THE BREWERS' LICENCE.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR.")
Sin,—Even if it is the case as you say, that the beer-drinker pays. the brewer's licence, I do not see how the argument justifies the tax. Why should the consumer be encouraged to drink spirits or cider instead of beer ? If it was right to impose a new tax on beer, in addition to its contribution to the Excise through the malt duty, on the ground that "the beer-drinker is a legitimate subject for taxation," why was not a similar addition made to the burdens- of the spirit-drinker, and why does the cider-drinker go entirely free ?
If the fact that the consumer pays a tax justifies it, why not reimpose the paper duties ? The newspaper proprietors would doubleas recover the difference by raising their prices, or by greater economy of management. Or, to make the analogy closer, why not impose a farthing stamp on every daily newspaper,.
-exempting all others? It is not more unjust to encourage the reader of weekly and quarterly magazines at the expense of the 'reader of daily papers, than to encourage the consumption of gin at the expense of beer.--I am, Sir, &c., A BREWER. [The simple justification of any malt or beer tax is, that without it no spirit tax could work. Very few persons in England would drink spirits if "Bass" were obtainable at 2d. a quart.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
