THE WEALTH OE NATIONS. 845

most; while at the same time the revenue might be consi-derably augmented.

The objections of Dr. Davenant to this alteration in thepresent system of excise duties, seem to be without founda-tion. Those objections are, that the tax, instead of dividing ■itself as at present pretty equally upon the profit of the malt-ster, upon that of the brewer, and upon that of the retailer,would, so far as it affected profit, fall altogether upon that ofthe maltster; that the maltster could not so easily get backthe amount, of the tax in the advanced price of his malt, asthe brewer and retailer in the advanced price of their liquor;and that so heavy a tax upon malt might reduce the rent andprofit of barley land.

No tax can ever reduce, for any considerable time, the rateof profit in any particular trade, which must always keep itslevel with other trades in the neighbourhood. The presentduties upon malt, beer, and ale, do not affect the profits ofthe dealers in those commodities, who all get back the taxwith an additional profit, in the enhanced price of their goods.

A tax indeed may render the goods upon which it is imposedso dear as to diminish the consumption of them. But theconsumption of malt is in malt, liquors; and a tax of eigh-teen shillings upon the quarter of malt could not well renderthose liquors dearer than the different taxes, amounting totwenty-four or twenty-five shillings, do at present. Thoseliquors, on the contrary, would probably become cheaper,and the consumption of them would be more likely to increasethan to diminish.

It is not very easy to understand why it should be moredifficult for the maltster to get back eighteen shillings in theadvanced price of his malt, than it is at present for the brewerto get back twenty-four or twenty-five, sometimes thirty shil-lings, in that of his liquor. The maltster, indeed, instead ofa tax of six shillings, would be obliged to advance one ofeighteen shillings upon every quarter of malt. But the breweris at present obliged to advance a tax of twenty-four or twen-ty-five, sometimes thirty shillings upon every quarter of maltwhich he brews. It could not be more inconvenient for themaltster to advance a lighter tax, than it is at present for thebrewer to advance a heavier one. The maltster doth not al-ways keep in his granaries a stock of malt which it will re-quire a longer time to dispose of, than the stock of beer anda ^e which the brewer frequently keeps in his cellars. The