when it did happen. When the pressure is felt it is time to apply the remedy ; and even then, the less we interfere the better, as the remedy will apply itself. The chance of a failure of supplies from the shutting up of the ports of Europe and Ameri- ca, is one which, being chiefly in view at pre- sent, will require a somewhat fuller considera- tion ; although the very same principles apply to it as to the failure from a deficient season abroad or at home. When W8 look with such apprehension to the failure of foreign supplies, as many persons do at present, it is natural to inquire, in the first place, into the probability of that event happening, so as to give us any material dis- tress : and towards determining this point, the experience of the last nine months is peculiar- ly instructive. The whole ports of the Conti- nent, from which we usually received supplies of grain, have been under the controul of our il, Gi «nemies, as far as such controul can be carried, ever since the last harvest was rea[)ed. As far as the strict(»st emlmrufo could prevent it, there- fore, all supplies to this country have been stop- ped since that time. America, the only other iiounftry from whidi we receive supplies, has, more lately, adopted the same measure ; and, (although I still hope the returning reason of both countries will prevent a rupture so injuri- ous to both), the embargo there has been for some time enforced as strictly as the govern- ment could enforce it. Yet, what has been the e as unreasonable to take it on tire possibility of a failure of im- ports ; from which, it appears, we have a great- er security than we can have in regard to the season. " 'But in the second place, supposing that such deficiency of the usual importation sliould hap- pen to a considerable amount, is the imme- diate suspension of distilleries a likely way of guarding us agxiinst its effects ? The argimients formerly applied to cases of sudden deficiency from other causes are precisely applicable here. In as far as the chance of deficiency from abroad is increased by the present interruption, ■we have the more occasion for superfluous vents * See statement of imports, Note (F.)» and efidencc of Mr Claude Scott, p. 116-17 ; Mr Kent, p. l2l ; and Mr Mackenzie, p. 122-3-4* From this statement it appeairs that, during the year 1807, we hare received from foreign countries, notwithstanding the embargoes, pretty nearly the average supplies, which have reached us for some years past. From Holland 233,000 qrs. and ' *Ten from France 27,000 qrs. It is probable we shall receive as . much next year, notwithstanding tlie restrictions. If wc should ^itiot} m can do very well without itt ,,1;^. ... • ■(■ Mi (/■■ ■ HA ,to extend our produce at home. Tlie failure of foreign supplies may not l)e lelt th<; next year, but it may be felt the year after, or some liiture year. If it be felt the next year, we liave gained little, for we might liave resorted to the pre- sent measure when we saw the proof of the lui- hire in the rise of prices; or rather, we mi^ht have permitted the rise of prices to produce; the same el!cct naturally. But if the pressure be delayed till some after year, the resource will be lost, from our farmers havingdiminished their cultivation, distrusting a market so uncertain as the difcitillery becomes by such frequent inter- ference. ^^, , . , Indeed, in a general review of this subject of our foreign supplies, I think we shall fmd it too insignificant materially to influence any branch of our policy. When we consider the propor- tion which the average importation of late years, of 700,000 quarters of all sorts of grain, bears to our demands, we need have little apprehension of material suffering, were the whole of this supply withdrawn for the next year. It appears that, by the distilleries alone, 470,000 quarters of barley are used in Britain, which is only cal- culated as one-sixteenth of the whole barley crop*. Of course the brewery must consume a vast deal ♦ This, together with the 311,000 qrs. used in the Irish distil, lery, amounts to 781,000 qrs. which is 81,000 qrs. beyond the areragc importatiuQ of all sorts of grain. 65 il more. A little retrenchment of thej«e two modet of consumption, on the natural rii^c of pricei, would supply the whole deficiency. But when we look to the vast amount of corn consumed by superfluous horses, and the over-abundant feed- ing of other animals, we must be satisfied, that a very slight diminution in this quarter would, in an addition to the above, much more than over- balance the whole foreign supplies withheld from us. The deficiency, I should think, would scarcely be felt in the price of bread corn. It mighty how- ever, be slightly felt for one season ; and this would stimulate the farmer to a production that would probably, in one season more, fully supply our home demand, and even turn the balance of ex- port in our favour. On the other hand, this premature and unnecessary interference will give a shock to the agricultural products, otherwise advancing, and, we may be sure, will expose us to an increased importation at some future time. But, indeed, I think there is little probabili* ty that we shall be exposed even to the above trial. I have no doubt, from what has appeared this year, that we shall receive our usual supply from foreign states next year, and every future ' year, as long as we want and can pay for it. The above is no doubt on the supposition that the crop now growing proves equal to the ave»» f^ c; w 60 rage of the last few years, which may yet not he the case. There is an equal chance, however, that it will prove abundant as that it will fail. Its failure is a contingency which wc have no more reason to reckon u[)on now than at any other time. If that misfortune should come, wc must endeavour to palliate it, by retrenchment of every kind, the best way we can (for, as Dr Smith ob- serves, a real scarcity cannot be remedied, it can only be palliated); and the rise of prices will at once indicate the evil, and enforce the remedy. The difference made by all the foreign supplies which we ever did, or ever can receive, on a se- rious deficiency, is very trifling. It is known how little proportion the utmost importation of 1800 and 1801 bore to our demands. It is ujy- on our domestic agriculture that we must mainly depend ; and to tamper with it by closing its na- tural vents, and deranging its system, when called for by no visible need, is to stop its pro- gressive increase, and lead to that real calamity which now only exists in the imagination. Upon the state of produce in Ireland I have said nothing, as I have not the means of ascer** taining accurately the prices there for some years back. It is, however, 1 believe, admitted, that po general scarcity exists there at present, si^ch 07 as to justify the Auspcnsion of the distillery. And) indeed, Ireland in this, as in cfher in- terests, ought never to be considered separately from Great Britain. If a free commerce of grain between the two countries be established, a partial deficiency there will be relieved by the abundance elsewhere ; and should be no more a ground for legislative interference, than a partial deficiency in any district of this island. It appears, indeed, from tlie report, that the Committee is in doubt whether to recom- mend the prohibition of the distillery in Ire- land. Their doubts, however, are unconnect- ed with the view of scarcity, and merely pro- ceed on difficulties regarding the revenue. If the suspension be not extended to that country, a new host of restrictive expedients must be embodied, to prevent the passage of corn spirits from thence into this country. As to the importation of corn needed by our colonies, which, in case of a rupture with Ame- rica, must be supplied from elsewhere, I have added a state of its amount for the years 1804, 1805, and 1806*. But in the first place, I . think there is little fear of their being deprived of this supply ; and secondly, it is stated by Mr ii ' <\ m i:!! m ♦See Note (G.) m Blackburn to l>e his o|iinion, that Jamaica ut least might supply itself *• The whole argument trc!at«»d in the two fore- going Sections may then be summed up in tlie following manner. In a course of years of average supply, whe- ther entirely drawn from home produce, or partly imported, the effect of distillation, like that of every other natural and indefmite vent, is to lead to a progressive increase of home produce, followed, in the one case, by the ge- neral extension of population and comfort, in the other, by ' ' progressive diminution of im- port in the first place, and ultimately by the same extension of population and comfort. If the subsisting by importation, then, be consi- dered as an evil, the distillery is still, more in- dispensible in a country where that prevails, than in one which produces its own supplies ; because the home cultivation has the more need of encouragement, to enable it to contend with the importation, and at length displace it. But the benefit of the distillery* and other modes of superfluous consumption, though great in ordinary years, cannot be fully appreciated till the recurrence of scarcity ; whether proceed- , . * App. to Rep. p. 33. ft) iiig from deficient home produce — deficient foreign prcxlure — the interruption of war — or i'rom all these taken together. At such u teu- ton, the superfluous prmluce raised for the con- sumption of the distilleries, affords u fund of suhsistence, which will be set free i'or human food by the natural rise of prices ; or, when the necessity becomes very high, may be set free by Legislative interference. This last, how- ever, should, in general, be delayed till the whole effect had been nearly produced in the natural way. To encroach forcibly on this spare fund ut any season of moderate plenty, or easy prices, is to deprive the country of it when the necessity arrives, by the discourage- ment of cultivation, which will probably be to a much greater amount than in proportion to the produce which the vent itself consumed. There is at present no such deficiency, or like- lihood of deficiency, from any cause, as to in- ' ducc us to risk such discouragement. I have thus endeavoured to shew, that on general and permanent principles, whether re- garding this country as producing its own sup- plies, or importing a part of them, and whether during moderate years, or in the case of scar- city, the vent of the distillery to our home pro- duce is a great public benefit ; and it never rt I '0 can be for the public benefit tbat tbis viMit sliould be forcibly interrupted. \Ve are told, bowever, tlmt udinittin^ tb^ justice of all tbe above geiieml principieM, tbe present departure from tbeni is too tritlin^ and temporary, to be considered us an important exception. Admitting tbut tbe interest of tbe pubhc, and of tbe liome grower, will be injured by tbe stoppage of the distilleries, as fur as tbeir consumption goes, tbis consumption, it is suid, is comparatively trifling. Tbe wants of tbe colonists are urgent, and re(|uire immediate relief. The distilleries will afford them such re- lief; while tbe want of their vent will be little felt by tbe farmer. Whatever might be the ef- fect of u permanent suspension, the present ex- pedient will be but temporary ; and even dtiring its continuance; apowcr is proposed to be lodged with the King iu Council, to open the distilleries again, in case the price of barley fall too low. This view then gives up the question on general grounds, and, admitting that tbe public and the British growers both suffer from the suspension of distilleries, only maintains, that tliey should voluntarily submit to tbis suffering, for the re- lief of the distressed colonists. Tliis leads me to the third branch of the sub- ject, which I proposed to consider. SECT. III. JToivfar the present Distresses of the Colonial Pro* prietors alone, afford a just (ironnd for t/ic pro* posed iiuspension q) the Distilkrj/, This inquiry naturally divides itself into two hnmclies : First, Wliethcr the colonists should receive any relief? and, sccondli/. Whether the relief proposed by the sus|)ension of the distil* lery of corn be a [)roper ono \ I. In the outset of these remarks, I intimat- ed my opinion that the present distresses of our colonists had arisen Irom an over exten- sion of the cultivation of sugar, during the tem- porary unproductiveness of other islands ; that now, on the revival of more fertile soils, there is a quantity produced beyond the present de- mand of the world, and that our colonists ne- ver pan be effectually relieved, till they reduce thtjir cultivation ♦. The first question, then, * NothwUhstanding the respectable authority of the Report of the Committee of the Houoe of Commons, 24th July 1807, to the contrary, I cannot help adhering to this opinion. The chief cause of the colonial distresses assigned there, is the import to the continent from the hostile islands, by neutral Tessels. fiut this would nerer account for the difficulty, unless there were atk OTcr produce i for, during former years of pcacr, when the in* • 7i Huit iKituriiUy occurs is. What right the colo- nists have to pubhc rchef* of any kind, more than every otlier unsuccessi'ul speculator, vvlio is ruined by his own imprudence, or by unfore- seen accidents ? Whether or not it would be ibr the general advantage that relief were at- tempted in all such cases, is, I think, a question of lictle dt)ubt. It would not only be impossi- ble, but if possible would be wrong ; as it would be an endeavour to anticipate the great cor- rective which nature has provided ibr human improvidence, in the suflerings which fol- low it. Even in the case of misfortunes pro- duced by no imprudence, the same rule must hold ; for it cannot be otherwise. How far the growers of sugar can shew any grounds for making their case an exception iirom the ge- tercoiirse of th^; continent with its colonies must hare been ctill more free aud extensive, the present distresses were not com- plained of. It is further stated in the present Report, chat the existiug surplus of sugar from the old British colonies^ of 1,312.419 cwts., is not equal to the continental demand of the last peace. But it is to be considered, that on a peace ali the other islands would also find greater facility in sending their pro- duce to the continent, so that, probably, tery little of the abovo suiplus would find a vent there. The fact of the rapid increaso. of colonial produce, is indeed distinctly admitted by Mr Hibbert, a member of the present Committee, who was examined. App. p. 1()6'.7. The immense import of skTcs^ of late years^ is »!•• stated by other witnesses. 73 neml rule, and extending that relief to them which cannot be extended to others, it is noi my present business to inquire, even if* I had the propcT time and means of inquiry. Cases niciy occur, where, from motives of com- passion to the sufftrers, it may be excusable to extend such relief; but I doubt exceeding- ly, whether, in an enlarged view, it ever can be for tuc public advantage to infringe the ge- neral rule. 1 doubt if the public ever will suffer so much from the ruin of a few imprudent indi- viduals, as it will from the cost of relieving them, and from the encouragement which such relief gives to further imprudence. As already said, however, I do not wish to pusii general principles too far. Justice may sometimes relax from her rigid equality : And I have not the means of deciding, whether the case of the colonists may not be such as to justify some deviation in their favour. If their difiiculties have been in part occasioned by the public measures of the country, their claim is no doubt the stronger. At the same time, it is not to be forgotten, that the present distresses of the colonists will never be removed by any temporary expedient. If they depend on a general cause, (the over culture of their commodity), the only effectual remedy rests witlj themselves. If, by such i Ir ii 74 forced enlargements of their market as this, they be encouraged to persevere in their pre- sent growth, the evil will receive but a slight palliation ; and at the end of any given period of suspension of the distillery, the colonists will require the continuance of the same violent ex- pedient, as much as they do now, perhaps more. We are further told in the Report, of the ad- vantage derived from the colonies to the ship- ping and revenue. As to the shipping, it has probably partaken a little of the over-trade of its employers, and the allowing it again to find its own level, will do the country no seri- ous injury. As to the revenue [)aid on su- gars, it is equally plai?), that if we force that commodity by encouragement, we tax our- selves to enable it to pay this revenue ; or, in other words, pay it ourselves in the most ex- pensive form. As already said, iiowever, I am not now opposing the granting ^* assistance to the colonists as a general measure. II. But if such assistance is to be granted, it should surely be in a way the least unjust to- wards any particular class of the community, and the least injurious to the whole. The pro- jected mode of relief) by the suspension of dis- tilleries, is objectionable on both these grounds. 75 ^ It is unjust towards the class of our home cul- tivators, and inexpedient in regard to the pub- lic interest. It is unjust towards our home culiivators, in laying that burden on them, which, if borne, should be borne by the whole couimunitv. It is a positive restriction on their industry, in fa- vour of the colonial industry. Nay, tbe injus- tice is not merely in laying the burden on the limited class of cultivators, (though the whole will suffer), but in laying its immediate weight on a small number of that class the groNM rs of barley. This hardship is great at any time, inasmuch as it forces into a diftierent mode ol culture, those soils which are best titted lor that produce ♦ ; and it is peculiarly aggra> ated in being imposed, without pre\ious warning, at this season of the year, when the barley crop is already sown, or the land so prepared for it, as not to be conveniently turned to any other produce. But it is said, the whole amount of grain used in distillation is small, and the loss to the British farmer will be trifling. It is further * '* I consider the cultivation of barley as almost necessary to the existence of Norfolk." Evid. of Mr Nathaniel Kent, App. p. 118. The impossibility of turning barley laud so well to any other culture, is also stated by Mr Cox and Mr Henning^ p. 149, Mr Elmar, p. 153, and Mr Wakefield, p. 109. 76 said, that the measure is tcm|x>rary, and will be attended with no serious inconvenience. With regard to tiiis loss, I cannot correctly speak. The quantity of barley annually con- sumed in distillation in Britain is stated, in the Report, at 470,000 quarters, or about I -1 6th of the whole. Tlie loss to the farmer, even from an immediate want of sale to the above amount^ is not inconsiderable. But it is to be observei^ that this argument cuts two ways. If the wanto this vent be a trifling loss to him, it will be but a triflinp' advantage to the colonists ; and the Smaller the burden is, the less difficult will it be for the public to relieve it in some other way. However small it is, it must bear much harder when laid on one limited class of the com- munity, than if equally imposed on all. I can see no reason why such a tax, if necessary, should be wholly borne by our home growers. Uneqral taxes, even for tlie support of the state, are always to be regretted ; but they become somewhat more intolerable, when imposed for the relief of a small class of individuals, whose distresses arc at least a presumption of their im- prudence. However, this is a point wh oh the British cultivators best know themselves. If they consider the stoppage of the distilleri. s as no hardship, I am satisfied. 11 they feel no grievance, they will not complain. li\ on th« 77 ** other ImncI, as I rather suspect, it will he a very serious evil to the cultivators in general, and to the growers of harlcy in particular, they should, r think, take all legal means to oppose it *, 1 have endeavoured to shew, that in sup- porting their rights, and their interests, on the present occasion, they will promote the inte- rests of the public. But it is not the immediate loss that is the chief evil in the present measure. The future injury to agriculture, from the derangement of the system of cropping, and the want of a sure market, are far more important. Security in his market, is the great stimulus to the farmer's exertion ; and if this be infringed, he must aban- don his culture, in the prospect of that market, altogether. The mischiefs of a fluctuating po- licy towards any branch of industry, are perhaps more than can be easily calculated. This is the great objection to the present suspension, as a temporary measure. It is not so much the loss which the farmer will suffer for this one year; as the gejieral loss to cultivation, from his never being sure, when, or for what reason, the measure may be repeated. In this particular view, it is even worse than if the the stoppage w ere permanent ; for in that case * Oa tiuB piowt, tke testimony of all the agricultural geatlemen, examvat:. before the Committeej is mniform. 78 the farmer would change his system of culture, and endeavour to push a steady market some other way ♦. ' Neither does the palliative of lodging a dis- cretionary power with the King in Council, to permit the distillation of grain, at all remedy this fundamental ohjection. It only introduces the principle of interference and fluctuation into that market still more completely than before. Indeed, a moment's reflection must convince us that this argument, of the measure being but temporary, is one which must apply always when the same thing is in agitation. No civi- lized nation, I suppose, ever enacted that the distilling of corn should always be illegal. Even France, who has been so justly censured for her weak policy, in regard to the corn trade, did not prohibit export at all times. Her eiTor only lay in resorting to that measure too light- ly and fre(|uently, and in listening to the vain alarms of future want, upon every trifling rise of prices. It was from this fluctuating system, ra- ther than Ironi j.it rmanent discouragement, that her agriculture suffered. But with all her folly, T doubt if the ever resorted to the proliibition of export, >v hen not in ibrce, as we are now called u|>oii to suspend the distillery, at a time • " It is," says Mr Wakefield, " the bane of a fanner to b« «^ driren out of his neural course*" App. to Rep. p. 113. • 79 of actual abundance, atid without any certain prospect of future deficiency. I doubt if she ever did so for the mere convenience of her colonial proprietors, without want being either felt or reasonably expected at home. Within the last forty years, it appears, that the distilling of corn has been suspended only twice before this time ♦ : — The suspensions, I am sorry to observe, are both lately. The re- lief obtained by the public, on those occasions, was probably trifling ; but the discouragement to agriculture, from the frequency of the mea- sure, may be both important and permanent. On those occasions, however, there was some apology for it, firom the public necessities actu- ally felt, and the market of the distillery na- turally declining of itself At present, there is no such excuse; and the evils of the fluctuating system are continued and augmented f . * From 10th July 1795 to Ist Feb. 1797, and from 8th Dec. 1800 to l8t Jan. 1802. App. to Rep. p. 205. + The fullowing observations of Mr Young, when speaking of the TJne culture in France, are equally just and important : ** There are t>io tcAtumn why vines are so often found in rich '^ plains ; the first is, the export of wheat being either prohibited *' or allowed with such irregularity, that the farmer is never sure ** of a price ; but the export of wino and brandy has never been /' stopped for a moment. The effect of such a contrast in policy << must hnvc been considerable, and I saw its influence in ever^r 80 On the whole, when I consider the importance of a flourinhing agricuhure to the prosperity, and even existence of a .state — the dependence of all other branches of industry upon it for their support or extension — its influence on our social happiness, as well as our public strength — the preference which our laws have so often given to less important branches of industry — the many obstructions which naturally or artificially retard its progress*-— and, I may add, the general charac- ter of that class of men who arc peculiarly con- nected with itr— when I consider these things, I am disposed to regard our agricultural industry with a sort of superstitious reverence ; to think it should not be lightly tampered with, to serve oc- casional views; and to consider any unnecessary encroachment on it as loosening one of the foun- dations of our strength, which cannot be even slightly displaced, without a shock to the stability of the whole. But if such superior estimation of agriculture be a prejudice in feeling, I carry it no such length *' part of France, by the new vineyards already planted, or begun '' to be planted, on corn lands, while the people were starving for <^ want of bread ; of such consequence in agriculture, is a steady ^^ unvarying policy. The fact is the more striking in France, <' because the vine culture is very much burdened in taxation, *^ but always possessing a free trade, it thriTei." Trav. in France, Volt I. p. 388, 81 in priiclicc. I ,^ LL L2| HI U 116 ^MM, §21 UA lU 122 r 1^ |2.0 m HiotDgrapiiic .Sciences Corporation A ^ <^ ■> NOTES. Note (A.) p. 16, " The imporlance of a country producinjf taenttj-five bushels " per acre instead of efghfeen, is prodigious ; but it is an idle ** deception to speak o( tzcenhj-five, for the superiority of Eng- *^ lish spring corn (barley and oats), is doubly s^reatcr than that " of wheat and rye, and would justify me in proportioning the ^' corn products of England, in general, compared \vith those of " France, as 28 to 18; and 1 am well persuaded, that such a " ratio would be no exaggeration. Ten millions of acres, pro- *' duce more corn than Jif teen millions, consequently a territory ** of one hundred millions of acres more than equals another of *^ one hundred and Jijty millions. It is from such facts that we ^* must seek for an explanation of the power of England, which '* has Tentured to measure itself with that of a country so much *' more populous, extensiye, and more favoured by nature, as ^* France really is ; and it is a lesson to all governments what. ** ever, that if they would be powerful, they must encourage the '^ only real and permanent basis of power, agriculture. By en. *' larging the quantity of the products of land in a nation, all " those advantages flow which have been attributed to a great '^ population, but which ought with much more truth to have *^ been assigned to a great consumption, since it is not the mere *^ number of people, but their ease and welfare, which constitute ** national prosperity. The difl'erence between the corn pro. *' ducts of France and England is so great, that it would justify *^ some degree of surprise, how any political writer could ever *' express any degree of amazement, that a territory naturally so '' inconsiderable as the British Isles in comparison with France, '^ should ever become equally powerful ; yet this sentiment, *' founded on mere ignorance, has been very common. With '^ such an immense superiority in the produce of corn, the mor« *^ obvious surprise should have been, that the resources of Eng. 86 ** land, conniarcd ivilh those of Franco, were not yet more ded* ** giTc." Young's Travels in France, vol. 1. chap. 4. p. 343. The aboTQ considerations seem to mo perfectly just, and I think they admit of an important application to the present cir- cumstances of our country. Such is now the condition of FiU. rope, that whether we have peace or war, we must continue in a posture of jealous defence for a lonf^cr period than any human prospect can calculate. We must dedicate a large proportion of our numbers to the protection of the state, or we cannot ex. ist in any tolerable safety. In considci'ing the several nations of £urope, I imagine it Mill be found, that most of them have al- ways maintained, and still do maintain, a much greater armed force, in proportion to their * numbers and resources, than we have ever done. I believe the proportion of their population, which they have maintained in arms, has been uniformly larger •than ours ; and yety if there be any truth in the principles I have tated, we should be able to maintain at least as large a propor. tion of our people in arms as any nation in tlie world ; and bet- ter appointed and supplied* Let it, therefore, be no excuse for our failing to adopt suffi~ cicnt measures of defence, now when all is at hazard, that we cannot support a larger militarv and naval establishment. Other nations have made greater exertions to serve the purposes of con- quest and ambition than we have yet made for our immediate safety. That safety, I fear, is only to be preserved by the exten- sion and improvement of a regular force. I am not free from the old constitutional jealousy on this subject (though I think that has been extreme) but there is now only a choice of evils, and we have at present more to fear from the standing armies of other states than from our own. If we outlive the present storm, the vigour of our system will renovate itself: What w« have now to provide against, is the risque of perishing in the commotion: Some general plan of armament subsidiary to the regular force, and calculated to keep up its supplies, such as that lately recom* mended by Lord Selkirk, I should think also highly i^Tisablc. . Note (B.) p. 21. '^ Do you think, that we could at present spare the market ^* tliat our distillery affords without injuring our agriculture ? — \t *^ seems to me, tl^t it is impossible to s))are it without a direct '^ injury to the agriculture of the kingdom ; for though the '^ amount of the distillery has been itated at only one sixteenth^ 87 (( 41 (( « " ntill it well deserves the attonfion of the ConuniHoo, that th« ** inoHtabIc writtT on thf siibjvct of corn, ovpreswly statts the in. ** finite cuii^eqiience resuldng from ho Hinall a proportion, n-la- ** tive to the growth, as one thirt^-secoml. He Ntates what ho " conceives to bt5 the growth of corn, and proportions it to th« greatest exportation ever lino\>n, as well as a smaller cxporta. tion. In one case he mentions, tho amount being only one thfrhj -second part of tho growth, and in another if I recollect right a thirh/.fourfh, and yet he draws the conclusion with some expression of surprise, of what prodigious consequcnco to the agriculture uf tho kingdom, that small export has been. Now, b^ a fair parity of reasoning, we may take the converse ** of tho proposition, and sup))ose tho deprivation of one sixteenth *^ would, on (he other hand, beattcnded with very great and con- <* sidcrablo consequence." Evidence of Mr Ar. Vouug. App* to Rop. p. 104* Note (C). p. 26. With regard to tho inclosnre and improyement bf wastes, t think the rule 1 have laid down in the text is the only safe and proper one ; namely, that it ought to be left entirely to indi- vidual interest and exertion, and neither :*ncouraged nor repres. sod by the legislature. All unnecessary obstacles to it, however, should be removed ; and these, by the present law of England, are perhaps rather too great, from the ex))ence of a direct applica- tion to Parliament for every Inclosnre, and the opportunity which this gives to ignorant or obstinate individuals to thwart the measure. By the law of Scotland, the division of common property among circumjacent proprietors, according to their re- spective interests, is a statutory right, which may be enforced hy any of them before the courts of justice. If a general inclosure bill went no further than to give some such facility in Englaud, it might probably be of advantage. Mr A. Young, has of late years (not very consistently with his former sentiments) urged the improvement of wastes, or til- lage of grass lands, by some sort of legislative encouragement. But supposing such encouragement raised so absurdly high as to force the improvement of wastes to any material extent, what would be the consequence ? tho remaining farmers must be dis. couraged, in exact proportion to the qutintity of grain newly raised, and the fall of prices thereby occasioned, and they, uf course, will give up cultivation to that extent. The culture will thus only be transferred from better land to worse, and the same quantity of grain will continue to be raised, but at a greater ex.- h 88 pencf. Nor docs Mr Younci's plan of raisini; pu(ii(H on (he new fi^rnumlH, in the least alter the qucHtiun ; for as the consiiinp. tion \i transferred from >vheut to potatoes, the demand fur whcul will l)c lesnened, the price will fall, and its culture be dimininhedf 18 effectually, and to the same extent, as if the now produce had been wheat itself. By no such plan of forced encoura^^onient ran the quantity of subsistence be increased ; because, even if the plan succeed, in forcinfi a new production, it will equally diini. nish the old, and even in a greater proportion than it adds io tho new. Mr Young, when under a Tcry unnecessary and prenmturo alarm on the state of our importation a few months ago, ren'*wc(l his exhortations to inc. easing home produce, in a letter publislieil in Cobbett's Register of March 5th, in which he speaks as if tlio existence of the people of Britain depended wholly on the stores from the Baltic ; and as if the want of supplies from thence, for a single season, would actually starve this country. The probability^ of this consequence I have considered elsewhere ; but supposing that, in conformity with his advice, a large produce could havu been immediately raised from waste or grass lands, it seems clear that this, for the next season, would occasion a glut of corn in the home market, exactly in the same way as the stoppas;c of the distillery, which would reduce the farmers to retrench their for. mer cultivation to the amount of the new ))roduce, or the pro. duce usually distilled. In the same way, the temporary supply occasioned by this forced production, would be no better than the temporary supply occasioned by stopping the distillery ; whoever, therefore, urged the one as an immediate or temporary resource, rannot consistently oppose the other. Both equally lead to a transitory supply, and an ultimate discouragement to agriculture. But though both arc equally wrong in principle, they are not equally so in practice ; for one of them fortunately (the forced production) cannot be carried into effect; the other (the forced repression) unfortunately can. Mr Young will not, however, I imagine, have recourse to this argument, or defend his plan on the score of its being impracti. cable, and therefore harmless ; consequently, when the Commit. teo press him on the subject of his proposal, I think he is re. duced to a complete dilemma. Supposing the terrible failure of foreign supplies to take place next year, which both he and the Committee are agreed upon, he is asked what will be the ditl'erencc between increasing the immediate supplies by a forced produc- tion, and increasing them by the forced retrenchment of distilla. tion ? He replies, that the culture of zcastes mil not much affect the growth of barley. But what is this to the purpose in regard to a proTision ageinst scarcity^ and for replacing the deficient m lupplies of next kea^on from the continent ? It \n tlie j^mrnil $u \u ply of HubsiHtenro that ih hrrc in qiioHtion, not th» relative itmouitt of 8o immaterial a produce an burlcy. TLu increase or drcrcisu of barley) as a peculiar crop, Hupponing the K^'ucriil .supply of corn to continue the Himo, Ih alike iinuiaterial to the general farm. Ing interest, and to the public. In short, it is (piite obvious, that as far as regards the temporary supply of the public, au'l the in. jury to the farmer, the two modes of proceodin}?, b\ forcing pro- duction, or 9UKpendini> the (iistillcry, supposing them equally practicable^ would be precisely similar in their ellects *, * I here insert that part of Mr Young'* evitiencc before the Committee« above alluded to. " Do you consider that the present state of the country, and the doubt- ** ful reliance that is to be placed on foreign markets, call for a prompt ** adoption of the remedy against scarcity, which you have proposed, ** namely, the encouragement of potatoes, and the cultivation of waste ** lands ? — / certainly dot I think every hour that is lost it much to be re- gretteJ, " You have stated that the exclusion of grain from the dibtillcry would injure by lowering the price of grain ; do you mean that this elTcct would be produced by the additional quantity that would he thus thrown into the market ? — Not by the additional quantity thrown into the market, but by the demand for the quantity already in the market being with- drawn,"— Which it is to be observed, in the present view, u exactly the same thing. « Do you mean that the proportion of demand would thereby become " less than the proportion of supply ? — Certainly ; as far as the quantity '* amounts to that consumed by the distillery. " Would not the same cfTect upon this proportion be occasioned, if, the " consumption remaining the same, an additional supply of equal amount *' were to be brought into the market ]— Certainly I conceive it would. ** In what respect then will the effect on the market, which is pro- duced by saving the consumption of a given quantity of corn, differ from that wmch is produced by introducing into the market an equal quan- tity, in addition to the former supply, by cultivating the waste lauds ? — The culture of the ivaste lands ivou/d not have a great effect on the im- mediate production of barley. The great effect would be on the pota- toes, and on the food of cattle, and on the production of other grain ; but probably least of all on barley. If the culture was principally to in- crease the production of barley, it would operate exactly in the manner ** alluded to, saving the consumption of the people employed in such cul- " tivatioq." Which last exception, by the way, is without foundation, as the people employed on the wastes would just consume as much, were they left at their old occupations. App. to Rep. p. 107,-8. I may here mention a fact stated by Mr Young, in his evidence, (p. 105), which he justly considers as hardly credible, namely, that the consumption of malt, in Britain, is now 'ess tham it was ninety years ago, when the po- pulation has increased in the proportion of 9 to fi. The rate of increase in 4( (t l( « <)0 I Tho ahuvo argument, however^ (IioiikIi it may he umuI a^ainHt Mr Young pernonally, hait no force ogainHt (lu; causif which hn «MpouiioM. It atiordn no ground for Hlopping the diHtilh'rioN, with thoM) who rqually diiuipprovc of that measure, and of the rain attempt of forcing production ; uiid who ur» ncnsiblUf that so far from any deficiency, there is at present rather an abundance in the country, and no certain proB|)cct of want for a future Ht^Non. For my own part, I neither think the failure of foreign Nuppiiex likely to hap|M!n, nor, if it did happen, that it would l)c attended wldi serious Inconrenience to us. Out Mr Young, considering inch failure both important, and liliely to be immediate, and urging strong measures to supply the deficiency, must, I thinlt, find it Very diincult to show any objection to the present measure of stopping the distillery, which will not equally apply to his own. Indtied it is clear, that as a sudden temporary resource, (if that were now wanted) the stopiuigc of the distillery, as being a much more clfcctual measure than the other, would atford an immediate flupply much more surely. Tts being so elfectuaty however, is, in another view, the grand objection to it. But Mr Young may say, his plan is not calculated for an itnmc. diate, but for a progressive and future effect. This plea is not ▼ery consistent with the urgency of the occasion, as he has him self represented it. I am willing, however, to allow, that for a course of time it is 'ess objectionable than a continued suspension f)f a vent to produce; and that, for two reasons, 1st, Because, as above mentioned, the one cannot be carried into effect, where. as the other can. The encouragement is incttectual, and there- fore only useless ; the restraint is effectual, and therefore noxi- ous. 2dly, Because, even if the culture of wastes could be for- ced a certain leii;^th, although the former tillage will assuredly sutler as far as the new is forced, it will suffer little further, and the average supplies will remain nearly the same. The place of growth will bo only changed, the amount not diminished. Where- as, by the suspension of distilleries, a certain quantity of produce is forced from the face of the earth, and in case of a bad season, there is less resource for retrenchment. The operation of Mr Young's plan wculd be similar to the exclusive introduction of co- lonial grain into our distillery instead of sugar ; with this differ- ence, that in the one case the grain would be raised at home, in the other raised at a distance. In the question of scarcity, the plan the population I fully subscribe to» but the decreased use of malt is indeed hardly credible. Tlie estimate is founded on the Excise duties, which, no doubt, seem to establish the fact. But I cannot help suspecting that some error from evasions or other causes must lurk ia the calculation. 01 of distilling from nugar Is Hh* same thing as prohibiting diitllla. tion altogether : fur Nugar can on no necessity hv turned to hu- man Huhtiinteilco. Mr Young on former nrranlons has not oTcrlookrd the follj of gofornmant iuh^rfrring in the ooncerns of agriculture, either to encourage direct, or restrain *. If he had never departed from this principle, he would have avoided the inconsistencies he has now fallen Into. All that agriculture needs, or ought to obtain, is equal protection ; and they who support it this length, and no further, will never be piiz/led with the clashing interests of the farmer and the public, nor fall into contradiction, either in argu. ment or In practice. I hat4 already ventured to remark on the uncertainty of Mr Young*! general principles in regurd to political ccconomy, and I think the above particulars, as well as some other parts of his late conduct, afford a new proof of it. He was formerly con. ▼inced of the impropriety of all interference in agriculture, and he ntfw urges encouragements to production. Ho formerly shew- ed, hy the most strilcing observations on fact, the danger and misery of an over population ; and he now attacks the pro- fotind and humane philosophy of Mai thus, who has su(|;ge8t. e4 the only means of ever preventing that danger, and that nflsery +. Mr Young seems once to have reached very near tho t^uth, and now when it is more fully shewn, he has unaccount- ibly lost it again. Ho found the path by night, which he now misses in the open day. Such, however, will be the case with all who value themselves in being practical men, and reject tho lessons of sound speculation. While 1 thus, however, observe with freedom on what I con. ceive to be Mr Young's errors, I willingly boar testimony to his merits. Indeed the frequent use I have made of his authority, shews how highly I esteem it. When we consider his long and active exertions, the mass of important facts which he has col- lected, the difllculties with which he had to struggle in his in- quiry, and the perseverance with which he overcame them, I think we must allow, that there are few individuals who havo better claims on the gratitude of society. I should be sorry, indeed, that any thing which I have said should be considered as disrespectful to his character. * ** A populous and rich country can never want bread to eat, but from « the fault of its government attempting to regulate and encourage what *< can flourish by absolute freedom only.''^ Trav. in France, VoL I. p. 359. t See Mr Young's observations on a legal provision for the poor. An* nals of Agriculture, vol. 41. p. 208. and 1Mb: Malthus's appendix to the last c<)iUon oi his work. Oi ! I rannot ronrliidti thin note wUlioiit alludiii)^ to Mr F.dward WiiVrflvId, Mthonc loUvm, hi (!ol>h(), 1 Mould not infer (an lomu of the econuniiNtn did) that in countricN fit for producing viiu'N, that produce should Ih* dlwcouraged, for the purpose of making the people raise com, and drink heer. Mi- Yoiing's remarks on the impolicy of such atteinptn are perfectly just ; I only urge the consideration, to shew that our inability to raitK^ vines in Britain possesites this advantage, that more corn in proportion to the population is gro\«n and consumed, and of courNi> a greater security ir; preservi*(l against scarcity. Travels in France, Vol. I. c. 10.— Vol. II. c. 10. The same sentiments he expresses in another place: '< In the ** arrangement of courses, that conduct which is suitable to an ** individual is pro|)er for a nation. It rarely answers to a man ** to change his purpose in the cultivation of his farm, on account *'^ of some transitory ex|K>ctation of a price. JIo ought to sovr ** his ground with the plant best adapted to his general views, and to the state of his land, and not swerve from his purpost; on the s|)eculation of any particular view. And, in like iimuiier, it will always be for the national benefit that the lands should be sown with w hatever crop is most suitable to them, and whoso product will pay best when valued in money. A populous and rich country can never want bread to cat, but from the fault of its goTernincnt attempting to regulate and encourage what can flourish by absolute freedom only. The inhabitants of such a country will always command wheat, because they ** can atl'ord to pay for it ; and her own farmers will never fail of *' raising that, or any other produce, in any quantity demanded, ^^ provided they are not impeded by injudicious laws and rest.. *' tions. In these principles, it is necessary to consider all pro. *' ducts as equally beneficial, provided they may be equally con. *' verted into money.'' Trarels ia France, Vol. I. p. 369. <( vi>ani, and on all thr dilit*rt>nt imttn of Itraiii, «Utk>ri» %vvy littlr. i'hc ate rage* , mtrulad'tt in the Knport of thi* C!omn.Utif, for mrh year is 700,0(X) quartrrii. From thin It woiiltl ap|)mr that then* in no HUt h progri'ititUc incnntM of iinportK into thin country jk nornv pcoplu inuiKinn. The %»lioli* amount is very tritlUig in roni|)ariNon with our houiM |)roducf, and, I should suppoHi*, dot's not nearly equal thn su|wr« tluoui consuuiption of avi*rjg« years. Wcru wo, therefore, to ho wholly de|)riTi>d of fonign HU|>|)lies for next, or any futun^ mim. son, wo Nhould proltahly fe<>l it very little. Hut it ap|H'ars, tlut during the whole of 1M07, we hare received our usual quantity, rhielly from Holland, Germany, and America, and |)artl) even from France. The dilierent nations who have sunplied us, and the proportions of their "upply, during 1807, are exhibited in tho following Table, taken from the lleport as above* Denmark, Russia, Poland, Prussia, Germany, Holland, France, United States, Other foreignCountries Total, .... Wheat, qri. 10,424 6,709 7,o:i9 4,426 3,370 11,416 27,008 108,696 4,503 Flour, cwts. 0 109 2,069 493,909 1,140 182,668 497,231 Barley, qrs. 407 301 2,151 108 78 2,903 Oats, qr*' 10,760 130,365 222,246 98 1,384 426,904 The summation is not perfectly accurate, as I have neglected the odd bushels. The above, however, are the gross imports, from which must be deducted the ciports from this country during the retotivQ yearsy to give the actual balance of import* m Note (G.) p. 67.) State of the amount of Importation of Gruin^ Flour, and Meal^ into cur fVeit India Colonies, from all parti, ftpcrifjfing the amount Imported from /?ri7ai>i*— Taken from Appendix to lleport, p. 188. 1804. 18U5. 1806. From other Countries^ From Great Britain and Ireland Total, i«'rom other (jountries, From Great Britain and Ireland, . . . Total, !• rom other Countries, From Great Britain and Ireland, . . . Total, ram. G qr». 55,197 75,889 48,766 29,776 78,531 Flour Sc Meal, 679,099 23,535 602,634 437,729 37,006 474,784 406,067 42,905 447,962 %< f.f^'lf^ ♦*■'•'* he to )0 (5 [4 19 )& i4 >7 )5 f2 APPENDIX ■ ; t. 9jpori from the Committee on the D'utillation of Su^ar and MoLusej, Ordered to be printed 13M Aprilt 1808. DISTILLATION OF SUGAR AND MOLASSES. The Committee appointed to inquire> and report, how far, and under • what Circumitancei, it may be practicable and expedient to confine the Distilleries of the United Kingdom to the use of Sugar and Mo- lasses only ; and also what other Provision can be made for the Relief o( the Growers of Sugar in the British West India Colonic ; and to report the same, with their Observations and Opinion thereupon, from time to time, to the House : — and who were empowered to re- port the Minutes of the Evidence taken before them ; H AVE, pursuant to the orders of the House, examined the matters to theni referred ; and have agreed to the following REPORT. Your Committee felt it their first duty to examine into the continuance of that severe pressure upon the holders of West India property, and those connected with it, which was so clearly proved before your Conmiitte| of the last session of Parliament. For this purpose your Committee called before them several gentlemen connected with those islands, and experienced in the colonial trade \ these gentlemen fully confirmed the evidence given last year, and proved lo the conviction of your Committee, that the continuance of the pressure has materially added to its weight. It appears from accounts laid before your Committee, that the price of sugar has greatly diminuhed since the year 1799 1 the average price of 1800, was 65s. per cwt. ; the average of 1807, was 348. per cwt. both ex- clusive of duty. In consequence of that depreciation, and of the increased expence attendant on tne cultivation of t.. . article, the situation of the sugar planter has been rapidly declining, till at leneth the value of the produce is, on an average, bare}y eqUal to the charges of production, leaving no rent for the land, and no interest for the large capital rmployed upon it. It appears that tKe obstacles oppoted to the exportation of^ colonial pro- duce, added to its forced accumulation in the market from the conquered co- lonies, haye been the principal causes of its depreciation. While the planter hm remained subject to a monopoly in favour of British produce and navi- G 88 gatlotit his exclusive poAnession of the home market hat been interrered with : and, while the British consumption has hecn increasing, the efforts lie has made to meet it have turtfed entirely to his owm disadvantage. It appears that the planter cannot so witndraw his capital, dimmish the extent, or change the object ot his cultivation, as to procure for himself any adequate rvlief ; and, without LegisUtive intervention, there is no prospect of his being extricated from his distress. Annuitants dependant on Wert India property for their provision, have, in many instances, been totally deprived of that income. The increased price of all the usual articles of supply, added to the de- preciation of colonial produce, has denrived a great proportion of the own- ers of the resources wherewith to furnish the accustomed stores of food and clothing for their negroes, and of duly providing for their superin- tendance ; and, if relief be not speedily applied, these stores must oe ac- tually diminished or withheld, whereby much painful privation will be suf- ferea by the negroes, and discontent, if not commotion among them, may be seriously apprehended. In the Report of the Committee of the Assembly of Jamaica, it is stated, that there are one hundred and fift ^n sugar estates respecting which suit* are depending in the Court of Chancery ; from which, and from other evi- dence, it appears that foreclosures of securities on property are become un- usually frequent in that islandi which will deprive many owners of their estates for qums quite disproportioned to their value. Another effect from this cause will be, much individual distress to the negroes, who, in conse- auence of such foreclosures, will in many instances be separated from their ntmilies. From all these considerations, your Committee submit, that the case of distress thus made out, is as urgent as it is severe ; that tlierefore it is not only necessary to adopt measures of permanent relief, but also such as may have an early operation, and apply to the coming crop, in order to prevent the accumulation of distress that will otherwise arise^ before any such ul- ter«r regulations can take effect. Tmm the Accounts annexed to this Report, it appears* THAT the average importation of Sugar into Great Britain, for Cwts. 5 years, ending with 1785, was - - - Cwts. Deduct, exported 1 f to Ireland - I • - j 157,317 » Annual Average < Do. do to other j I 157, Farts - 314,780 ,513 Averare annuid Balance remaining for the Consumption of Britain - - - - - Add, quantity exported, as above, to Ireland Annual Balance remaining for the annual consumption of the Empire - •• - - The above is exclusive of the small direct import Into Ireland (fom the West Indies* l,57d,5S7 314,780 1,264,807 157,217 1,422,024 !■ ■ •(( * v.H, THAT the ATcrage importation uf Sugar into Great Britain foi 18U1I and 1803 (being u ycari of peace) waa - Cwta. Deduct, average export to Ireland 167,267 >AnnuaI average Do. do. to other \ pklta m . J . . ^ 1,702,758 - Annual average balance remaining for consumption Britain .... Britain ... Add, average annua] importation into ) ... Ireland (direct) for the same period ) ' Deduct} export from Ireland . - 1, 1,870,095 of ,224 l,66(i 169,5581 Add, quantity exported to Ireland, as above 1 67|267 r ' - Average annual balance remaining for the consumption of the Empire ... THAT the average importation of Sugar into Great Britain, for 4 years, from 1804 to 1807, both inclusive, (being 4 years of war) was .... Deduct, average annual export to Ireland 174,166 ) . ... .„. Do. do. to other Parts 971,758 3 ****^»''''^ Annual average balance remainiksg for consumption of Britain Add, average annual importation into Ireland direct from the West Indies, for 3 years, from 1 804 to 1 806, both inclusive (the return for 1807 not having been yet received) Deduct export from Ireland 135,390 "J 462) 134,928 Add, quantity exported to Ireland, as above - 174,166 Average annual balance remaining for the consumption of the Empire - •> THAT the quantity of Sugar imported into Great Britun, dur- ing the year ending 5th January 1808, was, viz. From the old British West India ) _ _-_ .« - Isbnds - - - js^osgjWS from the cAiquered Colonies, viz.'l Trinidad, Demerara, St Lucia, >>. 581,881 Surinam, and Tobago - • 3 Deduct, export to Ireland -.. - -'933,1081 to other Parts « • 1,130,534 J ► - Cwts. !,7-ll,4tf& 1,870,025 1,871,461 336,825 2,208,286 3,473,488 1,145,924 2,327,564 309,094 2,636,658 3,651,684 1,363,643 100 Talance remaining for the consumption of Britain Add, quantity exported to Ireland* aa above • Balance remaining for the consumption of the Empire) exclusive of the direct import into Ireland ABSTRACT OF THE ABOVE STATEMENT. *\ Cmti. 8,988,044 Sn.'MOft Vai,!.)!! Annual average for S years 1 ending with 1785 - ) Annual average for 2 years, viz. 1802 & 1803 - - Annual average for 4 years, ' viz. 1804, 1805, 1806, & 1807 - Imported from the old Bri- tish Islands 3,069,805 Do. from conquered Colo- nies - - 561,881 Annual average Itnportation into' Great Britain. Ireland. 1,579,537 n,741,48«171,224 3,473,488 3,651,686 135,890 Total Im. portation 1,579,5.17 3,912,710 3,608,878 3,651,686 Average annual Exporta- tion to Foreign Parts. 157,513 1,704,424 972,220 1,130,.'!34 Balance remain- ing for the Consumption of Great Britain and Ireland. 1,422,024 cwts. 2,208,286 do. 2,636,658 do. 2,521,152 do. THE preceding Statement shews, thift the quantity of Sugar annually consumed in Great Britain and Ireland, upon an average of 4 years, ending with 1807 indusive, was ... 3,636»658 And that the average export from the United Empire, dur- ing the same period to foreign parts, was • > 972,220 , That the importation, for the year ending 5th January 1808, not including the quantity imported into Ireland direct was -- -- 3,651,68S Of which the quantity exported to foreign partS) was - 1,130,534 Leaving, for home consumption - . • 2,521,152 V Should there be no export to the Continent in the course of 1808, a quantity equal to what was exported during 1B07, as above stated, will be thrown upon the market f9r home consuqpption ; to which must be added* tlie Quantity of sugar which may be expected from the Danish Islands ; and the consequence of such a glut must necessarily be, a very considerable deduction in the price of sugar, unless an additional vent shall be fOund at home to take oft ths surplus. •4 101 'emain< the ition of :ain and fid. \ cwts. i do. I do. do. THE following caU Illation »hews tlie Incrrasrd (^onuuinption of sugar lu the Hritidh empire within the laitt V'J year* ; aUo, a comparative sttalcnu'iii of the actual production of the British colonien with British consumption, and of the surplus production of the British colonies ; with the demand ti)r ■ugar at the British market for the mc of the continent, durujg the short interval of peace : Annual consuniption of sugar In Great Britain and In*land, upon an average of 5 years, ending with 178 J - - . . i,4i,"i,()'j t Do • upon an average of 4 yean, ending with 1807 • 'J,(>:t(>,ti5H Increased consumption 1,314,634 Average annual Import of 1«04, 1805, 1806, & 1807, In- to the United Empire, wa« ... 3,608,H7tf Deduct, import from coTiquerec^ colonies (supposing 1807 to be an average) .... 5Hl,H8i Average annual Import from old British colonies - 3,ou»G,«)97 Average annual consumption in Great Britain and Ireland, for the above period - - . . 2,f>3G,G.'»H Annual surplus aliove consumption, from our own colonies 390,:):s*) Average annual export during peace, 1802 & 1803 - 1,70-', 7 58 Average annual luperfluity of old British colonies, as above 3!)(),'<3'> Shewing the inf nfficiency of the present surplus produce of the old Britisti colonies to im;ct a continental demand, equal to that of the last peace, to be - > 1,31 2,4 1<> With a view to apply as speedy a relief as possible to the ca^e thui made out, your Committee proceeded to consider of the expediency of pro* hit)iting the distilleries of the united kingdom, or any part thereof, from the use of grain, and confining them to that of sugar and molasses. This inquiry, involving in it the interests of the revenue, the distillers, and the landholders of the country, your Committee have gone through a long and minute investigation, with a view to ascertain how far these interests might severally be anected by the proposed restriction. It appears from the evidence of Mr Jackson, that the revenue received from the English distilleries amount to near L. 2,000,000 ; and is collected at the expence of one halfpenny In the pound. This revenue arises from a duty of Is. 4^d. per gallon of wash ; 100 gallons of wash are produced from about pne quarter of corn ; and the allowed produce of spirit from that quantity of wash is 19 gallons, at one to 10 over hydrometer proof. The customs duty on the cwt. of sugar io 278.; two cwt. of sugar will pro- duce 100 gallons of wash, which will produce 22 gallons of spirit at 1 t9 10 over hydrometer proof. The present duty on sugar wash is 2s. 0^. per gallon. If sugar were to be used without any alteration of the rate of duty, the Revenue would gain ; but the cost of the raw material would be greatly increased, and a 102 prnportionahle rlicin the tirice of spiriti to the loiminjer would be the ton- •equenre. It would be cletirablc therefore that some modification of the duty thould take place. It appears from a calculation of Mr Jackson, that taking the price of l)arley at 4Hk. a quarter, and of mall at HOs. a quarter, 1 Hi gallons of com> wahh (producing the same quantity of spirit as 'J cwt. of sugar) would, in materials and duty, cost tnc distiller 10s. 'l^d. per gallon, of*^ which 7s. lO^d. would be the duty to Government. Taking tnc price of sugar at 60i. per cwt. and reducing the duty on the wash to Is. *.>^d. per gajlon, the cost to the distiller would be lOs. lod. per gallon, of which the duty would be 78. lod., bringing the duty, under tnc proposed restriction^ to within a fraction of what it now is. The malt duty being much more easily evaded than the customs duty on su- gar, which in fact is little, if at all eluded, it appears that that duty ought to re- main as it is, and that the reduction ought to take place in the duty on the wash. There is, on account of the quicker dinsolution of the material, a great* cr facility of fraud in the case of sugar than of corn wash ; but on the whole, the chances of fraud would be diminished, the profit of it lessened, and the loss to the Revenue, even if it were practised, would not be so great. Under these liniitatiuns, your Conmiittee are induced by the evidence before them, to hope that the Excise regulations may be so arranged, with- out great or inconvenient alteration, as to prevent any material injury to the revenue from the proposed suspension. In Scotland, tlie system of collecting the duty is different and more com- plicated. In the Lowlands, there is an annual licence duty of L.l 62 per gallon on the contents of the still ; for which the distiller is permittea to make 2,025 gallons of spirit within the year, the licence expiring whenever that quantity appears to have been made. This duty amounts, on the gaU bn of spirit, to Is, 7d. S-iOths. There is a wash-duty of 5d. which, com- puted at the rate of 16j^ gallons per cent, on the 100 gallons of wash, a- mounts to Ss. 6d. S-lOths ; and there is a spirit duty of Is.; the total being 5s. l^d. per gallon. The lower per-centage on the wash is occasioned by the rapid mrde of distillation which is imposed upon them by lave, and which subjects them to a constant M'aste of material, which they consider as a species of indirect duty. Sugar, it appears, would be better adapted to their quick mode of distillation than com, as in the wash from the former there is no such re- siduum as there is in the wash produced from the latter. There is, there- fore, no reason to suppose that the same per-centage of 23 gallons of spirits from 1(X) gallons of sugar wash might not be expected in Scotland as well as in Eiij^iand. A$ it Ayould be advisable, for the reasons stated by Mr Jackson, to retain the whole of the Customs duty on the sugar, it would unly be necessary to make a certain reduction in the duty on the wash, or on the spirit. The present distinctions in favour of the Highland distiller (by which he Is required to produce only 10 per cent, on the M'ash, and is char' d with R duty amounting on the whole to 48. 5d. per gallon of spirit, instead of 58. l^d.) arose from an alleged inferiority of the material from which he works. Under the proposed restriction (the material being the same as that used by other distillers) the same per-centage of 23 gal)(yis would of course be re- quired. If it ahould be thought fit to charge tlie same amount of dutv» it would only be necessary to apply the principle before recommended. The 103 |»frtcess of working is nIowit than in the Lovvlantin, ami, oit a<'('mint of tita difBcuhy of obtaining t'uvli it might be proper tu leave lliat a» it i. now etublishcd. The trade* for export from Knuland to Scotlandi and t>ire tn-rsf and for home conaumption» arc icparateiy . iirried on, and under Kcparatf rrgiiU- tioni. If, therefore, it should he dtftned expedient to ronflnc the prohihi. tion to England* there could be no diflicnlty in suhiectin^' the Scotch cx< port-trad«r to that prohibition, as ho is to other rcguhriouH inipoHcd on the £ngliih distillers. Rut the partial adoption of this measure in any part of this Island would afford so strong a temptation in the other to sniii^^glc the corn spirit which they would be entitled to manufacture, into the part sulw ject tu the prohibition, that much detriment M'ould ac':rue to the revenue therefrom: and, indeed, there seems to be no good reason connected with the revenue why this measure should not be extended to Scotbntl. Much illicit trade is undoubtedly carried on in the Highland district, and the i)ro- posud restriction would encourage it, to a certau) degree, on account of^the preference entertauied for com spirit ; but the frauds practised in evading the malt duty, by the licensed distillers, would be cfTectually stopped. The collection of the Irish revenue is ultimately regulated by the quanti« ty of the spirits, and is necessarily attended with more checks than in Eng- land. A dutv of 48. is charged on the gallon of spirit. The mode of work- ing the distilleries is, by a certain number of doublings or charges of the itill, required within twenty-eight days. There are three stages in which the duty is checked, on the pot-ale or wash, at the rate of 10 gallons uf spirits to 100 eallous of wash ; on the singlings, or low wines, at two-fifths of spirits ; and on the spirits according to the quantity ; no reference what- ever being had to the strength. Should it be thought fit to extend the prohibition to Ireland, a modifica- tion of the rate of duty would be required, on the principle before stated. If the number of doublings is to continue to regulate the duty, the amount of the charge ought to be calculated on the utmost possible number of workings, which has been the principle on which the laws for collecting the revenue have been made. The number of workings has been gradual- ly and progressively increased, and it is apprehended may admit cf still further mcrease. The substitution of sugar for grain in Irish distillation would undoubted- ly so far prove beneficial to the revenue of that country, as it would pre- vent all fraud on the material to be used. The frauds on the malt duty, which are stated to be enormous, so far as concerns the distilleries would \)e prevented. It is stated however, that it would be impossible to restrict the Irish li- censed distillers to the use of sugar, their numbers being to those of the English distillers in the proportion of five to one : — That it would be very difncult to prevent them from using corn wash, which (under pretence of obtaining yeast) they would procure of the strength reouisitc for their pur- poses from the breweries, which are not subject to the Excise, excepting in as far as relates to the milt duty. This practice they are stated to have followed when the distillation from corn was last prohibited. Il is however, admitted, fhat if proper regulations could be devi&ed, and the vigilance of the revenue officers could be relied on, the frauds might in a great measure be prevented. But there would, it appears, be considera- h\» difficulty in framing such regulations, or in inducing the olficers aud- 101 di-iity tn.ch.Anuc tint teUxei! tond.ict, and in many ca»ei rorrupt bctia* vioiir, to wliicli thiy havi* la-en iinrortunatcly to«) much aildictoil. Thii didiculty with rrgard to the ufTlccrii, would add to the iarilUiri to fraud aruing trom the more rapid dinohiMon of lUKar, which even of iticlt would render it far from c."»»y to get an act urate a«( omit of the wa«h. The cnormoiiH account of the ilii'g.tl distillation in Ireland (which ii chiefly practined in the North) in urged as a strong objection to the pro- }K)Med meaxurct The very great preference entertained by the piHiple fur com spirits ; the consequent hopes of sending them to other parts of the country« where there are fewer illicit stills ; and the desire which would he crented in landlio rs to find a market for tfiu corn, thus ex* eluded from the legal diatillv les, wouldt it secmf» o|)erate to the great detriment of the rcvcnuei by tempting an increase of private diatillation« which would be entirely from corn ; and if so* whatever that increase ehoidd be, the rovtnuc would receive additional injury to that amount* without causing any additional consumption of Sugar. This objection would, however, not .ipply in case of a serious apprehension of scarcity, because the inhal itants would then bo active in stopping the use of com in the illicit distillerieti. The detail f regulation which would be necessary to protect the inter- course of spirits from Ireland would be considerable, and your Committee pass by that subject, leaving it for the consideration of parliament. In case it nhou.ld be thought inconvenient to extend the restriction gene- rally to Ireland, it were to be wished that the distillation for export from thence, might be confmed to sugar. Under such a regulation, however, considerable inconvenience might arise from the probability that a great deal ' '' com itnirit would be exported under the pretence of exporting su- ear spirit. Tliis too would be an inconvenience superadded to the risk aris^ uig from the illicit trade, as above stated. On the whole, if it should he deemed expedient to confine this measure to Great Britain, your Committee would recommend a suspension of .all intercourse in spirits between the two islands, as the best security that rould be aflbrded to the British revenue and manufacture, such suspension to continue while the com distillers should be restricted in Great Bri- tain. With a view to afibrd security to the revenue, as well as to protect the interest of the present com distillers, it would be an indis- pensable measure, to whatever part of the Empire the suspension of the use of grain in the distilleries should be applied, to connne the pbwer of distilling from sugar, to the houses now engaged in the malt distil- Iciii'H. The Maidstone distillery was established under a particular act of Par- lij'nent, and works, for a particular object, with different materials from the ordinary distillcrH. That house cannot make a spirit from sugar similar to that now made from corn. Were this distiller)' allowed to go on work- ing from their present materials, the rest of the trade being subject to the suspension, tlie injury that would accrue both to the revenue and the other Distillers need scarcely be pointed out. This peculiar mode of distillation ought, therefore, to be suspended during the operation ot the proposed measure. But youj* Committee recommend th't for that period, the pro- jirietoi-s ought to be allowed to enter and work from sugar as ordinary dis- tillers. They were not allowed so to work during the last prohibition, and filtered accordingly. It is stated that ihqy now pay L. 30,000 per aivium «» 105 to noreniiTtent, which would h« lo«t| whilit in encourtMmtnt would i/t given to the iimu||gling of lloltantU t^nevit of which tnetr Mpirit U tht rival. Asainit thu Ioui howevert muit be wt the probable legal impor- tation of Holland! gin, which pay* a much higher duty, and the addition- al quantity of sugar ipirit that would be manufacturca and consumed. Your Committee are not prepared to give any decided opinion aa to tht (irnprifty of permitting the uie of mouaiet in diitillation. l^af article )ring the prof^ice of refined sugar, and a drawback being allowed on tA« exfK)rtation of that sugar equalto the whole duty, no abatement of duty could he aflbrded on tlie molasses wash, such as has been recommended in the case of sugar wash. It besides appears, that the material of sugar is equally advantageous to the manufacturer, and produces a spirit equally pure, and as .good for all purposes. Brandy, wnich is now made from mnlasKcs, might, with equal profit, he made from sugar. It appears from the account of Mr Jackson, that, calculating from the quantity of spirits that pay duty, the distilled produce of 304,906 auartera of grain is consumed in England, a considerable portion of whicn .pirit U manufactured in, and imported from Scotlamt and Ireland. By thf ■anie evidence, the quantity of grain distilled in Scotland, for their liome, consumption, amounts to 147,5H(I quarters. By the Excise return from that country (which i^ exclusive of the export to England, and inclusive of the import of Engllih barley for the distilleries, which is considerable ever/ year) it is statetl at \r,'.},'Mi7 quarters. Mr Jackson's calculation for Ireland in formed on an average of two years, ending in 1 806, and is far below the quantity since consumed. Another evidence states the quantity of com used in Irish distillation at nr)3,S3;3 quarters ; — the quantity used in Scotland at 1 55t555 quarters ; and in England, including the importation from Scotland and Ireland, at <.'f)l,lG() quarters; making 780,054 quarters for the use of the distilleries of the united empire. It is difficult to get any very precise information ot\ this head. Rut taking 780,000 as the whole quantity ; taking Mr Jack- son's account for England at about 300,000 ; the Scotch Excise account 169,000; the total for Great Britain, 469,000, would leave the remainder^ or 31 1,000 quarters for the consumption of Ireland. It appears, howevert by an official return from Ireland, that the quantity of gram used for dia- filiation there is computed at 672,075 barrels, at 284 pounds per l)arrel( three-fourths of that grain are oats. In order to form their opinion on the manner in which the proposed re- striction would affect the cultivation of barley in this kingdom, your Com« injurctl, liy Itcing tUiven out of thuir utiul rounc of rrnpplngt anil liy the forcnl application uf the land tu athcr produce leu •uited to the nature of the loIl. Mr Arthur Young, Secretary to the Board of Agriculture, haa stated the qnantity of barley grown in England at about 'I,H(K),(K)o quartcrii and caU cuUti't the (luantititft uied in the UiNtillcrir* at iKKVXX), or l*liith of that amount, He belirvea, that to withdraw from the m.irkct even that iniall Ero|H)rtion, would have a great efTcct in lowering the price of the article, la conceive*, howrver, that the dcpri'ciatiun, or the alarm of it, cannot have any effect on the quantity town thii year, but on that town in the next year ; which cflect ** would dv|H.'nd entirely on the idea of the puln ** lie relative to having a difTerviit motive thin time twelve monthn, fur ** repeating the itoppagea, from any which operates at present." He think* that in the event of an abundant harvest, the restriction would prove peculiarly hard upon the fariitvr, and arrest him in every exertion of his industry. Another witness states, that the farmers conceive the distilleries to be a source of greater influence on the market than they really are. He thinks the proposed suspension would operate as a greater discouragement than it ougfit, and that the farmer (acting under exaggerated reports) would not tow hit usual auantity of barley. It it to be obter'ed, however, that the elTect of clamour or alarm ia, from its nature, but temporary, and would assuredly die away if any equi- valent were found for the privation that caused it ; such an equivalent would be found in the increased demand which would arise from any failure in our usual importation uf grain. Moreover, as the quantity sown this year will not be afTvcted by the proposed restriction, and as there is no ground to siip))osc that a smiilar measure will take place next year, the very rc*npening of the distilleries to the produce of his industry, cannot but do away any evil occasioned by the effect of a temporary alarm on the mind of the fanner. It appears that, in the dixtricts peculiarly adapted to barley, that grain pays better than oats, and prepares the ground better for the wheat that esually concludes the course. It is also generally preferred to oats for the purpose of sowine witli grass, and is conbidcred as infinitely lest exhiust- ntf to the soil. It is stated in a part of the evidence, that in the barley sihtrictt the number of theep maintained under the turnip husbandry it greater when barley forma a part of this course, than it could be if oats, or any other grain were substituted for it, as the turnips can be kept on the ground longer if followed by a crop of barley, than u followed by any Ar\tY u rwoniiat to the turnip huib«nilrv» u tntr* tirai tiMcl with •o nuirh aucccu. It ia huwcvtr gvntrally admittadt that wtrm arc many liart* ot Kngiand to whirh thea« ohjuctioni do not apply t and where ih« vuliivatiou of oata, luppoting the price to riaci might b« auhetituted for that of barley without any Iom to the farmer. With trgird to the nouthern part of Scotland^ and tht diatrirti in th« nnrth into whirh tht* improved huibandry haa been introduced* it appears that Mpring whrat lia* )>een much and vrrv advantageoualy cultivated there of laic yearn ; and that the quantity of barley grown haa proportionably dimlniahed. It appcarti moreoveri that oat* are not there aeemed to ex> haunting a rrop aa ihry arr in the louth. It ia thought* however, that any intpriliiiient to tlie growth of barley might be detrimental to the Uiidholdcr» by lowrrmg the price of grain. In the Highlanda, amltnoM part* of the North Ixiwlandt into which th« improved tyatem haa not bern introduced, or which, from the nature of their aoit or climate, are under pvctiliar diaadvantagea, the case ia different i very little two-rowed barley u grown therms but the four-rowed barley called berc. In aonie parta of thoae diatricta, no wlirat ia srown, and the pro]H)rtion of oata doea nut amotuit nearly to that of here. It ia atated, that any measure of dixcouragement to the culture of here would be detrimental* aa it would be diflficult to find a aubatitute for it ; a considerable portion of it ia said to be consumed in distillation, though what the pro|)ortionat0 amount of that is to the Quantity grown could not be learned. It ought here to be again remarkeu, that illicit distillation prevails considerably in the Highlands, and North of Scotland, and that aoubtless a great part of the here is consumed in that way. It appears to your Committee, that considerable quantities of wheat* flour, and oats, have been annually imported into Great Britain for some years past, while the export of those articles has been very trifling. The annual imoort and export of barley is very small. This iumishes a suffi« cicnt proof that we have of late years depended, in some degree, upon our foreign connections for a supply of food for the inhabitanta of this country} and your Committee are not informed of any circumstances attendant o« the late crop that can diminish the importance of that resource. Your Committee, taking into their most serious consideration the atate of our foreign relations, and the consequent probability that our usual sup- ply of grain from foreign countries may fail us, are naturally led to suggest measures of precaution, which may eventually ward off so great an evd. It appears, that about 4 70,000 quarters of grain are annually consumed by the British distillers, and 672,07.'! barrels, or about 4'JO,000 quarters in Ireland ; and that the annual importation of com into Great Britain from foreign parts, exclusive of that from Ireland, has for five years past amount- ed to about 770,000 quarters. Under the pressure of an actual scarcity, there would be no hen our •A«nmimi('klU)fi %v4fh titr rmt of th« worlil, thit inr ttiirr miuhl Ih* rfiutrrrcl bnn«m«ary Hi the virw )u«t •tatvd— awarr that, .tthoii^jti in ihc rv«nt of A ikflri^'nl ( rop tKia ycari the (lUirrii* w>hiI(I Im> (rr4,ily iiurraacilt if act om- panitd Hy ■ AffUivnry in unr utual forrign aii|>|Hiri « yrt| that in ihr evrni of ■ •ii|>cralmR(Utit harvr«ti thr protxMvil rcMriiti'Mi miKhi In* ftntml very hHrtfill to iht africihural IntrrraO ut the kini(tl iicr, that any hill to be hrnughl in, in t nnnrqtirtK e of ihia Kejmrt, ahould totitain a rlanie, f^ranting a ikiwit to the King in Cuimcil, up«)n a aufflcirnt nntii e, to do away the au«|)n the grower. It ia rali'ulatcd that It'.'OtVMH) atre^ arc u«id for that nnqmar, uf which ahout HO,iKK>, or one^ixteeuthi are iiifncient to grow ine whole quantity from which the apiritt conaumrd in Kngland are produced. The quantity of barley and here grown in Scotland cYoea not, in all probability, Itcar a much le«a proportion to that conatimcd in a limilar manner. I'herc are doubtleaa many parta of the country in which the aubititution of a different crop could be attended with no diiadvantage, and might eventually be attended \rith profit. In the moat cuhivated parta of Scotland, in which a practical knowlettge of agriculture exiata in aa great perfection aa anywhere, auch t aubetitution ha a been found actually to anawer. It ia tn t)c remarked, that although it may be deemed diaadvantrgeoua to aubatitute any other grain in the room of barley, yet that the pricca of grain mutually operate upon each other, and that a riac or fall in the price of any one kind muat have a eorrenponding inflnenre on the prices of the rest {.and that any alarm which might be created by thia meaaure ran only o|)erate proanectively aa to next year'i crop, from an expectation that the aame suapenaion will again be re- torted to. Your Committee truat, that on a full consideration of the nibject, all ap- prehenaion will be done away by the power prnpoied to be veatcd in the' King in Council. They are aenaible tnat they ihall not have fulfilled the dutiea tmpoaed on them by the House, unless they proceed to consider every pouible mode of relief for the proprietors of West India estates ; and they trust that they shall be enabled to suggent measures so permanently benefi- cial to that body, as to render it unnecessary for them again to apply for the interference of Parliament, even should the present anomalous state of our foreign relations be protracted. Your Committee arc persuaded, that the permanent adoption of thia measure would be attended with great evils to the agriculture of the coun- try ; they feel it incumbent on them to state, that nothing in the evidence before them could induce a recommendation to that eflfcct ; they conceive that it! frequent repetition would be still more hurtful ; and nothing but the itrong case so clearly made out by the West India interest, coupled with the loss of our trade with the countries from whence we derived a |[reiA proportioit of our foreign supply) could prevail upon them to advifV ,. 100 „ •tvn ihU kHght tfmporaty Interfcrenf « (giianWd m It U by ltt« p t}tOMil U* miuiiotM) with an rtublulird tyttrtn of «||ri< iilliir*. The |i«t'uli«r liiualuNi af lrrlaii(f« th« grral iltinculty of rnlltrtinf th« rrveniic on %\At\t» ilirrr,

---

n to that riHintry i but thry arr liy nn tfftan* |)r«|>arr(l to aMcrt, that atii h r»* gulatUmt may niH iwwiihiy li« tlrviatd a* to rrndvr ita adoption ihtrt a« praiiitalttv a* in Orrai Itniain. 'I hty art unwilling to flxpritaa an opinion on till* part of the (piniioii. Your Comntittcr ^wvn uytux the rontidvration of the Ilouac thr nfverv loaa that niuat t)« Irit hy tlii' vinpire at larj^r, and no part of it itiortf than hy thff lamlcd inlrrot, if umxe rfficieni rrmtdy ahmild not lavt thf WrH Jndia Colonic* from thr di atter* thai awail them. Whfn it i« rrt'ollrrtrd* that thia ctHintry drrivn from ihrm a nrt revvnuc on luvar of L. :l,0(X)|(HM) annually, braiilct the duliea on the other artiilea of ih'ir produce i that they taae nA' nianufacturci ami prtMUue of thia country to the amnunt of I.. fl,0()O,(K)O Mtrrling ; to whi^h conaiilerationa muat \tt added the ahipping thty employ, ami the aailort bteil in the trade ( and that were the rektric* tion taken off that now imfieilea the export of corn to the Colimica, they would iniuort from h^nce, to the great advantage of the Britith bndholder and men nant, a ctmaiderahle proportion of what they now do from foreign partai It ia hoped that the llouac wilt think your Committee warrantcdt under the peculiar ctrcumatamea of the timea, in recommending th« auapen* aion of the uie of grain in the diatilleriea of Orcat Britain, and their reatri<- tion to the uie of augar for one year, from the firat of July IHOH, to tht flrat of July 180U, accompanied by the aforesaid discrvtioiury power to be veatcd in hia Majesty. George Roroiay 3c C^. rrinten.