James Ellis' evidence to Commissioners of Excise (1835)

Post date: Apr 29, 2019 7:18:9 PM

Available on Google Books as Appendix 19 to the 16th report of the Commissioners of Excise before Sir Henry Parnell in the chair.

APPENDIX No. 19.

- Tuesday, June 16, 1835.

James Ellis, Esq., of Barming, near Maidstone, called in and examined.

I BELIEVE you are the greatest hop-grower in England? –Perhaps it may be so.

How many acres have you now in cultivation?—Upwards of 500 acres.

You have been a considerable time a hop-grower?—I began before I was eighteen years old, and I have never been eighteen days at one time away from it since.

How many years?—More than 40; 42 years a hop-grower.

The Commissioners are anxious to know whether you have any suggestions to make with respect to the present mode of collecting the Excise duty on hops, or generally any observations either as to the mode of collecting, or as to the duty itself?—No, I do not know that I have any observations, but I really do not know that it could be better than it is.

Have you any fault to find with the amount of duty, I think it is about 2d. per lb. ?—It is just 2d. per lb.; there is rather a difference of opinion about that.

You better tell us what your opinion is?—I would ask whether the alteration of duty would have any effect in altering our protection; that we are more afraid of than any thing.

We have nothing to do with that question; all we have to do with is the actual duty, not at all coupled with any foreign protection ?—We are quite satisfied that without the protection all our land and labour would be worth nothing, and nothing but ruin would be the consequence of any interference.

Have you had any foreign hops imported —There were some in 1817. I was applied to in 1817 to dry some, but I said I would much rather that my new oast-house was burned down, than dry any foreign hops on it.

Then foreign hops require our drying or cleaning?—That was the case then.

Have you ever seen any samples of the foreign hops of Belgium or the north of France ?– Yes. I have seen samples; generally speaking they have a very bad smell;

They are not equal to ours?—No, they are not. We grow one hop which we call the Flemish hop, but it is the coarsest and worst kind of hop that is grown. It is called at Farnham the Never Black, and I understand they are not admitted in the Farnham row at Weyhill Fair. They are never at the Farnham market.

It does not blight so easily as the more delicate qualities, I believe ?–It does not. The Farnham people will not allow them to come into the Farnham row.

But now putting aside the question of foreign hops, do you consider the duty, is tolerably fair? What percentage does the duty make on the average price of hops? What do hops sell for per lb.?—I cannot tell you the percentage for several years, but the present percentage would be nearly 17 per cent., supposing the price to be 5£ and the duty 16s. 10d.

It is not quite as much as a shilling per lb.?—It is 10d. and the duty 2d. It is 18 or 19 per cent.; it is certainly a heavy duty. I need not tell you what the original duty was. It was 1¹/₄d. per lb., and it was afterwards made 2¹/₂d. In 1804, we petitioned, and ¹/₂d. per lb. was taken off, and 2d. has been the only duty ever since. We have continued to calculate at the old duty, which is about 10s. per cwt. in round numbers.

Do you consider that the rate of duty is such as in any degree to check consumption? Do you suppose if the duty was reduced people would grow more hops, or do you think it does not interfere much with the growth? —I should think rather they would grow more hops if the duty was reduced. Supposing the duty was reduced to 1 1/2 d., we call it the old duty, I believe they would call that the war duty.

You may, but I do not think it was imposed for the war. Suppose it was reduced to the old duty, you think then that would rather increase the consumption ?—I should think it would ; as far as duty goes, it is the heaviest thing we have to look to. It is a great sum to get together; but at the same time I do not think I could say that it is the opinion that it would be better for being lower.

We are only taking your opinion; of course anything you believe to be the general opinion we should be glad to know also?–I believe the general opinion is, that if any thing was done about the duty, perhaps it might interfere with our protection, and that would ruin us altogether.

Do you think when the duty was increased, it had the effect of occasioning the use of substitutes for hops?—Why, I do not know about that; the percentage duty has varied very much.

As far as your experience and memory go, do you think when the duty was double, that occasioned the use of drugs or other substitutes ?—It unfortunately happened when the duty became more the prices became less, certainly. I have some account of the prices, and notwithstanding perhaps that money was more valuable as far back as the years 1788 and 1789, still, when the duty was 10s. per cwt., the prices were greater in amount than they have been since, when the duty has been higher and money less valuable. My account goes back since 1788 up to 1823. Before 1807, we have no account of the acres in plant, but probably you have. I am very anxious to get the accounts if I could, previous to the year 1807. We have always been compelled to make a return of hops; why we have not been able to ascertain the gross amount I do not know. I have never seen the amount of acres previous to 1807.

What is your impression as to the amount now, as compared with the period since the peace? Do you think there are as many acres cultivated as during the war?—Yes, quite as many, rather more I should think. We seem to have gone on with 38,000 acres and a fraction, through the years 1807, 1808, 1809, 1810, 1811, and 1812. Then we have gradually increased to 39,000 and 40,000 acres.

The total number of acres this year is 51,000 in plant, I believe?—That is just what it was in 1819, 51,014 acres. They are all smaller after the duty was laid on, and then we come to the great crop years, 1818 and 1819, when the prices were down to 50s. and 5£. In 1822, when we complained about the duty, they were down as low as l£. 15s. from 5£. 12s., and that is the lowest I have an account of.

DEAR SIR, Union Street, Southwark, 5th Feb. 1824.

The annexed table commences when there was a very small stock of hops on hand, and at the expiration of thirty years, in 1817, it is well known there were very few left unconsumed. The average produce for the said thirty years is £111,776, old duty. The last six years have yielded £964,261, old duty, averaging £160,710 per annum, exceeding the produce of the preceding thirty years by £48,934 per annum.

We are, dear Sir,

Your most humble Servants,

SANDERS, PARKES, AND Co.

James Ellis, Esq., Barming, Kent. -