^ o (/ r^ « i.)- SIXTII REPORT or THE COMMISSIONERS [ Appx, with refpett to other Officers, though he believes this mode of keeping Books to have been general. Maltfters who wet without notice, make room on the floors for their private wet- tings, by battening the oldcft floor to the kiln. If the kiln could be limited in proportion to the quantity of flooriiig, he thinks, thofe frauds might more effectually be prevented. It is his opinion, that Maltfters difpofed of their private Malt chiefly by fending out two or three turns under one Permit. Pie thinks the time for which Corn is allowed to remain on the floor might be abridged to 13 days ( and that without injuring the Manufacturer) and lcffen the opportunities of fraud. He is of opinion, that if the Officers did their duty, the prefent regulations would be fuffi- cient to prevent private Malting, as the procefs takes up fo much time as to render It fcarcely poffible that frandulent Maltfters Ihould efcape detection; He obferves, in looking over feveral Malt- books for the City of Dublin, now fhewn to him, that thofe Maltfters who are fuppofed to be fair Traders do not keep their Grain longer ' than 12 or 14 days on the floor, wliilft thofe Maltfters who are fuppofed to fmuggle, always appear to take the 21 days allowed by Law. While on duty in Dublin, he received from Mr. George Hughes, a Maltfter in his walk, who had two houfes, for the large one ten Guineas, and for the fmaller five Guineas, for every month during which they were worked ; in thefe fums the Permit ftamp duties were included. From Mr. Trevor, another Maltfter in his walk, he received five Guineas at the time of meafuring his houfe, but fcarcely any other fees. There were no other Maltfters in his walk. J. S. Rochfort, John Wilfon. Fred. Geale, Robert Alexander, Charles Saxton, Chas. Steward Hawthorne. No 8. The Examination of ARTHUR GUINNESS, Efquire; taken upon Oath, the 29th of July, and 28th of Auguft, 1807. This Examinant faith, That he is a Porter Brewer in the City of Dublin, and carries on a confiderable manufacture of Malt in the country ; that he conceives the regulations of the Malt Aft of the year 1805, particularly the great increafe in the monthly charges impofed by that A£ t, to have operated as a confiderable check to the manufacturer of fmuggled Malt, which, previous to the pafling of that A£ t, was carried on fo extenfively, that there were two Markets for Malt in Dublin, one for that which was fmuggled, the other for that which paid duty. He thinks it could not be difadvantageous to their trade, if Maltfters were obliged to keep the Corn in fteep 60 hours, as 72 hours are feldom more than fufficient for the fteeping of Irifh Barley. Irifh Malt made for fale is in general hurried through the procefs ; it is the objeCt of the Irifh Manufacturer for fale, that his Malt fhall weigh heavily; of the Englifh, that it fhall meafure well. He thinks that Malt may be hurried through the procefs, fo as to be off the kiln in 7 or 8 days from the time of wetting, but the fair Maltfter generally takes nearly the full time of 21 days allowed by Law. He thinks it a hardfhip on Brewers to be prevented from felling Malt that has been purchafed by them, as they may at times, from being overftocked, or from other circumftances, find it neceffary to difpofe of part of their ftock; and that although a Brewer ought not to be allowed to traflic generally in Malt, he conceives the Com- miflioners of Excife might have a power, in fpecial cafes, to permit Brewers to dif- pofe of purchafed Malt. He confiaers the Malt Permit fyftem as oppreffive to the fair Trader, and afford- ing no efficient check to fmuggling, except in cafes of the conveyance of Malt from one place to another; but as applied to the keeping of Brewers flocks, or to the afcertaining of the quantities confumed in their kieves, he conceives that it can fo eafily be evaded, as to have become totally inefficient, and believes that the Officers feldom attempt to keep a correct account of Brewers flocks. He is of opinion, that a faithful attention to the charging of the Duty on Corn in procefs would fufficiently fecure the Revenue, and render Permits unneceflary.