Showing 2 results

Brief for the trial of John Hatch and David Boyce, dealers in foreign and British spirits at Averstoake in the county of Southampton, [1723], headed 'For the Attorney General...Information for the 10s. per gallon penalty for not keeping British spirits seperate [sic] from foreign brandy', and endorsed with the signatures of Sir Thomas Pengelly, Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and J. White, solicitor, and with the words 'To attend Mr. Justice [Alexander] Denton upon the point reserved. Ellis Solicitor for the Excise. For Sir Thomas Pengelly'. The dealers had been accused of mixing foreign and British spirits to avoid the customs: '...the said dealers kept in their warehouses and storehouses great numbers of caskes both of foreign brandy and of British spirits, which they industriously laid and placed in the most confused and disorderly manner they could contrive, on purpose to perplex and confound the officers...'.

Draft, with marginal notes, of A letter from a Member of Parliament...containing his reasons for being against the late Act for preventing the retail of spirituous liquors, published in 1736. The letter concerns the writer's reasons for not supporting this Act (9 Geo.II c.23 - 1736), although he had supported the 'Act for laying a duty upon compound waters' (2 Geo.II c.17-1729, repealed by 6 Geo. II c.17-1733). Many of the arguments in the letter, for and against the Act, are given in similar terminology in Cobbett's Parliamentary History of England, vol IX (1811), columns 1032-44, and more particularly columns 1059-1110.