however, were only retained for a short period. The Government of the Revolution would gladly have made itself popular by abolishing the more obnoxious of the Excise duties, but its necessities would not allow of such a course. The duty on glass and on malt was first imposed in William's reign, and the distilleries were subjected to Excise duties as well as the brewers. The salt duty was reimposed, and the duty on ale and beer increased, the latter producing an addition of 450,000l. a-year to the revenue. During the thirteen years of the reign of William III. the Excise duties averaged nearly a million a-year. The expensive wars of Anne's reign rendered it necessary still further to increase the number of articles subject to Excise, and duties were imposed on paper, stainedpaper, and soap. This branch of revenue produced an average of 1,738,000Z. during the twelve years of her reign. The produce of the Excise, during the peaceable reign of George I., averaged 2,340,0007. per annum, with no addition to the number of excisable articles, except a small duty on wrought plate.

The Excise still remained the most obnoxious branch of the public revenue. The laws for its protection were very severe, and no other tax so constantly and inconveniently interfered with the trading classes, or excited so wide-spread a prejudice; for the unpopularity of the duties on importation was chiefly confined to the towns on the coast, but the Excise laws were felt by persons in every corner of the country. It was a current opinion of the political writers of the day, in which Locke and Davenant had been deceived, that taxes of every description fell ultimately upon the land; and this is a point of importance in the consideration of Sir Robert Walpole's attempts to introduce his great scheme for extending the Excise. He had Land and Trade against him, and was baffled by the most violent and ignorant burst of popular clamour which it was ever the fate of a minister to encounter. A short notice of Walpole's scheme will not, perhaps, be unacceptable to those who take an interest in the history of finance; and the reception it met with is also exceedingly characteristic of the times. At that period the fiscal laws of the country were daily outraged in the most open and daring manner. The highwaymen, who pursued their occupation with impunity on all the roads leading to London, had their counterpart in the desperate class of men who carried on the trade of smugglers along the coast, murdering the officers of the revenue, setting fire to custom-houses, and riding in armed gangs of twenty or more, within half a dozen miles of London, on the banks of the Thames. A committee of the House of Commons, appointed in 1732 to inquire into the frauds and abuses committed in the Customs, and which did not complete its task, reported that since Christmas, 1723, a period of nine years, the smuggling of tea and brandy had been conducted openly and audaciously, that the number of custom-house officers beaten and abused amounted to 250, and six had been murdered. In the same period 251,320 lbs. of tea and 652,924 gallons of brandy had been seized and condemned, and upwards of 2000 persons prosecuted; and 229 boats and other vessels had been condemned. Owing either to the adroitness of the smugglers or the corruption of the revenue officers, only 2808 hogsheads of wine had been condemned in these nine years; but the number "run" in Hampshire, Dorsetshire, and Devonshire was 4738; and informations had been entered against 400 persons. The sense of honour amongst the mercantile classes of that day was at a low point. It was proved before the

committee in question that by perjury, forgery, and the grossest collusion, the revenue was frequently defrauded to the amount of a third of the duty on tobacco; and that in the port of London a loss of 100,000l. per annum was sustained by the dishonest manner in which the drawback on re-exportation was obtained, which in some cases exceeded the sum originally received by government. When Walpole introduced his plan, on the 15th of March, 1733, for the correction of these abuses, he held in his hand a book which had belonged to a tobacco-merchant in the City, shewing one of the modes of defrauding the government by collusion with officers of the revenue. False quantities were entered at the times of importation, and this column was covered by a slip of paper artfully pasted down, on which were written the real quantities. The import duties were paid on the first or false quantity, and the drawback obtained on the real quantity; and, of course, the one amount was larger than the other, and the government was defrauded to the extent of the difference. In the case which the minister quoted, the merchant obtained in each case a drawback to nearly twice the amount of what he had actually paid duty for upon importation. Another variety of fraud in the tobacco trade was that of receiving the drawback for exportation and then re-landing it. A great trade was carried on in this way with Guernsey, Jersey, the Isle of Man, and the ports of Dunkirk, Ostend, &c. Besides persons apparently respectable, and custom-house officers, who were engaged in plundering the revenue, watermen, lightermen, and City-porters called gangsmen, were equally active in "socking,”—a cant term then in use for stealing tobacco from ships in the river. This practice was discovered in 1728; and it appeared that fifty tons of tobacco had been "socked" on board ships and on the quays, and deposited in houses from London Bridge to Woolwich, in the course of one year. One hundred and fifty custom-house officers were dismissed for participating in these frauds, and several of them were prosecuted at the expense of government. In mentioning this circumstance, Walpole observed, "And it is not a little remarkable, when we recollect the professions of patriotism, virtue, and disinterestedness which are now so copiously poured forth, that not a single merchant, though the facts were so notorious and shameful, assisted the state, either by information or pecuniary exertion, to suppress the fraud or bring the delinquents to punishment."

The plan of the minister for the correction of these abuses was, to benefit the fair trader by putting down his unprincipled competitors, and to improve the revenue without the addition of new duties. Conceiving that the laws of the Customs were insufficient to prevent fraud, there being only one check—that at the time of importation-he proposed that tobacco should be subject to the laws of the Excise as well as those of the Customs. While the total duty would not be increased, the Customs duty was to be only three-farthings the pound, and he added: "I propose for the future that all tobacco, after being weighed at the Custom-house, and charged with the said three-farthings per pound, shall be lodged in a warehouse or warehouses, to be appointed by the Commissioners of Excise, of which warehouse the merchant-importer shall have one lock and key, and the warehouse-keeper to be appointed by the said commissioners shall have another, that the tobacco may lie safe in that warehouse till the merchant finds a market for it, either for exportation or home consumption." If he sold for

exportation, the quantity, after being re-weighed, was discharged of the Customs duty of three-farthings; and if for home consumption, he paid also the same duty, and on delivering it to the buyer, an inland duty of fourpence to the proper officer appointed to receive the same. This is precisely, in in its main features, the admirable principle of the present warehousing system; but in vain did Sir Robert Walpole urge the merits of his plan, and plead for it "as a most innocent scheme, hurtful to none but smugglers and unfair traders.". In vain did he assert and demonstrate, with great clearness, that his measure would increase the revenue, and "tend to make London a free port, and, by conscquence, the market of the world." The alarm had been thoroughly sounded from one end of the country to the other, even before the minister brought forth his project; and when his intentions were only surmised the country was lashed into such a state of blind fury that it seemed to have lost its common sense on this occasion. Ballads were printed and sung about the streets, with a wood-cut of a dragon with several heads at the top. This monster drew a chariot, in which sat a portly person (Walpole), receiving large sums of gold which issued from one of the mouths of the beast. A tobacconist set up a new device on his paper, of three wooden shoes on a shield, with an exciseman and a grenadier, as supporters. According to the Craftsman, the terms used in the game of Quadrille were changed, and to be "beested' was to be excised, while one sort of card was called the Projector (Walpole), and others, Commissioners; and so, it states, the humour ran through the town. The same violent partizan manufactured a story of a lady having been robbed of two guineas only out of ten, by a highwayman, whose politeness rather astonishing her, she had courage enough to express her surprise; on which he said, " Madam, I rob like a gentleman! I assure you I do not belong to the Projector;' I am none of his gang." On the 15th of March, when Walpole introduced his new measure, "not only the members solicited the attendance of their friends, but letters were delivered by the beadles and other officers in the parishes and wards of the city, to induce a numerous party to assemble at the doors and in the avenues to the House, in order to overawe the proceedings of the legislature."+ Deputies from the provincial towns had been sent to London to oppose the measure, and the corporations throughout the country were very generally active for the same object. The newspapers of the day state, that on the 15th "a vast number of eminent merchants and traders appeared in the Court of Requests' lobby, and places contiguous to the House of Commons, to solicit against the excise." The debate was maintained with great spirit until two o'clock in the morning-an hour then very unusual, and on a division, there voted with the minister 266, against 205. As Sir Robert left the house some of the exasperated people outside attempted to do him some personal injury, but were prevented by the interference of his son, and his friend General Churchill. Several divisions took place in subsequent stages of the Bill, and the ministerial majority dwindled from 61 to 17. A private meeting was now summoned by Sir Robert of the principal members who had supported the Bill, at which he was urged to proceed with the measure,

* The Craftsman,' a weekly newspaper, commenced in 1727, as the organ of the country party. It was written with great spirit, and some of the opposition leaders occasionally contributed to it.

† Coxe's Life of Sir R. Walpole,' vol. iii. p. 81.

notwithstanding the violence of the opposition both from within and without. Walpole is reported to have said that, "in the present inflamed temper of the people the Act could not be carried into execution, without an armed force; and there will be an end of the liberty of England, if supplies are to be raised by the sword;" and he would, he said, resign rather than enforce taxes at the expense of blood. On the 11th of April, when the Bill stood for a second reading, he moved that it should be postponed to the 12th of June, or, in other words, he abandoned his scheme. The Wine Bill, a measure of similar character, was never brought in. No great national victory could be hailed with such exuberant triumph as that with which the country greeted the defeat of the minister's "monster project."

This defeat was celebrated in London the same evening by bonfires, illuminations, ringing of bells, and other public demonstrations of joy throughout the whole city: the Monument was illuminated. The demonstrations in the provinces were, if possible, still more fervent. The rejection of a great measure would now be known at such a place as Bristol by midnight, or within five hours after the event had been announced; but, in 1733, the news of the dropping of the tobacco bill was brought to that city by an express which arrived at eleven o'clock the following night. The merchants knocked at each other's doors to announce the good news; bonfires were lighted in the streets, one of large size opposite the Excise-office; at two in the morning the bells of the city-churches struck up a merry peal, and continued ringing all that day and even on the Saturday; barrels of ale were also given away in the streets; and two effigies were burnt, probably the one representing the prime minister and the other an exciseman. The " courier" for Liverpool with the good news passed through Coventry on Thursday, "when the joy that immediately appeared in every countenance was inexpressible, and demonstrated itself by ringing of bells, bonfires, and illuminations, with the sound of trumpets, drums, and French horns, warming-pans, and everything that could make a noise, while healths went briskly round to all the honest (?) gentlemen that were against the excise." At Liverpool, the day on which the news arrived (Friday, 13th April) was spent "in ringing of bells, wearing of gilt cockades on leaf tobacco, under which was written No Excise;' ships' colours were displayed, and those of the Exchange, and guns fired in honour of the glorious 204." Effigies were burnt both at Coventry and Liverpool. At Southampton, also, "somebody was carried round the town in effigy, and then thrown into the fire." At Chester, where messengers with the intelligence arrived on the 13th, there were lighted "the greatest number of bonfires ever known in the city:" one opposite the recorder's was kept in for five days. A great ball was given, and the Exchange was illuminated by 204 candles, being the number of the worthy gentlemen who had opposed the obnoxious measure. From Lewes, the Craftsman received a private letter which began by saying: "No news (newspapers, we suppose, are meant) come to this place, but we are glad to hear from private accounts that the old English spirit still appears for the preservation of our liberties and properties." At Rye, most probably a great stronghold of smugglers, "every one expressed an insuperable delight in being happily rescued from further excises and wooden shoes." Cambridge there were great rejoicings, but Cambridge was far outshone by

At

Oxford. The rampant proceedings at the latter university on the defeat of the minister sufficiently indicate that political hatred of the most violent kind was the chief motive of the leaders of the opposition, and truly they had a superfluity of ignorance and prejudice at their command, such as does not often glad the feelings of political bigotry. At Oxford, says Archdeacon Coxe, in his Life of Walpole,' " the gownsmen joined and encouraged the mob, Jacobinical cries resounded through the town, and three days passed in this disgraceful manner before the Vice-chancellor and proctors could restore tranquillity."

Walpole remained undismayed amidst this political storm, and so far from being disgraced, as was fondly anticipated by his opponents, the king dismissed several persons who had deserted the ministerial ranks. The Earl of Chesterfield was deprived of the office of Lord Steward of the Household two days after the Excise-bill was abandoned, and his dismissal was followed by that of five other peers who held official situations. Lord Cobham and the Duke of Bolton were deprived of their regiments, and the friends of the minister were appointed to several of the vacant posts. The king's speech, on closing the session, alluded to "the wicked endeavours that have lately been made use of to inflame the minds of the people, and, by the most unjust misrepresentation, to raise tumults and disorders that almost threatened the peace of the kingdom." The extravagant ideas of liberty and of their own superiority over all other people which were entertained at this period by the English are quietly satirised by Goldsmith's Chinese Philosopher,' who listened to a conversation carried on between a debtor through the gate of his prison, a porter, and a soldier, the subject being an apprehended invasion from France. The prisoner feared that liberty, the Englishman's prerogative, would be endangered if the French were to conquer. The soldier with an oath exclaims that it would not so much be our liberties as our religion that would suffer, and the porter terms the French a pack of slaves fit only to carry burdens. Andrew Marvell, Blackstone, and Johnson were great vilifiers of the Excise. Marvell describes it as "a hateful tax;" Blackstone, writing in 1765, says that "from its first original to the present time its very name has been odious to the people of England," and the great lexicographer's definition is well known.* The Excise laws have been so injudiciously framed, and in many instances rendered so unnecessarily vexatious, that they have, in consequence, obtained more than their due share of the discredit which attaches generally to all taxes. Above six hundred acts of Parliament for enforcing Excise regulations are a trap to even the fairest trader; and, at the best, it is no light evil to conduct manufacturing processes under a system of interference and regulation enforced by heavy penalties. While the Commissioners of Excise Inquiry give some instances of the prejudicial effects of such a system, they also point out the manner in which they may be diminished.

The Gin Act of 1736, an unwise and futile attempt to put down intemperance by a tax intended to make that liquor too dear for the poor, who solely or chiefly

* Mr. Croker, in his variorum edition of Boswell, shows that there is very good ground for believing that Johnson's inveterate hatred of the Excise had its origin in a prosecution against his father for some breach of their laws. Hence the terms in which he speaks of a Commissioner of Excise in the 'Idler,' and the scurrilous definition in the Dictionary. The latter was actually submitted by the Commissioners to counsel for an opinion as to its libellous character.-See Croker's Boswell.'