victed of this
fraud, the Report of the Board of Excise amply shews.--See p. 129.

The following statement relating to this subject, we transcribe from a
Parliamentary document:[74]

Mr. Perkins being asked, whether he believed that any of the inferior
brewers adulterated beer, answered, "I am satisfied there are some
instances of that."

_Question._--"Do you believe publicans do?" _Answer._--"I believe they
do." _Q._--"To a great extent?" _A._--"Yes." _Q._--"Do you believe they
adulterate the beer you sell them?" _A._--"I am satisfied there are
some instances of that."--Mr. J. Martineau[75] being asked the following

_Question._[76]--"In your judgment is any of the beer of the metropolis,
as retailed to the publican, mixed with any deleterious ingredients?"

_Answer._--"In retailing beer, in some instances, it has been."

_Question._--"By whom, in your opinion, has that been done?"

_Answer._--"In that case by the publicans who vend it."

On this point, it is but fair, to the minor brewers, to record also the
answers of some officers of the revenue, when they were asked whether
they considered it more difficult to detect nefarious practices in large
breweries than in small ones.

Mr. J. Rogers being thus questioned in the Committee of the House of
Commons,[77] "Supposing the large brewers to use deleterious or any
illegal ingredients to such an amount as could be of any importance to
their concern, do you think it would, or would not, be more easy to
detect it in those large breweries, than in small ones?" his answer was,
"more difficult to detect it in the large ones:" and witness being asked
to state the reason why, answered, "Their premises are so much larger,
and there is so much more strength, that a cart load or two is got rid
of in a minute or two." Witness "had known, in five minutes, twenty
barrels of molasses got rid of as soon as the door was shut."

Another witness, W. Wells, an excise officer,[78] in describing the
contrivances used to prevent detection, stated, that at a brewer's, at
Westham, the adulterating substances "were not kept on the premises, but
in the brewer's house; not the principal, but the working brewers; it
not being considered, when there, as liable to seizure: the brewer had a
very large jacket made expressly for that purpose, with very large
pockets; and, on brewing mornings, he would take his pockets full of the
different ingredients. Witness supposed that such a man's jacke