TEANSACTIONS OF SECTION F. 639 



3. The sections of the community that gain profit from other material than malt 

 and sugar now used in brewing. 

 The direct losers are : — 



1. Farmers. 



2. Brewers, especially small brewers for sale. 



3. Maltsters. 

 Indirect losers : — 



Landowners and the numerous sections of tlie people who more or less directly 

 depend upon these losers. 



Experience is insufficient to accurately estimate the gains and losses. 

 The points established are : — 



1. The present duty exceeds the old tax. 



2. The loss presses heavily upon men ill able to bear it, tIz. farmers, smal 

 brewers, and maltsters. 



3. The moral and social disadvantages of the Gs. and Qs. licences, and the de- 

 sirability of their suppression. 



4. The advantages of the ' free mash tun.' 



I. The present duty exceeds the malt tax by 2s. per quarter at least. Mr. Glad- 

 stone admits this, and it is more clearly shown by the Parliamentary returns moved 

 by Mr. "VViitney, giving details of the brewing trade to September 30, 1881. 



The old dutv amounted to 22a-. 8d. per quarter. The duty paid by all brewers 

 making over 100,000 bis. of beer exceeded 24s. per quarter. By the two largest 

 brewers it was 25s. Gd. per quarter. By tlie smallest it was 23s. Qid. This class 

 used 667,440 quarters materials ; the three largest brewers used GUI ,038 quarters 

 materials. The duty on the latter amounted to £871,066 8s. Od., on the former to 

 £792,718 15s. 3d. ; if the bullis of material were equal, then the large brewers would 

 pay £50,277 Is. dd. more duty than the smaller ones. The apparent loss to the 

 revenue of £02,000 per annum is accounted for by the material, exceeding 250,000 

 quarters, used by the 110,000 6s. and 9s. licence-holders, paying onlj- £40,000 instead 

 of £300,000 if material paid as much as formerly, and also by the decrease in beer 

 made last year upon the quantities brewed during the preceding six years. 



II. Farmers know now practically that the destruction of the monopoly in barley 

 has lowered the average price several shillings per quarter. No reasonable change 

 in the law can alter this excepting a return to the former regulations and malt duty. 

 Protective taritt's on maize, rice, and sugar will not effect it. This loss at a time of 

 depression is insupportable to many farmers. 



Small brewers are disappearing rapidly, and the whole trade is depressed. In 

 1880 there were— 



Brewers makinj? over over over Pmall brewers 



500,UOO bis. of beer lOO.OOU bis. lOdUhls. .inrt beginners 



1880 4 61 2,205 18,953 



1881 3 66 2,103 14,948 

 loss in one year 1 5 1U2 4,005 



— a remarkable loss, almost entirely of small brewers. Decreased volume of business 

 simply shifts back larger brewers a step lower. This diminution of inimbers is a 

 striking proof of losses to small brewers, caused by the beer duty adding directly to 

 their burdens, and the Gs. licences depriving them of manj^ lucrative customers, want 

 of knowledge being the primary cause. The materials used by the 14,948 small 

 brewers, if used by the three largest would have produced 166,360 bis. more beer, 

 giving a gross profit to Government of 60,277/. Is. Qd., and to the brewers of 

 150,000/. ' 



Maltsters lose heavily also, but no statistics concerning them are now available. 



III. Class legislation is usually defective. Brewers now pay heavier duties. 

 Ignorant labourers entirely escape after using 2 bushels of malt ; they make very bad 

 beer duty free, and spoil much costly material. Tlie stimulus given to the truck 

 system is also pernicious. Scientifically, cottage brewing is a mistake. These 

 licences should be suppressed or material used by their holders should pay equally 

 ■with that under all other licences. 



