1B04. Dr KeitPs Evidence before the Malt-Tax Committee. 355 



fcar of endangering the flavour of his liquor. The dlftlller, If he getf 

 a greater quantity of extraclive matter, is If fs intcreftcd about the flavour 

 of his worts, both becaufc they have to undergo a complete attcnuatioij 

 and the fubfcquent proccTs of diftillatioii, and alfo bccaiife the flavour 

 or quah'ty of his fpirits depends principally upon feparatlng from them 

 the eiTi'ntial and empyreumatic oils when ihey are dldillfng. Bu* 'lie 

 brewer muft beware of fearching too feverely the grains of his :T:rut, 

 efpecially where tliis is of inferior quality ; othcrwife, he wiU lofe more 

 by deteriorating the quality of his malt liquor, than he can gain by any 

 addition to the q\iantity af his extrart; and, therefore, higli heats and 

 a number of hquors would be dclhu6livc to the brewer vvJio ufes inferior 

 grain. Nay, in late harvefts and bad feafons, it becomes necefTary to nu*>i 

 cither the malt or the worts of -Scotch bigg with thofe of Engllfli bar« 

 ley, in order to procure a palatable liquor. 



Indeed, by the prefent Excife laws, which impofe the wliole fpirit 

 duty on the wafh, the Englifli diililler cannot fearch his grains fo 

 thoroughly as the brewer often does: but where a diililler is not limited 

 in his operations by a duty on the wafli, he both can and will fearch 

 the malt in his ma(h tun, farther than what it will be prudent for the 

 brewer to attempt, if his grain is ijf an inferior quality. In conducing 

 my experiments lafl year, 1 poured fevcu liquors on the malt of Englifli 

 barley ; fix on that of Scotch barley ; five on the malt of bed Scotch 

 bigg; and four liquors on the two inferior kinds; trying by the 

 faccharometer the Ibength of my worts, till I rendered the- grains fo 

 perfectly infjpid, that my horfes would not eat tlicm. ff f had been 

 brewing ale of any kind, 1 would have Ropped at five liquors, at mofl:, 

 for my Englifh barley, four for my vScotch, and three for my malt made 

 of bigg. My experiments, therefore, make inferior grain fomewhat 

 more valuable for the diftiller than for the brewer; though they fliew 

 v^ry nearly the Gomparative values of the diifcrent kinds of malt, eveu 

 for the latter purpofe. 



Have you aceefs to know the effeds of the high proportion of the 

 malt-tax on Scotch barley and bigg, in any other part of Scotland 

 except Aberdeendiire ? 



Independently of all the private information which I could colle6l ox\ 

 this fubje6t, 1 have examined both the printed Accounts of May 2d 

 i8c4» refpefting the duties of Excife on malt made in iScotland, and 

 alfo the Account prefented to this Committee from the Excife of that 

 country on the nth inllant — -from which 1 am led 10 draw the following 

 conclufions : 



I. The total quantity of malt made in Scotland for ten years pre- 

 ceding midfummer 1803, amounted to 16,244,197-'- bufiicls. But as 

 '795» ^799* 3"cl iSco were unfruitful feafons, and as both barley and 

 bigg were made into meal in great quantities, and as not quite half of 

 the ufual quantity of malt was ufed In thefe calamitous years, I throw 

 them out of the account when forming an average ; and 1 find that, 1*11 

 r^e ofhev fcvcn years, the quantity of malt made in S.rntland amounts 



Z 3 t'i 



