Mr. Ala Mr. Alderman Newnham reminded the Houfe that he had Newala. ftated that the bill was far from complete, which was, he conceived, a fufficient juftification of a motion for its recommitment; but it the Houfe chofe it, he could produce abundance of specific reafons to prove, that his general affertion was founded in fact. The Alderman then read a variety of objections to the bill from a folio manufcript which he held in his hand, and which, he faid, contained a catalogue of objections made to it by the wine merchants of London. Mr. Chan Mr. Chnacellor Pitt expreffed his hopes that moft of the acitor Pitt. objections ftated by the worthy Alderman might be removed by neceffary amendments being fuggefted on the report; and he had good reafon to believe he could, in that ftage of the bufinefs, do away all grounds of neceflity for the recommitment of the bill. Mr. W. Mr. W. Stanhope declared that the bill certainly was Stanhope. extremely incomplete as it then ftood, and required much improvement. As one proof, the bill virtually profcribed quakers, fince no quaker could be a wine merchant; for, as it ordered an oath to be taken by every merchant of that defcription, and as it was well known that quakers refufed to take an oath, it would be impoffible, if the bill were not altered, for any quaker to be a wine merchant. Great, indeed, was the impropriety of thus marking out a religious fect, as objects of injuftice and oppreffion; and the multiplication of oaths was a measure extremely wrong, as it only tended to increafe perjury. Sir William hamie. Sir William Cunynghame faid, that he held in his hand a Cunyng paper containing objections to the bill, and reafons for deeming it, as it ftood, inadequate to the purpose of preventing fmuggling and abufe of the revenue in various ways. Thefe objections and reafons came from a very refpectable defcription of men, though their names and characters were not generally known in that House. These were the wine merchants of Edinburgh, collected in a meeting convened at Leith, for the purpofe of difcuffing the bill and its contents. Sir William read the paper to the Houfe, the purport of which was an approbation of the bill, accompanied with expreffions of alarm, left it might be productive of fome rigours beyond the intention of the Legiflature, and several statements of particulars that required alteration, moft of which, Sir William obferved he was happy to know, met with the approbation of the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) entrusted with the minifterial government of affairs. The Houfe divided, Ayes, 22.-Noes, 61. On On the report of the wine bill, Mr. Beaufoy rofe and faid, I do not rife to debate the principle of the bill, or to offer my fentiments upon any regulation that has been already difcuffed; iny object is to propofe to the Houfe a claufe of much importance, as I conceive, to the interefts of the kingdom, and to ftate to them the circumftances upon which that importance is founded. But before I enter on the difcuffion, I naturally feel an anxiety that an opinion which public confiderations have led me to form, may not be dif honoured by the fufpicion of a private and interested motive; and for that reafon I hope I may be pardoned for faying, in contradiction to certain reports which have been current of late, that I am not engaged in any manufacture; that I have no fhare in any trading concern; and that I never faw the prefent bill, nor knew its regulations, till it appeared on the table of the Houfe. The bufinefs before us involves in it two perfectly dif tinct queftions-The one is, how far is the idea of applying the excife laws to the collection of a revenue from wine, effectually reducible to practice? The other is, admitting the practicability of the measure, how far is the extenfion of the excife laws confiftent with the regard we owe to the civil rights of the subject ? On the first of thefe queftions my remarks will be short and few; for its difcuffion, as I obferved, is not my principal object. Sir, the applicability of the excife fyftem to the wine trade will be eafily determined by a plain and obvious fact, which is, that the whole fyftem of excife regulation is founded on this one principle-the officer fhall take an account of the trader's flock. From this principle it follows that to. all trades in which the procefs is fuch as to admit of an account of flock, and to thofe trades alone the excife law may be effectually epplied. Thus, for example, in the bufinefs of a brewer the excife fyftem operates with entire force, for the nature of his trade is fuch that no addition or diminution in his stock can eafily be made without the knowledge of the officer. On the other hand, when the tax upon plate in the poffeffion of private perfons, was fubjected, many years fince, to the collection of the excife officers, the tax entirely failed; for as the excifeman had no right of furveying a private house, he had no poffible means of knowing the flock of plate which any individual poffeffed. Judging then by this principle, that the applicability of the excife laws depends upon an account of stock, what shall we fay to the propofal of fubjecting to thofe laws the collection of the revenue from wine? Can the regulations of the pre fent fent bill, or can any regulations, enable the officers to keep, at all times and under all circumftances, a regular account of every increase or diminution of the trader's ftock? My anfwer is, to keep fuch an account is difficult, but not impoffible. The prefent bill is far from being perfect; but though the provifions it contains will not enable the officer to keep fo exact an account of stock as will exclude the poffibility of fraud, yet it will narrow the extent of illicit dealing; and prefcribe limits to the depredations which are committed on this important branch of the public revenue of the kingdom. The next queftion that arifes is, (admitting the applicabibility of the excife fyftem to the trade ir wine,) how far, confiftently with the regard we owe to the civil rights of the fubject, can we extend that fyftem to a numerous defcription of perfons not hitherto comprehended within its limits? To reafon on this fubject with any degree of clearness or precifion, it will be neceffary to confider that the Excife fyftem is compofed of two diftinct parts, which have no neceffary connection with or relation to each other. The one confifts of rules for the collection of duties; the other confifts of rules for judicial decifions.-The first governs the proceedings of the officer in charging the impoft; the laft governs the proceedings of the Court in the trial of offenders. Having stated this diftinction, I have no hesitation in saying that fo far as the bill propofes that the excife mode of levying the duty fhall be applied to wine, its provifions are not inconfiftent with a due regard to our ancient conflitution, and to the civil rights of the fubject; for, as the officer will have no admiffion to any other part of the trader's premifes than that in which his wines are kept, and as that part of his premifes in many inftances is, and in all inftances may be, feparate, and even diftant, from his own Houfe, the repofe of his private dwelling, the tranquillity of his home, will not be disturbed by the vifits of the officer. That no inconvenience will attend the feparation of the wine cellar from the houfe of the wine merchant, in thofe cafes in which they are not feparate at prefent, I do not pretend to fay; but I affert that the inconvenience is not of that kind that trenches upon the conftitution, and violates the rights of the fubject. If then the prefent bill was fimply an application to a new object of that part of the excife fyftem which directs the collection of the duties, I fhould fay that it is not inconfiftent with the laws and conftitution of the country; but, Sir, the bill as now fubmitted to the Houfe, contains other provifions which I own do excite my ferious apprehenfion, and against the dangers of which I am perfuaded the right honourable gentleman near me, will, upon refiec tion, think it neceffary to guard. The provifions which I dread are thofe that fubject the dealers in wine to that part of the excife law that relates to the trial of offences. This is the part of the excife fyftem which Blackstone reprobates as alien to the conftitution, and abhorrent to the law of the land; a truth which every lawyer admits, and which, I am fure, no man living will difpute who has the fmallest knowledge of the nature of the court, or of the mode of trial it adopts. For what is the courfe of its procedure? Sir, it is fo fummary and fudden, and is finished with fuch fearful dispatch, that a very few words are fufficient to describe it to the House.-An excifeman, for the moft part needy and neceffitous, for his falary is lefs than a maintenance; an excifeman who knows that the fhorteft road to wealth is that of accufation, fince half the penalties are his, informs the Commiffioners that an offence has been committed, and names the fuppofed offender. The Commiffioners immediately iffue a fummons to the accufed, commanding him to appear before them, and to answer to the charge. Now in this fummons three circumftances are very remarkable-The firft is, that the fummons does not specify the particulars of the charge, fo that the accufed, efpecially if innocent, knows not in what manner to prepare for his defence, nor what witneffes to bring. The fecond circumftance is, that contrary to the established cuftom of the King's Courts the fummons gives the accufed but three days notice of his trial, fo that if he is abfent from town, the fummons will never reach him, and the firft information he will have of the charge will probably be that judgement has been given against him for non-appearance, which the excife law conftrues as contempt; that a warrant of execution has been iffued; and that the officers of juftice are in poffeffion of his house. The third circumftance is that the fummons may be left with his fervant, or with his child, or in the key hole of his ftreet door; for the law exprefsly declares that the funmons may be ferved in either of these ways; fo that if the accufed fhould be actually in town the fummons may never reach him; in which cafe as in the former, he will be condemned without a hearing, and the execution of the fentence will be the first notice of the charge. Let us fuppofe, however, that fortune is his friend, and that he receives the fummons. What is his fituation when he attends the Court? Uninformed of the particulars of the charge either as to time or place, he cannot be provided with witneffes to atteit his innocence, nor is he, in any respect, prepared for his defence. His accufer, on the other hand, comes with full preparation; with a charge matured by reflection, and guarded VOL. XX. X x by by every art that a personal intereft in the event can poffibly fuggeft. The accufer knows that if he can establish the charge, one half of the penalties incurred, one half of the goods that are forfeited will be his; nor can it be thought furprifing that urged by poverty on the one hand, and tempted by the profpect of wealth on the other, he fwears with a determined mind. In this perilous fituation to whom shall the defendant turn for protection? Will the Commiffioners be counsel for the accufed? Sir, the Commiffioners are appointed by the Crown, are removeable at the pleasure of the Crown, and are dependent for their falaries on the very revenue against the interefts of which he is fuppofed to have offended; they are parties against the accufed: how then fhall he escape conviction? and if convicted, and penalties beyond his means, as may often be the cafe, fhould be impofed upon him, imprisonment inevitably follows; an imprifonment to which the Legislature has prefcribed no limits, and which, therefore, may be imprisonment for life: nor is this fufficient to fatisfy the law; for after his body is furrendered to the Crown, the law ftill attaches on his fortune; his goods are still feized; and his wife and children difmiffed to beggary and want. Such is the nature of the excife tribunal. His Majefty's higheft officers of the law are near me-I appeal to them for the truth and fidelity of the defcription. Will the Attorney General difpute the account I have given of the excife code? Will the Solicitor General controvert the recital I have made of the nature of the fummons, of the conftitution of the court, or of the frightful difpatch with which its proceedings are conducted? I am fure they will not contradict me. On what principles then will they defend the extending the judicial powers of the excife to new defcriptions of men? upon those of the conftitution? upon thofe of the ancient law of the land? That I am confident they never will attempt; for it requires not their ability, or their profeffional knowledge to difcern that this part of the bill is abhorrent to every principle which the Conftitution knows: or will they defend the defpotifm of the Commiffioners as neceffary to enforce the collection of the duties? That moft certainly they will not fay; for every day's practice is a proof that the excife ju rifdiction can never be fupported on this plea, as many of the most important excife caufes are, by the officers own choice, determined by a jury, for when the officer thinks himself in the right he gives the preference to this mode of decifion. As little will they contend that the fummary proceedings of an Excife Court are effential to the principle of the bill, as it would be eafy to prove that thofe proceedings militate directly against it; for what is the object of the |