TO THE NOBLEMEN, GENTLEMEN AND Proprietors of Lands in Scotland, and Inhabitants at large.

SCOTLAND as a part of the united kingdoms altho' having a right to the ſame protection from Government with its ſiſter kingdom, England; yet labours under ſome hardſhips, and even impoſed by Act of Parliament, which the people of England know nothing about. And theſe are Burrow duties known by the name of impoſts on Malt Liquors, which have of late years ſpread themſelves as a plague over the face of this country. They began firſt in the capital of the kingdom in the year 1693, an aera, when few claſſes of men in this country knew their rights and privileges as ſubjects, or if they had been as well underſtood as at preſent, were unacquainted with the mode of application to parliament; all of which circumſtances, contributed to the Bill in fa⯑vours of the town of Edinburgh paſſing without op⯑poſition impoſing a duty of two pennies Scots on the pint of all malt liquors brewed, tap'd, or vended with⯑in [2]the privileges of ſaid city. From which not only the Burrows and towns of conſequence, but every petty town have taken the hint, and have ſucceſ⯑ſively applied to Parliament for ſimilar Acts, and is now become almoſt an univerſal tax on this coun⯑try, viz. the towns of Edinburgh, Glaſgow, Dundee, Dunbar, Kelſo, Arbroath, Dalkeith, Preſton-pans, Bo-neſs, Paiſley, Port-glaſgow, Greenock, &c. and there is great reaſon to believe, that private gentle⯑men, who have the ſmalleſt villages ſituated on na⯑vigable rivers, and who are not yet arrived at ſuch a degree of conſequence as to have a magiſtrate of any kind, allured by the ſurpriſing revenue which this tax raiſes, intend applying to Parliament for grants of the ſame nature; and Parliament, by no oppoſition hav⯑ing ever been made, have overlooked them as un⯑connected either with the revenue, the landed in⯑tereſt, or the welfare of the people in general, but which are connected with all theſe three to a degree of more conſequence than is in general underſtood or attended to.

It is the univerſal complaint, that the malt liquors of Scotland, particularly porter and pale malt liquors, are not equal in quality to that brewed in London, [3]and the other towns in England, but it ceaſes to be a matter of any wonder, when the Public are informed that the malt liquors of Scotland is loaded with 30 per cent. of the King's exciſe in impoſt payable to royal borrows and other ſmaller towns.

The trifling opinion, which the country entertains of two pennies Scots, and mankind in general of the fractions of a penny, has made this oppreſſive tax paſs unnoticed, not only by parliament, but by the landed intereſt of this country, both of whom ought to have ſet themſelves in oppoſition to ſo partial and oppreſſive a burthen on this part of the kingdom. Trifling as two pennies Scots may appear, when taken by the pint, it is no leſs than 1 s. ſterling on every 9 gallons which is 1/9 of the whole value of malt liquor at 1 s. per gallon; but burthenſome and oppreſſive as this muſt appear to every conſiderate perſon, it is enormous when conſidered as a tax added to the ex⯑ciſe, which is ſo heavy already, that when Lord North in the year 1779, laid 5 per cent. on the amount of the cuſtoms and exciſe, out of compaſſion to the laborious part of the nation who are the conſumers of malt liquors, he exempted the brewery in both kingdoms; and in his ſubſequent taxes he has ſtill [4]paid ſuch an attention to the brewery (no doubt from a conſciouſneſs of its not being able to bear more) that he has all along exempted it, and even in the additional taxes on the malt, he provided a drawback of 10 d. per barrel on all malt liquor above the de⯑nomination of ſmall beer, and 3 d. per barrel on this last ſpecies, in lieu of the additional duty on the malt, and altho' this drawback is not an exact equivalent for the additional duty on the malt, yet it is plain he meant it to be ſo, according to the beſt of his judg⯑ment and the information he had

For the above two barrels of malt liquor, which is 21⅓ gallons, the brewer in Scotland pays 2 s. 4 d⅓. of im⯑poſt, which every body will find that will take the trouble of calculating is upon 8 s. 3 d. the amount of the exciſe on a barrel of porter and a barrel of ſmall beer, no leſs than within the meereſt trifle of 30 per cent. upon the amount of the duty taken com⯑plexly; and on ſmall beer is no leſs than the exact double duty. What would the Noblemen and Gen⯑tlemen [5]and Inhabitants of Scotland ſay, were Govern⯑ment to lay a double tax or even 30 per cent. on the malt liquor of Scotland more than in England? The very mention of it muſt ſtrike every perſon of any conſideration with aſtoniſhment, how any ſpecies of manufacture could ſupport ſuch a load of taxes, eſpecially when it is conſidered that the price of no kind of malt liquor has been raiſed in Scotland, not⯑withſtanding of this enormous local tax. The fact is, that at the time the impoſt was impoſed, the brewers found themſelves in poſſession of a pretty good trade from the very low price of materials at that time, and having no denomination of money equivolent to two pennies Scots the amount of the tax, and not being allowed by the law to add it to the price of the pint or gallon, without expoſing themſelves to be charged the next higheſt duty, viz. ſtrong ale, were under the neceſſity, in order to indemnify themſelves of taking the value of the tax (which is one ninth) out of the quality of the liquor.

Every body will ſee what a debaſement of the li⯑quor would enſue by taking the ninth part of malt out of the quality; to this debaſement of the liquor muſt be attributed the decreaſe of the brewing buſi⯑neſs [6]in Scotland, which is evidently demonſtrated by the decreaſe of the malt tax, as any body may be in⯑formed of, by appyling to the Exciſe Office at Edin⯑burgh. This debaſement of the liquor does not operate in a common and ordinary proportion on the intereſt of the country, but in a threefold proportion. It is not only the loſs of 1/9 part of the conſumption of the barley to the landed intereſt and to the farmer, but alſo 1/9 part of the revenue of the malt tax to Go⯑vernment, beſides this debaſement of the malt liquor, makes at the moſt moderate calculation 1/9 leſs con⯑ſumption of the liquor that is brewed, and 1/9 de⯑creaſe of quantity of malt is 2/9=¼ nearly, (being only 1/36 part leſs) ſo that it is plain this tax does not operate to the prejudice of the revenue as 1/9, but as ¼ decreaſe on the revenue of malt, likewiſe not as 1/9 but as ¼ decreaſe of barley to the prejudice of the landed intereſt.

This tax in proportion as it decreaſes the revenue of the malt tax 2/9, it decreaſes the revenue of the ex⯑ciſe on the ale in the proportion of one ninth leſs con⯑ſumed than would have been if this tax had not taken place, ſo that it affects government in no leſs a pro⯑portion than 3/9, or ⅓ loſs on the revenue of exciſe in Scotland.

[7]The author might have availed himſelf of Mr. Arnot's is hiſtory of Edinburgh, page 521, for the in⯑conteſtible evidence of the above facts, (who had full acceſs to the records of the city) wherein he ſhows, that in the year 1724, at or after the time that the town obtained an act extending the impoſt to the pariſhes of St. Cuthbert's, Canongate, South and North Leiths, that the revenue of the impoſt paid to the town of Edinburgh was no leſs a ſum annually in the year

During the period betwixt 169 [...] [...] firſt act the town of Edinburgh procured for levying an impoſt, which was confined to the city alone, the impoſt did not exceed l. 4000 annually, becauſe, as ſoon as the act took place, the greateſt part of the brewers either removed out of the town, or ſettled in the invirons of the city, which included the above pariſhes. The a⯑mount of this noble income of l. 7939 16 s. ſhews in the moſt forcible manner the great extent and flouriſhing ſtate of the brewing buſineſs at ſaid period. For at 16 d. every 12 gallons, equal to an Engliſh barrel of [8]36 Wincheſter gallons, it is 119, 097 barrels, and in the year 1776, a period not ſeven years ago, the num⯑ber of barrels brewed, and conſequently that paid revenue to government (for the town of Edinburgh takes the charge of the impoſt from the gaugers re⯑turn) was no more than 32, 955 barrels, ſo that there is an annual decreaſe, comparing theſe two periods to⯑gether, of 86, 142 barrels, and ſupppoſing them all two penny ale, and at the old duty of 2 s. per barrel, is no leſs a ſum than an annual loſs to Government of l. 8614 12 s. on the exciſe only, for the preſumption is, that the revenue on the brewery, would not have fallen ſhort of the above quantity, had the impoſt act not taken place, as the nation inſtead of a retrograde motion toward [...] [...]enſion has been advancing ſince that period, (viz. the year 1724) in a rapid progreſs to wealth and opulence, and therefore no other good cauſe can be aſſigned for the decreaſe of the revenue on this article, but the debaſement of the liquor which took place in conſequence thereof. On the ſame principle the malt duty has likewiſe fallen ſhort in proportion, for 119, 097 barrels the amount of the quantity brewed in the year 1724 in the city of Edin⯑burgh, allowing ſix buſhels Wincheſter meaſure to e⯑very 2¼ barrels or 27 gallons of two penny, will take [9]317, 592 buſhels, which at 4½ per buſhel the duty exigible till the year 1776 amounts to l. 5954 17 s. In that year the impoſt revenue of the town of Edin⯑burgh, had fallen to 32, 955 barrels only, which at the above calculation, viz. ſix buſhels to every 2¼ barrels produces 87, 880 buſhels, at 4½ is

[10]If the principle of theſe calculations is founded on right reaſon and common ſenſe, this country has loſt betwixt 1693, and the preſent period (88 years) the enormous ſum of l. 2, 821, 544.

Few inſtances, perhaps, have occurred that ſhews in a more forcible light the dangerous tendency of ad⯑mitting the moſt trifling tax to be levied on a com⯑mon neceſſary of life. This eſtimation the author hopes, will be thought very moderate, when it is conſidered, that additional duties have been laid on both malt and ale; and the price of materials have been annually advancing during the above period, all of which ſhews, that the author's ſuppoſition of 1/9 leſs conſumption of ale in conſequence of the impoſt tax taking place in this country, from which all theſe calculations, [...] taken, Are too, too well founded, more eſpecially when it is conſidered, that the above enor⯑mous ſum has been loſt to the country on the con⯑ſumption of Edinburgh alone, excluſive of all the other parts of Scotland.

The author hopes, what he has ſaid, will meet the attention of the Noblemen and Gentlemen, Lords of Council and Seſſion, Barons of Exchequer, and Commiſſioners of Cuſtoms and Exciſe, as likewiſe the worthy Manufacturers and uſeful Mechanic and [11]Labourer, who are alſo intereſted that this oppreſſive tax ſhould be aboliſhed in Scotland, to put them on a footing with their brethren manufacturers and la⯑bourers in England, as alſo houſe-holders of all de⯑nominations, whoſe intereſt it is to have as in Eng⯑land, a nouriſhing, ſound and wholeſome malt liquor.

The impoſt acts have the effect of a monoply againſt the inhabitants of every town where it is eſtabliſhed, in loading with an additional tax, one of the com⯑modities of life, and prevents people at a diſtance from relieving them by ſerving them better and cheaper than their own brewers either can or chooſe to do, it being the intereſt of every community, to open the moſt free communication for all ſorts of proviſions, and therefore it is their intereſt to op⯑poſe all ſuch Acts.

In ſhort, it is the intereſt of the community at large, and of the inhabitants of towns in particular to guard againſt magiſtrates introducing by act of par⯑liament, and without their own conſent; any ſpecies of taxation, and carefully watching over any bill in its progreſs through the Houſe of Commons, and the author of this addreſs takes the liberty to adviſe the inhabitants of corporated towns in all caſes where magiſtrates propoſe getting new acts of parliament, [12]to chuſe a committee of the moſt worthy and re⯑ſpectful of their number, unconnected with the council, to watch over the ſteps the magiſtrates and council take in ſuch a piece of buſineſs, and that they would always employ a council at law to take care of their intereſt in the Houſe of Commons, the ex⯑pence of which would be a mere trifle. But of all the ranks of men in the community, he would adviſe the brewers in Scotland at large, to be upon their guard when any revenue laws are applied for, more eſpecially thoſe whoſe avowed purpoſe is to ſubject them alone to a tax excluſive of the reſt of the inha⯑bitants, as all impoſt taxes on malt liquor are—taxes to the prejudice of the revenue, the landed intereſt, and the ruin of a reſpectable rank of citizens, who are ſubjected [...] partial, local and unequal tax which their brethren the brewers of England know no⯑thing about.

It has been ſaid, and is ſtill averred by the abettors of this tax, that it is the inhabitants that pay the tax and not the brewers, and as this doctrine is induſtri⯑ouſly propagated among the inhabitants of the diffe⯑rent towns, the author begs the reader's indulgence, until he explodes this magiſterial doctrine calculated [13]to miſlead the well meaning citizen who would ſpurn the idea of contributing by his conſent to load his neighbour and fellow-citizen with a burthenſome and oppreſſive tax, of which he himſelf bears no part. It is well known that two-penny ale, at the Union of the two kingdoms, was ſold at two-pence the Scots pint, the brewer had then the malt 50 per Cent. cheaper than at preſent, and yet every body knows, that the two-penny ale all over Scotland, is ſold at the ſame price at this very moment. If this is the fact, the author begs the favour that the advocates for this impoſt tax will ſay, where the impoſt (which is ⅙ of a penny) is added to the price: But however trifling it appears on the pint, it is 1⅓ of a penny on the gal⯑lon, and on a barrel of 36 [...] [...]cheſter mea⯑ſure, or twelve Scots gallons, is 16 d. which is the exact duty of exciſe on ſmall beer, and conſequently ſmall beer in Scotland, pays exactly double duty of what it is charged with in England. It is in this way (ſay the trifling denomination of the tax) that the iniquity and oppreſſion of it has eſcaped the notice of the legiſlature and all good citizens. And unleſs the inhabitants at large pay the tax, where is the equity of charging a few individuals as much as all the in⯑habitants beſides, for the ornamenting of any town [14]whatever. And what is more extraordinary, per⯑haps thoſe very people who pay this oppreſſive tax, do not reſide within the precincts of the town, as is the caſe in many places having an impoſt. In ſhort, every view you take of this tax, it is fraught with abſurdity.

It is much to the honour of this country at the preſent period, that a ſpirit of patriotiſm prevails among the Noblemen and Gentlemen, to promote the manufactures of their own country, which if followed out with ſteadineſs and perſeverance will raiſe this country to a degree of opulence unknown to former ages. It is therefore from them we are to expect [...] [...]pport in oppoſition to all our oppreſſions, and as there never was at any period, a Prime Miniſter, who ſeemed to be more the friend of the manufacturer, or lower claſs of the people, we have every reaſon to expect, that he will oppoſe attempts, that are prejudicial to them in any ſhape, provided the repreſentatives in parliament from Scotland, ſhow a truly ſpirited zeal for the public welfare. It is to them we have to look for redreſs, and as they are moſtly men of patriotic principles, we cannot entertain a doubt, but they will be the [15]guardians of our intereſt. The author, in the firm perſuaſion that the Legiſlature and Public at large, will unite in redreſſing the evil complained of,