13 Fi-S 33 O' 5 FACTS ON IRELAND. m fJ rr^°l E nr?°q mVe i Stigat rf the i ?^. ue 1 nc ® of those peculiar circumstances in the Financial, Com¬ mercial, and Social condition of Ireland, to which the excessive misery of the great mass of her neritv and^^r ^ attnb 'J t ^* And 1 sha11 endeavour to exhibit the tnie obstacles to her pros¬ perity, and the tendency of the various measures devised for promoting it. P THE STATE INCOME. JuN P 18Sn ed ^ t0 tllG ReP ° rt ° n - Ireland ’ P resented t0 the House of Commons upon the 16th of Ju y v!w 0, r th r ere , ar< ; V ® ry perspicuous and detailed statements of the Public Income Exnenditnre tTe t^ alnd ^tuhTfim 91 *°> t tf ° f the ^ 1829 ’ with of which vear SrSa 8 ! i and the fifteen succeeding years ending with 1816, on the close . h j md Insh Exchequers and Debts were incorporated. From these ril ff Statements, and the separate Accounts for the ten years ending with 1826, I have piepured the following condensed view of the financial transactions of Ireland during- a period of yea f’ dlvested of those apparent complications which render the Publfc Accounts unsatisfactory to persons not acquainted with the intricacies of our financial system This Accoun is faithfully correct. I have carefully computed every item in ^ZTihl Blnces ll . A rrf tra ” Sactions > ^ from those’ which they INCOME AND LOANS. wtumcuLcmciH oi eacn periot 2. Repayments, by Debtors, Ac¬ countants, &c. O Ate- ments and Management: 4. Customs and Excise Duties Assessed Taxes.. 5. Stamp Duties. 6. Postage Duties. 7. Duties on Pensions and Salaries 8. Net Produce of Lotteries. 9. Poundage Fees, Pells Fees and Casualties. 10. Received from the British Ex¬ chequer in each period, beyond the Sum remitted to it in the period. 11. Borrowed in Ireland, in each period, beyond the Sum repaid in the period. 12. Borrowed in England, in each period, beyond the Sum repaid in the period. Income and Debt....£ For 10 Years from 5th January 1702, to 5th January 1802. For 15 Years from 5th January 1802, to 5th January 1817. For 10 Years from 5th January 1817, to 5th January 1827. 3 £• s. d. 1 243,645 9 2* £• s. d. 324,164 17 9f £• s. d. 77,976 12 10£ . 1,512,842 2 8 r 1,792,420 19 8^ 1,937,966 11 10^ 113,420 2 10| ~ - - [ 14,479,191 14 2 859,268 5 84 170,110 0 6 96,116 4 24 727,067 13 10 49,800,828 3 11 7,300,916 6 7| 937,806 1 llj 2,788 19 4 31,378,040 3 24 4,550,300 18 8 655,538 9 2£ 25,770 16 7f 397,644 2 0 531,781 8 4| - 98,422 12 If 18,599,305 15 2£ 60,690,706 17 8^'i 38,724,016 4 7 *300,000 0 0 " - - 1 14,943,536 6 9 9,520,203 5 0^ f-12,825,903 5 7 1W — M 10,313,708 7 8^46,771,369 12 34 income and Debt ...£ 38,733217. 7 6 “-—----ifci>s7oH-vT * See Item 21 • t See Item 22. \ See Item 23. ll St § 81,573 12 3£ 120,287,979 15 6| 43,749,126 3 74 See Item 21. § To complete Loan of 1815. 4 FACTS ON IRELAND. EXPENDITURE. 13. Dividends on Debt created in England. 14. Dividends on Debt created in Ireland, and Interest on Irish Treasury Bills. 15. Irish Civil List. 16. Miscellaneous Payments. 17. Grants for Army, Ordnance, and Miscellaneous Services 18. Advanced for relief of Trade, and other public Objects.... 19. Discounts and Charges on Loans. 20. Deficiency of Lottery. 21. Remitted to the British Ex¬ chequer, beyond the amount received from it. 22. Irish Debt discharged, be¬ yond the amount borrowed in the period. 23. Applied in Ireland , to the reduction of the Consoli¬ dated Debt... 24. Balance in the Irish Trea¬ sury, at the close of each period.. For 10 Years from 5th January 1792, to 5tli January 1802. For 15 Years from 5th January 1802, to 5th January 1817. For 1(T Years from 5tli January 1817, to 5th January 1827. £. s. d. £. s. d. £. s. d. 1,706,909 9 4 24,645,800 11 7 4,033,147 19 H 14,409,291 18 Of 10,528,011 7 0 2,327,869 9 2f 3,310,491 4 4f 2,079,055 10 Ilf 1,093,353 7 2| 3,105,709 9 5 2,422,164 7 3f 28,541,991 7 94 59,006,674 9 H 19,026,540 12 4f 638,288 2 3 495,896 3 1 3,038,369 9 * 6f 67,492 14 H 372,390 12 Of - - . - - 281,033 7 n — — 38,409,052 9 105,627,287 16 of - 37,094,141 7 2 _ 14,582,715 6 8 - - - 324,164 17 9 77,976 12 104 38,733,217 7 6 120,287,979 15 6f 1,216,996 0 8 4,872,176 12 8f 565,812 3 1 43,749,126 3 7£ A View of the Debt of Ireland, founded on the foregoing Statement. (Item 12.) Total of Cash borrowed in England, l>e- £■ s. A „ l"i 10* yond-the amount repaid ... ” ’ ’ /Item 21.) Cash remitted in the second period to the V British Exchequer, beyond the amount received from it • • • 1 (Item 10 ) Cash received from the British Exche- ^ V quer, in the first and third periods, beyond the amount remitted to it Balance in favor of Ireland, applicable to the payment of the Debt contracted in England. 14,582,715 6 8 5,243,536 6 9 L (Item 11.) Cash borrowed in Ireland, in the 1st and 71 ' ' 2nd periods, beyond the amount repaid 22,346,106 10 7 4 /Item 22.) Debt discharged in Ireland, m the third ^ period,beyond theamount borrowed in it 1,216,996 0 8 9,339,178 19 11 47,827,472 11 11 f 21,129,110 9 Debt (in Cash) contracted in Ireland priorto the 5th January 1792, and then due (see Sinclaire’s History of Revenue) 2,275,006 3 AppWin Ireland, to thereduction of thedonsohdated DeU Amount of Consolidated Debt, in Cash, on the 5th of January 1827 23,404,116 13 04 71,231,589 4 Ilf 4,872,176 12 8f £66,359,412 12 3f THE DEBT. It has been usual to maintain that Ireland incurred a heavy Debt in England from 1797 to 1815 which she was unable to discharge, and which England therefore added to her own on the 5th January 1817. This Debt is exhibited by the 12th items of the preceding Account and the appended Abstract The sum borrowed, (beyond repayments,) in the first period, amounted only to 10 millions, and this amount Ireland repaid to England in the second period, by remitting to the British Mxche quer 14| millions more than she had received from it. (Item 21.) It appears, however, that in that second period 46 millions were borrrowed in England, (beyond repayments,) to make up the Irish contribution to the service of the Empire, the Irish resources proving to be deficient fhis money was not expended through the Irish Treasury, as was the greater part of the sum borrowed m the first period, but was expended by the British Treasury, in defraying the War expenses And comparing the total expenditure charged in the period to Ireland, (which amounted to J05 2 millions,) with the total of her Income and Debt, (which amounted to 120 millions,) the Debt contracted for her in England was 14^ millions too much, (even supposing that she was fairly chargeab e with that Debt,) and the surplus is therefore chargeable to Great Bntain That surplus (which occasioned the large remittance to England) consequently dis¬ charged the previous Debt as already stated, and left 4^ millions of a balance. But this balance being more than countervailed by Treasury remittances to Ireland, made in the first and third thld h perkj!f° Unt ’ (Iteml °^ there remained 47 millions due to England, at the close T J 11S ls .^ ul D the whole of the Debt in cash, which remained due to England, in any view of the financial transactions of the two countries. But I conceive that whatever reason may exist for charging Ireland with the Debt contracted in the second period of the Account, in conse- quence of the War, there is nothing to justify the debit of 10 millions, (Item 12,) in the first period. The money was spent in Ireland, no doubt; but it was expended in quelling an Insur¬ rection caused by the system of Government which the English Ministers maintained in Ireland Deducting these 10 millions, Ireland owed England only 37 millions at the close of the third The matter however is of little importance, now, except as it may be interesting to those who desire accurate information, that they may form just conclusions. The system of the periods in which the Debt was contracted, is happily at an end ; and the Debt is no longer due by one Nation to the other, but by the whole Empire to such Members of the Community in both Nations as have the good fortune to acquire wealth, and chose to become National creditors. In this way the capital of the Debt on the Irish books has been increased from 26 millions to 32 millions 7 since January 1824. (Sde Finance Accounts for 1825 and 1830 ) millions, THE STATE EXPENDITURE. Some of the prominent political men of Ireland complain that the country has been drained o capital by means of a diminished expenditure of Irish Taxes, and their application to the Sic, uses of Great Britain, since the consolidation of the Exchequers, and by the adoption of those pZrD?pan3r Government, under which reductions have been made in the Iris! Individual interests may have been injured by reductions in the Public Departments. And the necessary surrender of the patronage of Government, for temporary objects, to English Function iTi e !’ X wh( ? m . the revision of the Irish Departments has been effected, may Certainly have led to the commission of some acts of injustice to promote personal favorites. But all suchoccur rences are unavoidable. Besides, the breaking up of the Irish Departments was at first a conces sion to the wishes of the popular party, who knew that the less there was to be gained b^ political ascendancy, the less would be the inducement to maintain it. It was clearly with thb object that Sir John Newport, and other popular Irish Commoners, perpetually 7 U rged th< Government to retrench; and from the same motive they were warmly supported by the popula Press. And all who advocated Irish retrenchment then, will now be happy to learn that th have not caused w In the second period of the Account on the 4th pa) COnside ™ ble P art ? f whlch was applied in England and on the Continent in defrn mg War expenses. To meet these charges the Government borrowed in England during th 6 FACTS ON IRELAND. period the sum of 46,771,369/. So that the expenditure in Ireland was many millions under the total expenditure charged against her. 7 ah Her Income in the period was 60,690,706/. and she borrowed at home 12,825,903/. All that she had to expend was therefore but 73,516,609/. and out ol this she remitted to England 14 582,715/. which left her for distribution at home 58,933,894/. Now this is all the public money (except the expenditure of the Revenue Departments) that by any possibility could have been expended in Ireland during the fifteen years from the 5th January 1802, to the 5th ^The' succeeding period of the Account is one of ten years. I shall therefore take a third (19,644,631/.) from the expenditure of the fifteen years, to ascertain how much was expended in ten years of that period, in order to compare it with the Expenditure of the succeeding period. The deduction exhibits an expenditure of 39,289,263/. for ten years of the second period. In the third period—the ten years from the 5th of January 1817, to the 5th January loa¬ the Income of Ireland amounted to 38,724,016/. and there was remitted for her use from England (Items 10 and 12) the difference between that amount and 43,749,126/. all ot which except a balance remaining at the close of the period amounting to 565,812/. (Item 24) was expended or applied in Ireland. Thus it appears that the expenditure of the third period, was 4| millions greater than that ot ten years in the preceding period. Moreover—in this third period Ireland expended all her Income and received further supplies from England ; while in the preceding period of fifteen years , her expenditure was nearly two millions less than her Income , which sum she sent to England wit 1 nearly 13 millions of borrowed money, (Items 11 and 21.) - , • u Irish misery, then, is in no respect attributable to a diminution in the expenditure of Irish Taxes, for in the aggregate, there has not been any. Tilery may, as already stated, have been a great diminution of Expenditure in the Revenue Departments, but the saving was otherwise Some persons, however, will contend that though there is not a diminished expenditure on our Accounts, there is at present an actual diminution of the Expenditure by purchasing in England Army Clothing, Accoutrements, &c. But this is no more than the ordinary commercial inter¬ course. If England provides the outfit for Army and Navy, Ireland provides the food Tho Expenditure for Navy and Ordnance and Commissariat contracts is not now debited to Ireland. Neither is Ireland debited with the payments to Army and Navy Pensioners, although about 400,000/. a year, passes from England to the Chelsea Agent in Dublin, to take up the Army Pensioners’ Receipts which are cashed by the Revenue Collectors. . , If then any of the Irish Taxes should be remitted to England by the Commissariat and Ordnance Departments, for Clothing, &c. &c. the amount of this diminution of Irish expenditure is more than countervailed by an expenditure of English Taxes on Pensioners, and tliroug CO But a ho 0 wis it with England? Her Taxes are spent at every Court in Europe, by her Ambassadors, to an amount far exceeding the expenditure of I oreign Ambassadors “ , they are spent in all parts of the Globe by Envoys, Consuls, &c.; they are spent in her Colonies (without in many instances any return,) to so enormous an amount, not only by the ordinary Colonial Establishments but by British Troops, that Mr. Hume and other Reformers recom¬ mend that the greater part of the Colonies should be declared Independent. If Ireland were to be totally separated from England, she should incur g r ^f m . terna ^ a ^ external expenses which England now defrays for her as part of the Empire Will it then be said that she should not now contribute her proportion of those expenses ? Has not England, right to draw on her at present for a portion of the Naval, Colonial Diplomatic, and C d r charges, and the expenses of the Government and Legislature ? No doubt she has And there¬ fore, Irefand would have no cause of complaint, though there were a dram of Irish Taxes to thB British Exchequer, which however is not the case, for even the uncredited Taxes paid in England are countervailed by an Irish expenditure of British Taxes. THE STATE TAXES. Bv the Act of Union, (article 7,) it was provided that for twenty years Ireland should not be required to pay more taxes than should be sufficient to defray her own charges and 2-1 5th» ot the general charges of the empire. This period terminated with the year 1820, and from that time it has been in the power of the Legislature to impose for Ireland any faxes (not exceeding the Englis 1 rates) which her resources should be found capable of yielding. There can be no doubt of the capability of Ireland’s resources to yield a much larger contribution to the public servicethan is now obtained, directly and indirectly. But, been properly taxed. Industry has been taxed with a ruinous pressure, while acquired propeity &as (speaking comparatively) not only been lightly taxed but enhanced m value. THE STATE TAXES. 7 For the purpose of supporting and elucidating my view of Irish Taxation, I give the following statement of the produce of Irish Taxes in 1820, and of Irish, Scotch, and English Taxes, in 1829, that is, the Net Produce, (the money taken from the tax payers,) deducting Drawbacks and Repayments, but not the charges of Collection. Prefixed to each item in the column for 1820, I give a reference to the page of the Finance Accounts, for that year, from which the item has been taken, as the Accounts of 1820 are exceedingly complicated. Such a reference is not necessary for 1829, as its Accounts are free from complication. I select 1820, as the last year of the Union arrangement; and 1829, because it is the last year in which the produce of every branch of Revenue in the three Countries has been distin¬ guished. Heads of Taxes. Ireland. Scotland. England. 1820. 1829. 1829. 1829. Customs—On Foreign Goods, inwards On British Goods, inwards On Exports Produce of Seizures, &c. <£1,305,777 364,673 2,390 58,017 (33) Excise . . . . (11) Stamps .... (56) Assessed Taxes . . . (62) Postage .... (68) Poundage on Salaries and Pensions Hawkers Licenses Hackney Coaches Fees and Fines, &c. &c. £1,730,857 1,983,423 565,763 333,051 222,670 none. in the Excise. Police. 9,205 £1,634,118 2,025,649 490,020 225,252 none. in the Stamps. Police. 8,886 £1,332,648 2,271,133 511,534 291,635 194,595 3,212 1,112 Police. £16,331,558 16,464,874 6,284,421 4,914,756 1,764,818 52,725 38,031 32,908 76,830 Totals 4,844,969 4,383,925 4,605,869 45,960,921 UNCREDITED TAXES. Both Ireland and Scotland contributed much more to the Exchequer in 1829 than the sums here appropriated to them—under the heads of Customs, Excise, and Stamps. CUSTOMS. Ireland paid in England and Scotland the duty on the Sugar refined in Glasgow, Bristol, Liverpool, and London, and from thence exported to Ireland. I estimate the quantity of soft Sugar thus consumed by Ireland to be about one-fourth of the Sugar consumed by her in its primitive state ; and as in 1829 the duty paid on soft Sugar in Ireland amounted to 448,448/., the duty on Sugar consumed by her in a refined state, may be set down at 100,000/. This amount nearly accords with the duty paid on refined Sugar imported in 1820, (when the coun¬ tervailing duties existed,) which amounted to 96,475/. Ireland also pays in England the duty on Cotton Wool purchased there, and duty on the Wool, &c. in the Cotton Manufactures which she imports. The English Revenue from Cotton Wool in 1829 was 225,062/., (paid by all consumers throughout the world, for there is no drawback on exportation,)—the Scotch 11,337/.—the Irish 1,978/. The Irish Revenue being so low compared with the Scotch, there must have been a considerable amount paid in England, and some in Scotland. Then there are the Silks, Drugs, Dyewoods, Indigo, &c. &c. On Cotton, and these, with some few commodi¬ ties, imported from England charged with duty, beyond the quantity exported charged with duty, (as Tallow, Timber, Bark, &c.) Ireland may pay uncredited Revenue, (looking to her direct contributions on similar commodities in 1820 and 1829, and taking intermediate reductions into view,) which probably amounts to 50,000/. a year. She imports Timber, Bark, Barilla, Ashes, &c. &c. directly, in large quantities; and she pays at home the duty on all the unrefined Sugar, Wine, unmanufactured Tobacco, &c. which she con¬ sumes : such quantities as she does not import, directly, being imported from England under Bond. EXCISE. Ireland has paid in London since 1828, the Duty on Tea. In 1828, she paid at hq*^-^ 271,634/. In 1822 and 25, she paid a little more than Half a Million on Tea. But irj^he succeeding year to each, she paid 60,000/. less. In 1827, she paid 442,382/. By "/ B R e t, u , n 8 FACTS ON IRELAND, presented to Parliament on the 25th of March, 1830, it appears that her consumption of Tea continued to decline in 1828 and 1829. In the latter, the amount consumed is not given separately ; hut the consumption of the United Kingdom, then first consolidated in one total, does not show an addition that would warrant any other inference, than that the quantity added for Ireland in 1829 was not greater than the quantity separately given as her consumption in 1828, the Duty on which, as already stated, amounted to 271,634/. On Hops Ireland pays in England about 20,000/.—which I estimate in this way. The Duty on Malt in England in 1829, was 3,365,084/.—in Ireland 276,673/. being one-twelfth— suppose then that each country used Malt for brewing in this proportion, it may also be inferred, that they used Hops in an equal proportion ; and as the Hop Duty of 1829 produced 242,658/., Ireland may have contributed the sum I have set down for her. In 1820, the Custom Duty, then payable by her on the importation of the Hops, amounted to 15,450/. In 1829, Ireland consumed 811,243 gallons of Scotch Spirits, but the Duty has been credited to her; for, by a Return presented to Parliament on the 20th of March, 1830, it appears that the Duty on Irish Spirits consumed at home in 1829, amounted to 1,305,064/., and in the Finance Accounts for the year, she receives credit for 1,480,486/. which must include the Duty on the Scotch supply. . . ... On British Glass, Ireland pays some Duty not credited, but it is small in amount, m conse¬ quence of a dexterous measure adopted by English and Scotch Manufacturers in 1828, when the Duties on Glass were assimilated. Until that year, the Excise Duty in England and Scotland was drawn back on Exportation to Ireland, and the Irish Importer paid Custom Duty; but then the three countries were taxed alike, and the draw-brack was repealed. However, the Manufacturers availed themselves of the timely notice given, and stored Ireland with a long supply In consequence of this fiscal coup de main, there has been as yet but very little unac¬ knowledged Duty paid on British Glass. Besides, Ireland has at home a very extensive and successful manufacture of Glass, in Dublin, Waterford, Cork, &c. Her beautiful flint Glass supplies nearly all her demand, and she also furnishes a large portion of the bottles, &c., not¬ withstanding the competition of Dumbarton and Newcastle, with all their local advantages. In 1820, her Customs and Excise Duties on Glass amounted to 4,430/. In 1829, her Excise Duties produced 19,338/. How much she paid in Great Britain cannot possibly be estimated, but for the reasons stated the amount is as yet small—it will serve to make round numbers of the other unacknowledged Excise Duties. Upon English and Scotch Paper, Ireland pays some Duty not credited to her—Books and Letter-paper for example are supplied chiefly by England, but when it is considered that twenty tons weight of paper pays only 560/., the amount of Revenue thus contributed by Ireland must be very trivial. Besides, it is notorious, that, with the exception of the Paper used in the King’s Offices, the greatest part of the English Paper used in Ireland is smuggled. The Duty on Scotch Newspaper is thought to be considerable; but the Duty on all the Newspaper consumed in Ireland does not exceed 4,000/., taking the number of Reams at 10,000, which is above the mark, [Return to Parliament, presented June 17, 1830,] and of this quantity the greater part is Irish. The majority of Dublin Journals are on Irish Paper, while several of the leading Provincial Journalists, and nearly all the minor Journalists, are supplied from the Stamp Offices, for which Irish paper, exclusively, is purchased. The Duty on Irish paper in 1820, produced 10,474/., and that on English Paper imported, 3,912/. In 1829, the Irish Paper yielded 26,203/. Paper made in Scotland in the same year paid 87,217/.—but this Paper was for a number of Markets in the United Kingdom, which Scotland supplies, and for exportation to the West Indies, &c. In every view of this subject, then, 5,600/. appears to be as much Paper Duty as is paid for Ireland, in England and Scotland. 1 On English Leather, Ireland must have paid a considerable sum in 1829; but as the Tax has been since repealed, it is unnecessary to estimate the amount of Taxes so contributed. ‘LAND REVENUE.’ A large sum goes annually to the British Exchequer as Irish Quit Rents, &c„ arising from Crown Grants. In 1826, the Produce of this Income was included in the Irish Accounts, and amounted to 72,108/. It may be presumed that the Produce was not less in 1829. ‘ STAMPS.’ About 5 000/ a year may be paid on British Newspapers. In 1829, the Stamp Duty upon the Irish journals produced 28,578/. Supposing that English Journals were sent to Ireland equal to one-tenth of the number of Irish Journals published m that year, the duty on them (being double the Irish rate) amounted to 5,715/. But this Estimate will certainly bear being reduced to round numbers, or even lower. , „ . ... ., Marine Insurances in 1829, Ireland paid at home 1,531/. Her Merchants possibly paid more in England. And British Merchants paid an additional sum on Goods shipped to, from, Ireland; but she has no claim to a credit for that—America or France might THE STATE TAXES. 9 as well claim credit for Taxes paid by English Merchants on Goods shipped to, or ordered from them. On Fire and Life Insurances, Ireland pays nothing in England, beyond a few pounds, as the English Companies, who insure Irish property or Life (except for Absentees) employ Agents, who pay the Duties in Ireland. On Plate, Ireland may pay about 2,000/. In 1820 she paid on Irish Plate 2,572/. and on English Plate 498/. In 1829 she paid on Irish Plate about 4,000/., and supposing that her Imports have considerably increased (as alleged) since the Customs Duty was taken off, the Duty paid on English Plate in 1829 cannot be under-estimated at 2,000/., as all the leading- sellers of Plate in’ Dublin are Manufacturers, and as it is notorious that the greater part of the small articles brought from England as Plate, do not pay any duty; for, being much under standard, the assay officers would break them up if they were submitted to the test. On Cards, Ireland may pay in London about 1,000/., the Duty on 20,000 packs, which is as great a number as she is likely to use in addition to her own supply. She may also contribute a small portion of the British Duty on Patent Medicines. In 1829 this Duty produced 33,420/. Englishmen being one hundred times fonder of Quacks and Nostrums than Irishmen, and the payment of the Duty not being requisite to authorize the vending of British Pills and Plaisters in Ireland, it would be wonderful if this country contri¬ butes 300/. to the grand total. Few, if any, of the articles vended in Ireland with the stamp on them (to protect the Patentee) are liable to more than a duty of 11 the grievous and iniquitous Taxes repealed in England during this period. WAnArtimiq ; n I am not enabled to include the reduction of Excise Taxes in this view o P P pij relief was extended; that branch of the Account giving only the totals for Engla , THE STATE TAXES. 11 Scotland, and Ireland, consolidated. As, however, these consist of the following items, it will be seen that Ireland fully participated in this relief also. Malt, Hides, Salt, £505,455. 228,456. 1,596,595. ^62,330,506. In reviewing the comparative reduction of Taxes in the two Countries, it must be considered that both England and Scotland have paid, and still pay, most pernicious Taxes, never imposed on Ireland, and that the chief cause of diminution in the aggregate of the present British Revenue, as compared with 1814, is, the repeal of the Tax on Property, (not alone on Rents and other acquired Incomes, &c. but on Merchandize, and the profits of Industry,) which amounted to near 15 millions, and was imposed on the express stipulation that it should be repealed as soon as the War would cease. Ireland has received a share of relief in the abatement of every Tax payable in both Coun¬ tries, and in some cases she obtained a repeal where England and Scotland obtained but an abatement. For example, the Assessed Taxes have been totally repealed for Ireland, and but reduced for England and Scotland. Up to 1819, Ireland paid 24,000/. a year, by a Tax of 2s. on Permits. This was found to be grievously unequal, and on remonstrance was repealed. Up to 1823 she paid 5s. 6d. on the small Gallon of Spirits—she since has paid but half that amount on the large Gallon. Whether this has been generally advantageous may be doubtful. It is, however,; a manifest advantage to every sober member of the industrious classes; for, though an excessive use of Spirits must be as pernicious, as it is brutal, a moderate use of it, when properly diluted, as all the middle classes in Ireland use it, must be conducive to health by creating hilarity and enhancing social enjoyment. Besides, I do not think that inebriety is increasing in Ireland. Among the middle classes it has certainly decreased. The reference to the Duty on Spirits, leads to a circumstance connected with Irish Taxes, that requires explanation. The Irish Net Revenue in 1820 amounted to 4,844,969/., and in 1829 it amounted to 4,383,925/., without the Tea Duties and other Uncredited Taxes, in the former Totals, my Estimate of which would bring up the Taxes actually paid by Irish Residents, in 1829, to 4,943,925/. This increase in the aggregate of Irish Taxes, notwithstanding the intermediate repeal or reduction of Taxes to a very great amount, is chiefly attributable to the increased consumption of taxed Spirits. In 1820, the duty of 5s. 6d. on the small Gallon, pro¬ duced only 902,483/. Net. In 1829, 2s. 9d. on the large Gallon, produced 1,480,486/. If the consumption of taxed Spirits had not increased, the Net produce in 1829, (the reduction in the rate being more than a half,) would have been under 400,000/. This accounts for more than one million of the increase in produce; and there is also an increase in the produce of Glass, Paper, Tobacco, and some other Taxes. RELIEF FROM EXISTING TAXES. The assimilation of the Excise and Customs Taxes in Great Britain and Ireland, which is sometimes complained of, is indispensable to the protection of the Irish Manufacturers. For example, the existence of a Tax on Printed Cottons in Britain, while there was none in Ireland, was extremely injurious to the latter, because it gave the English Manufacturers a right to a drawback on exportation, and with that aid, (for they managed to make an aid of it,) they under¬ sold the Irish Manufacturers in the Irish Market. In the same way the English Soap Tax has worked against the Irish Soap Trade. And the present Ministers have already conferred great benefit on Ireland by taking off English Taxes that operate in this way; while the assimilation of the rates of Excise and Custom Duties payable in each Country, which was effected by for¬ mer Ministers, has also been beneficial to the Manufacturers, however it may have operated on the Tax payers, in a Country where labour, except the labour of Tradesmen in Dublin, is so inadequately remunerated. When I justify assimilation under the heads of Customs and Excise, I do not mean to defend attempts at assimilation under other heads of Taxation, by increasing the Irish rates to those of England. I should rather see the English rates equalized with those of Ireland. And I trust the day is not distant when England and Ireland shall be under one equable system of Tax¬ ation, and when all restrictions on the free interchange of their Produce and Manufactures shall be at an end. The whole system of Taxation in both Countries, requires to be remodelled. There are some Taxes that should be repealed, and others reduced, for which a substitute maybe provided. j The Tax on the importation of Corn, which is defended as being for the good of Nation^- Agriculture, and particularly for Ireland, has a most baneful influence on the Agriculture arU .Manufactures of the whole Empire. It has raised Rents, stopped reclamation, and made i'om dear. In this way it has embarrassed and impoverished the Home Trade, which is by far )2 FACTS ON IRELAND. important than the Foreign Trade, by deducting from the means of consumption among the working classes. Let us trace its operations. At first these classes became unable to consume the manufactures prepared for them, and the supply became surplus—then the Manufacturers foreseeing difficulties in the Home Market, stinted the supplies_Demand for operatives was thus diminished—wages fell—poverty extended—the capability to buy agricultural produce was then diminished, and the supply was necessarily limited to the wants of the Market. Agricultural employment next became insufficient to make the Peasantry comfortable—and Farmers now can do little more than barely subsist, after paying Rent, Tithes, and local Rates. Thus dis¬ tress has become universal among all the industrious classes in the Empire, while Landlords get high Rents, cheap Labour, and cheap Apparel. If this Tax did not exist, the Landlord to make good his Income, then diminished by low Rents, would waste less of the soil with Parks, Plantations, and Preserves; and he would reclaim every unprofitable acre under his dominion which could be made available ; because, in no other way could he maintain the aggregate amount of his Income. Some persons would repeal this Tax at once. If they did, there should be a law to adjust Rents, and perhaps if the principle of equitable adjustment were once admitted into our Laws it would be difficult to prevent its general extension. No—bad as is this Tax—and fatal as it has been to the internal prosperity of the Empire—I would not recommend that it should be re¬ pealed or even reduced. I would counteract it by means of a labour Rate, in both Countries, which would enforce the employment of the People on Land, by taxing Wastes, of every kind capable of being made available, and all arable Lands which did not employ at least fifteen or twenty labourers on every hundred acres. I shall justify this measure, in discussing the question of Poor Laws, Here it is only necessary to observe, that this would speedily force an accommo¬ dation between Landlord and Tenant, throw open the agricultural resources of the Country, and, by extending employment and cheapening subsistence, revive the Home Trade. Eventually the Landlords would derive as much income from the cultivation of all their territory as they now derive from the cultivation of a part of it. And the Corn Laws might be then repealed without disturbing any social interest. I would also seek to relieve the People and our Colonies, and Manufacturing and Shipping Interests, by asking for a repeal of the Taxes on Malt, Hops, Soap, Candles, Glass, Paper, Sugar, Coffee, Cocoa, and Cotton. The Tea Tax, perhaps, should not be altered. An effort should be made to discourage the use of Tea, rather than in¬ crease it, as the supply is too limited for the demand which would ensue on a reduction of the duty, and the sale price would stand as at present, or the Commodity would be adulterated to an extent most injurious to health. Cocoa Nuts yield a nutricious palatable beverage, and no de¬ mand for them that could exist would exhaust the supply, or exceed it, so as to make the Com¬ modity dear. At present the Cocoa Nuts can be retailed at Is. 6d. a pound; and that quantity in consumption is equal to a half pound of good Tea—so that even now the Working Classes would be materially benefitted by using Cocoa. There are many other Taxes which should be repealed: various Customs and Stamp Duties, with the Assessed Taxes, while others should be reduced.* It is only in this way that the pro¬ ductive industry of the Empire can be effectually relieved, and the State burthens equally charged on all classes. At present an industrious member of the trading classes in Great Britain, pays at least twenty per cent, on his income to defray the expenses of Government, while the very opulent classes do not contribute more than five per cent, although the system has enhanced their incomes and cheapened all their enjoyments, except those derived from the consumption of food and a tew taxed luxuries. I propose that a division of the State Expenses should be made, to distinguish current expenses from those entailed on the Empire by War and past mismanagement. The former to include the expenses of the King, the Public Establishments, and the Navy, Army, &c. The latter, the interest of the Debt, Annuities to' Public Creditors, &c. and all the Dead Weight, as it is termed occasioned by the War. The former should be defrayed by Taxes on Commodities that^do not I fall under the denomination of necessaries of life, as Spirits, Wines, Tea, Tobacco, loreign Fruits, &c. &c. The latter to be defrayed by a Centage Tax on Rents, Annuities of all kinds, Interest on the Debt, Dividends on all public Stock, and interest on Bonds and Mortgages.-f- Some such change in the Financial arrangements of the United Kingdom must be soon adopted. And when it takes place the prosperity and power of the Empire will surpass that of any modern Empire, and the happiness of the people will have no parallel in the condition of mankind, in either modern or ancient times. - It is only by being bound up with the destinies of the English people, and identified with them in interests_by having one Legislature, one Code of Laws, one Government—that the Irish * See Parnell on Financial Reform, Murray, London, 1830. Also, Commentaries on Ireland, &c. Milliken, + b A^rax 3 of this description was proposed to George I. by Mr. Hutchinson, a celebrated Commoner in that iner's reign as a means of paying off the National Debt. For a description of his plan, see Sinclaire s History of enue For apian of raising the Tax here proposed, and of compounding for it, see Commentarieson Ire- 1 &c. Milliken, Dublin, 1831. See also, Bryan’s Practical View of Ireland, page 281. Wakeman, Dublin, 1831. ABSENTEES. 13 neoule can ever ffct rid of the present system of Taxation, without passing through a bloody revolution, and many years of anarchy and strife. Combined with the English people by a close ™mmnnitv of interests Ireland will be protected, and borne on to freedom and prospenty. U} LTttXnS will be delivered over to a Military Government, and to the fac¬ tion by which she was before reduced to misery and despan. ABSENTEES. Two parties in Ireland contend that the Absentee proprietors are the chief producers of the ^Tl^yttmuf^e'Lriilhf lived in Ireland, Rents would be low, wages high ol provisions cheap, and employment sufficient. But it is impossible to discern in what way the residence of the proprietors would abate rent, raise wages, cheapen provisions, or even extend ^SupposeaiTtiie^Abswitees resolved to^om^to their Irish Estates and tocome too in the way apparently most favorable to Ireland, without any of the numerous Irish Tradesn^i whom they or the same classes of Englishmen employ m England—What could they do ? The people dis¬ tressed are agricultural labourers or weavers. They could obtain but little additional employment from the proprietors. They could not become domestic servants, carpenters, masons, smiths, &c. To give employment to Jrfch weavers, the millions must be lettered m their condition, and m effec-ting tliis P change the presence of the proprietors would have little or no influence , but the Chi ¥i: S^SSay, show that the residence of proprietors has there failed to make the peasantry comfortable. In each of these Oonnties there are ^ea number of resident proprietors, and in each poverty rs raprdly increasing. ^ Gaiway ne^ly alL the proprietors are resident, and yet the peasantry endure indescribable misery. In Water font and Londonderry, on the contrary, the principal proprietors are absent, and the peasantry on their ■ St The drcumsJnces'ZlOTwhich^thTlands are occupied, determine the condition of the peasanty.: And it is well known that the estates of absent proprietors are not leased more disadvantageous^ than those of residents. It is even found that with the exception of a very few res,den s all their lands are let, as leases expire, to the bidder of the highest rent, while those of the Duke of Devonshire, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the London Company, (kc. are continued, under very advantageous terms, to the old tenantry. n f It is complained that the Absentee takes his rent away. So he does ; but the greater part of the resident’s rent is sent away. Besides, it is quite immaterial to the rural labourers what is done with the rent. It is the market employs them, and not the proprietor. All the farmer, could obtain from a proprietor would be an abatement of rack rent. All thelab our ei wants, is sufficient remuneration for his labour, with a sufficiency of labour for his industry Suppose that the residence of a Proprietor were sufficient to induce an abatement of lent, which I deny, and can maintain the denial with incontestible evidence adduced from the co ^ uc ^ f resident proprietors,—but suppose it to be sufficient: would the abatement of Rent serve the La-) bourers ^ It would not. Wages would remain just as before. The old Lease Farmers under\ low Rents are not as good employers as those under new Leases, and high Rents Ajimualous m it may appear, it is nevertheless true, that high rents ensure employment to the labourers b 5 thus 6 manifest that if^tlie Absentees returned, there would be still wanting an mfluenj to protect the Peasantry. Landlords could not dictate rates of wages to the Farmers, or enfor , by their presence, the extension of rural employment. . t, . , ' It is supposed that all the Absentees, if resident, would undertake improvements. But then is no reason for assuming, because ten or twelve resident Proprietors exhibit a taste for impiov. ment, and voluntarily exert themselves to make the people happy, that the absent Proprietoii would, on residing in Ireland, prove to possess similar inclinations. It is just as hkeljthatthej would be as indifferent to the condition of the Peasantry, as are the majority of the presenj R The p-eat Absentees have several Estates-Men of their station in society pay little attentioj to the ordinary concerns of life—and, therefore, if living m Dublin, in Meath, or Kildare, teil would necessarily be as ignorant of what might happen on Estates in Donegal, L ™ e ^ or ^ other County, as if they were in England. There are few of our residen^^^ usefully supervise the Estates on which they reside—And even if they did, they could not] useful to the Peasantry, except as a Man relieves a Beggar, which would totally degiade I demoralize the People. 14 FACTS ON IRELAND. It 1S commonly thought in Ireland that the condition of the English Peasantry is attributable to the residence of the Proprietors. This is a mistake arising from ignorance of the state of other Countries in which the Proprietors are also resident.* In Prussia all the Proprietors are residentyet the present Government has been obliged to resort to an Agrarian Law in order to improve the condition of the Peasantry, till then in extreme wretchedness. Bavaria has its resident Proprietors; yet misery so much increased that Munich, its Capital, became thronged with paupers, who beset the Houses and the Passengers like the paupers of Dublin, until the Government established an equitable provision for them. Naples has its resident Proprietors_ whence its Lazarom? Spain has its resident Proprietors—whence its hordes of beggars in every city but Barcelona, the only one in which labour is provided for the Poor ? Absenteeism has not caused any of the great evils of Ireland. It has not fostered factions • nor promoted jobbing with Taxes drawn from the industry of the People. The Absentee has no interest in either. It has not increased Rents : the Absentee tends to lessen Rent by giving up his whole estate to meet the demand for Farms, while, if resident, his demesne would occupy space, that, under proper management, would employ more industry than could be maintained by all the avocations which a Resident Proprietor might render necessary. Neither does Absen¬ teeism curtail wages: that has been done by the pasture system, which is the great bane of Irish prosperity. Some Absentees may have bad Agents; but Agency has not done more mischief on their estates, than on the estates of Residents. To check Absenteeism, and so protect the old Conquests or Inroads, there was in the time of Kichard II. a Tax on Proprietors who did not reside in Ireland. Such a Tax now would force the possessors of Properties to sell them, and take away the purchase money, which might be thirty years’ Rent. If absent Mortgagees, &c. were taxed, it would be an unjust deduction from their Incomes, which they could not avoid; and if the Rents were taxed without allowing for Incumbrances, it would be monstrous so to tax Rents not under the absent Proprietors’ con¬ trol. Besides, absent Mortgagees, &c., who derive Incomes from the estates of Resident Pro¬ prietors, are more numerous than those who have Incumbrances on the other estates. Again : if absent Mortgagees, &c., were to be taxed, they would proceed against the estates; and, as Irishmen would buy them, for no Englishman would, these creditors would sweep away the purchase money, and so take thirty years’ Rent at once, like the small Proprietors. Middlemen too, should be taxed; and they could not resume their Lands in order to obtain an exemption from the Impost, without forcibly expelling the Tenants in possession. No doubt. Absentees should contribute to defray all the National expenses, in proportion to their actual Incomes. But this object can only be effected by a general Tax on Net Incomes in every part of the United Kingdom. They should also be compelled to prevent the growth of misery on their estates. But this object also demands a general measure—a Law to protect industry on every estate. In combating the prevailing opinion in Ireland, of the injurious effects of Absenteeism, I do not offer an unlimited opinion. I confine myself to Absenteeism, in its present extent, and which is not likely to increase, unless political excitement, and the postponement of measures of practical utility, may render the Country still more unfit for the residence of persons who desire see social happiness around them. Absenteeism is far from being so general at present, as it is commonly represented to be. In very County there is a great number of Proprietors. Of the Peerage, the majority are esidents, according to the following table compiled from the Dublin Almanacks for 1831 : lio Residents. Dukes, Marquesses, Earls, Viscounts, Barons, Bishops, Peeresses, . Peers employed out of the Country. Absentees. Total. 131 86 26 The majority of the Commoners are Residents, and the majority of Baronets. Even among |* e Representative Peers, only 4 are absent out of the 28, and one of the four (Lord Belmore) ' employed abroad, and his sons are Residents. ' T put forward this statement with reference merely to the social condition of Ireland, and not the probable amount of Income raised in the Country, which is expended in it and elsewhere, p-e are Absentees possessed of Irish property, who belong exclusively to the English Peerage! For a valuable collection of information on the State of Industry in all Nations, taken from authentic fees, see Bryan’s Practical View of Ireland. Wakeinan, Dublin, 1831. * m authentic ABSENTEES. 15 Commoners, &c. as tlie Duke of Devonshire, the Marquess of Bath, the Earl Fitzwilliam, _ an d on the other hand there are Residents possessed of great estates, in the ranks of the Irish Gentry, who reside almost constantly in their respective Counties. I shall, however, attempt an estimate of the amount of Rents drawn from Ireland, founded on the Accounts of Imports and Exports to 1825, the last year in which the total Trade was recorded_the means of remitting to England being supplied only by the Trade Balance m favour of Ireland, or payments by the Agents of the British Government, and the influx of English money through English and Irish Traders and Travellers, migrating Labourers, &c. For this purpose I shall give a table of the amount of the official and real value of Imports from Great Britain, and of Exports to it, in 1817, 1821, and 1825—showing the rate per cent, of the excess or depreciation of real value in each year. I take the items of official value from the Accounts appended to the Report on Ireland, pre¬ sented upon 16th July 1830. I adopt the rates of excess or depreciation in the Imports , from the totals of the Official and Real Value of British Exports for the years I have selected, which are given in a Return presented to Parliament on the 5th of April, 1830; and I adopt the rates of excess or depreciatiou in the Exports , from the totals of the Irish Exports to Foreign Countries, given in the same Return. IMPORTS FROM GREAT BRITAIN. EXPORTS TO GREAT BRITAIN. Years. Official Value. Real Value. Rate of Excess or Depreciation. Years. Official Value. Real Value. Rate of Excess or Depreciation. 1817 £4,722,766 £4,864,448 3 perCent. 1817 £5,696,613 £9,114,580 60 per Cent. 1821 5,338,838 4,751,566 11 ... 1821 7,117,452 8,967,989 26 1825 7,048,936 5,780,128 18 ... 1825 8,531,355 9,725,744 14 The real Values of the Exports thus appear to have exceeded the real values of the Imports, by about four millions in each year. But the Foreign Trade Account remains to be disposed of. To exhibit it, I take the following items from the Parliamentary Return already referred to : Years. Official Value of Imports retained for Consumption. Official Value of Exports. Real Value of Exports. 1817, £900,384 £877,960 £1,411,897. 1821, 1,040,993 637,818 832,135- 1825, 1,533,662 697,668 793,615. The real Value of the Foreign Imports cannot be ascertained. But as they chiefly consisted of Cotton-wool, Coffee, Sugar, Tallow, Timber, Tobacco, and Wine, their real value in 1817 may have been higher than the official value, while, in the subsequent years, it must have been depreciated. It is, however, certain that Irish Merchants are obliged to have recourse to England for the medium of remittance to Foreign Countries, and it is therefore obvious that the balance on Foreign Trade must be against Ireland, which is of course a deduction from the balance in her favour on the British Trade. Looking then to that Balance, as the chief medium of remitting to England, (the Irish money, except change, being local,) I shall suppose the medium to be further increased by the English Remittances to Government Agents, by Notes and Gold brought in by Traders, Tra¬ vellers, and Irish migrating Labourers. . Against all these sources, I shall place the Foreign Balance ; the expenditure in Great Britain by Irish Traders, and by the Irish Nobility and Gentry (not Absentees) attending Parliament, or visiting the watering Places;—the Gold or English Bills and Notes carried away by Emi¬ grants ;—the Remittances of British Insurance Agents ;—the Remittances of the Resident Gentry to their English Creditors (Bondholders and Mortgagees);—also their Remittances to English Bankers for investment in the Funds ;—and finally, the Taxes paid by Ireland in Eng¬ land, on Commodities purchased there, which Taxes do not enter into the estimate of the Values in the Trade Accounts. Setting all these against the total medium of Remittance formed in the manner described in the preceding paragraph, it is impossible that the drain by Absentees in 1817, 1821, or 1825, could have amounted to Three Millions. Probably it did not exceed Two Millions. I have included the Investments in the English Funds by Residents. These are very great. And, in order to facilitate them, a Law was made in 1824, to enable Persons to puixhase Irish Stock in Dublin and have it transferred to London, and to have, in like manner, English Stock transferred to Dublin. In this way Irish Stock was transferred to England, to the close oj 1830, exceeding Five Millions; and English Stock was transferred to Ireland, in the samj 16 FACTS ON IRELAND. period, amounting to Twelve Millions and a Half.* These Transfers were plainly Iiish trans¬ actions, because no English Capitalist would send to Dublin to purchase Stock for the former transfers, nor would he buy Stock in England for the latter transfers and open an Account in Ireland. The English Stock, however, was not all purchased in the period. But judging by the transfers of 1829 and 1830, it would appear that there were purchased at least Ten Millions. The purchase money of this Stock at 90 per cent (a low average for the period) amounted to Nine Millions. The Five Millions transferred to England in the period, purchased at the same average rate, must have cost Four Millions and a Half. These totals suffice to show, that the In¬ vestments of Irish Residents in the British Funds must have employed (in the same annual ratio) before 1824, a very large portion of the medinm of Remittance provided annually by the Trade Balance and other sources to which I have referred. I, therefore, feel strengthened in believing that the Rents of Absentees in 1817, 1821, or 1825, did not amount to more than Two Millions; and they cannot have increased since. Suppose, however, that they amount now to Three Millions, this is a very trifling sum compared to the Produce of the Country, which employs the Population. Valuing the Produce of the Land at 41. 10$. ()d. an acre, as an average for tillage and pas¬ ture, there being Eight Millions of arable acres, the Produce of the whole would amount to 36 Millions. To this must be added the Produce of Manufactures of all kinds, and of the Fisheries which would form a very great total. It is to this total that the working classes should look, and not to the really minor object on which mistaken Political Men would fix their attention. If the working population of Ireland amounted to only One Million, and if the Absentees gave up their Rents altogether , the Three Millions of Pounds divided equally among the Million of Persons, would enhance the wages of each but two pence farthing a day, supposing them to work on 300 days during the year. Nay, if the whole Four Millions, now expended inEngland by Absentees, occasional Residents, and Travellers, and by means of uncredited Taxes, public Funds, &c. were to be given up and distributed gratuitously, they would add but three pence to the daily means of a million of Irish Labourers. From this fact let the working classes learn to regard their productive powers as the sources from which only they can reasonably expect to derive employment and good wages. It is mani¬ fest that to increase both, the productive energies of the People must be extended; and this is all that Ireland requires for the remuneration of industry. Henceforth let not the working classes be deceived when any one attributes their distress to the drain of Rents. Scotland remits in Taxes to London Three Millions and a Half annually, as I have already shown ; and the majority of her Proprietors are Absentees. Yet her Trade flourishes; and the wages of her rural Labourers, give an average of one shilling and eight pence a day, while the average in Ireland is under ten pence. AGRICULTURE. What then are the causes of the misery which pervades the rural classes of Ireland, while the soil possesses more natural fertility than that of any other part of the Empire ? HABITS ? Habits are effects not causes. Neglect has made the Peasantry lowly and slovenly. But they are laborious, intelligent, and ambitious of gain. With these requisites they ought to be on an equality with any Peasantry in the world ; but in spite of these requisites, and in spite of them¬ selves, they are below all the world. They may be factious; they may be turbulent; these also are effects of neglect, but I conceive (judging by partial appearances,) that it is only necessary to show them that any thing will be gained by adopting better habits, and they will speedily become quiescent. The forefathers of a great portion of the race now suffering Irish misery, came from England. If they had not left it, their descendants, now so lowly and slovenly, would be like any other Englishmen. It must then be neglect and misgovernment that have produced the change. RELIGION? Never was there “pious fraud” more glaring than that of those doctrinal Itinerants, who allege that the religion of the Irish People makes them lowly and miserable. It is not even true, as it might be thought to refer to the bigoted tendency of certain landholders. Irish Landlords (with the exception of a few who kindly foster the descendants of old Tenants,) let their Lands to tthe highest bidders—no matter what may be their Religion. And notwithstanding all the pro- * Commentaries on Ireland, page 277, &c. Milliken, Dublin; Ridgway, London, 1831. AGRICULTURE. 17 fessions which some trading Politicians have made, of peculiar attention to the interests of the lower classes of their own Creed, it is undeniable that they have never, because of Religion, re¬ jected the Tenant who bid highest for Land, or the workman who asked least for his labour. If Religion made Irish misery—why are the Catholic Peasants of Wexford and Waterford so much more comfortable than those of Galway, Clare, &c.—why are the Catholic Peasants of Down and Antrim, just as comfortable as the Protestants and Presbyterians—why too are the Catholic and Protestant Peasants of Tyrone, &c. equally in misery—and why is it that the Protestant Leaders are now forming Poor Colonies to release (as they aver,) the Protestant Peasants from their present miserable condition? Religion has not made misery in other Countries. The Peasants of the Catholic Cantons of Switzerland are far before those of the other Cantons, in comfort, education, &c. The Catho¬ lic Peasants of Piedmont, Austria, Belgium, France, Catalonia,* Biscay,* and Navarre,* are not surpassed by those of any other parts of Europe, in industry, order, intelligence and social enjoyment. TITHES. It is notorious that in order to avoid Tithes, (as much as from other motives,) large tracts of Land in Ireland are reserved for pastures. Even the Clergymen of the Establishment have been known to adopt the depopulating pasture system, rather than pay Tithes to the Rectors of Pa¬ rishes in which they have Property, under personal management. An acreable charge, like Rent or County Tax, has no such tendency as Tithes; for the acreable charge falls on the soil generally, no matter how employed; while Tithes attach to the Crops that employ the rural Labourers. In this way, and from the unhappy political propensities of some Clergymen of the Establish¬ ment, a hostility to Tithes has been generated in Ireland, which a modification of the Impost is not likely to allay. Though so far as the Labourer is interested, the commutation of Tithes for a Land Tax would give full relief; for then, there would be no penalty on tillage, and the demand for labour would not be contracted. To the Peasant the total abolition of Tithes, would give no benefit, unless the measure were to be succeeded by the establishment of a labour rate, to provide employment. If the Farmers were allowed to retain the Tithes, they would not add any thing whatever to wages, unless there were a labour rate ; for, as I have already stated, the old Lease Farmers, who pay low Rents, give as little employment and as low wages as the Farmers who pay high Rents— so that it does not follow that wages will be good if the means of paying them be increased. The Farmers, however, will not be content to pay Tithes in any shape; for those who are under Rack Rents say that the amount of Tithes is a charge on their Land beyond its utmost value, and they see greater hopes of relief by demanding the abolition of Tithes, than by soliciting an abatement of Rent. Writers who support the Established Church, for the sake of its temporalities, labour to con¬ vince the Farmers that in paying Tithes they are but handing over a Balance left in their hands by their Landlords for the use of the Church. But no Landlord would venture to say this; be¬ cause it is well known that the unfortunate and reckless competition for Land among the Irish, has given nearly all Landlords more than its value (with reference to Covenants against Tillage) exclusive of Tithes and all other charges. It appears very decisive to say, that Tithes are charges on Rent, because whatever abates the Farmer’s means of paying Rent is naturally a deduction from the amount that would other¬ wise be given. By such reasoning it might be contended that the Taxes on Tea, Sugar, Spirits, &c. are charges on Rent, and that it would be impolitic to take off these Taxes, or abate them, lest the Farmer should hand over his quantum of relief to the Landlord. The Taxes on Windows, Hearths, &c. &c. in particular, must have been deductions from Rent! Then there is the further argument, that if two farms are to be let, one liable to Tithes, and the other exempt, the Tithe free farm will obtain a Rent equal to the Rent and Tithes of the other. But no two farms of equal size can be of equal value. There is a difference in buildings, inclosures, aspect, surface, soil, drains, means of irrigating, and general condition, observable on every two contiguous Farms in the Empire; and no such case can ever occur, as the one supposed. There is no doubt a desire for obtaining Tithe free Land, and something will be given in consideration' of the exemption, because there is no penalty on improvement, or the employment of labour. But it is not therefore true that Tithes are left in the hands of the Tenant in possession. There are few Gentlemen who have made Leases in Ireland since 1806, that would venture to corroborate such an allegation, bearing in mind the Covenants against tillage. Nevertheless it is apprehended even by the opponents of Tithes, that while the competition for land exists among the Peasantry, Rents would become still higher, as Leases would lapse, if Tithes were to be abolished, unless they were to be succeeded by a labour rate for the protection * See Townsend and Inglis. In these provinces of Spain,, cultivation has reached an extraordinary state c perfection, inconsequence of the direct interest which the peasant has in the fertility of the soil. I refer merejj to the rural labourers. The Catalans of this class, at present fare better than English Tradesmen. 18 FACTS ON IRELAND. industry. In that case a commutation of Tithes to an acreable Tax would be the proper measure of relief, with reference to Lands nearly out of Lease or held at Will; but nothing but the total abolition would be a measure of relief, with reference to Lands held at rack Rents under long Leases—and the latter constitute a great part of the soil of Ireland. The total abolition of Tithes, and the enactment of a Law for the protection of industry, are then clearly the measures that it would be politic to adopt. Rut then, it is only the Church Tithes that oould be abolished. The Lay Tithes should be left to an equitable adjustment, between the Landlords who receive them and the tenants who pay them ; and where not payable to landlords, there should be a power to value, in a legal way, and give a final acquittance. The Tithe composition clause in existing Leases might be nullified or preserved as Tithes should be payable to Ecclesiastics or Laymen. On disposing of Tithes, the maintenance of the Church would devolve on the public Revenue; each Rector and Curate receiving an Income suited to his labours—not, however, with reference to the value of the Tithes abolished; for from that value should be deducted something for the old pauper charge, the Bishop’s quarter parts, the charge for building and repairing Churches, and for Church expenses, and the charge of maintaining a parish school. The puritans say, “let the Clergy live by the Gospel.” So they would whether paid by Tithes or Crown Salaries. A Judge does not live the less by the Law, for being paid a fixed •Salary, instead of getting a fee on every Judicial act he performs. Some too, will say the Revenue cannot bear the charge. It ought not to exceed .£500,000 a year, for Bishops and Clergy. More than that would be saved by internal peace. A State provision for the Church would annex the See and Glebe Lands to the estates of the Crown : the former as soon as the Bishops should commence to receive the State Stipend; and the latter on the demise or promotion of the present Incumbents. And as the existing Leases would expire, a most valuable change in the system of letting Irish Lands might be intro¬ duced, by granting Leases of those Lands in perpetuity on Oxford Rents : the value of a certain number of bushels of Corn, according to the average prices obtained in each year, at the three nearest markets. The Lands of the University of Oxford are let in this way ; and it is so equitable a mode of adjusting the interests of Landlord and Tenant, at all times, that it should be universally adopted. The ordinary system of Rent, as the profound Paley observed, imposes, in most cases, a penalty on improvement. To remove the Church entirely from collision with a hostile people, the abolition of Minister’s Money in Dublin, Cork, &c. and of Church Rates, generally, should be effected at the same time with the abolition of Tithes. Funds for the purposes to which Church Rates, are appli¬ cable, might be provided by fixed charges for performing the Marriage, Baptismal, and Burial services of the Church, and by a small annual charge on all Parishioners attending Divine Ser¬ vice : the produce to be paid to Parish Trustees. These several charges should provide amply for the Church expenses ; and the Bishops and Clergy might be released from the First h ruits Tax. Still, however strong and natural may be the hostility to Tithes, it must be felt by every dis¬ passionate thinker, that the great evil which they certainly have a tendency to create, would be removed so far as Tithes generate it, by commuting Tithes for an Acreable Tax. They would then no more impede tillage and general improvement, than rent—indeed the Tax might be im¬ posed in such a way, (by making it a fixed rate, alterable only by a new law,) that it would not operate as a penalty on improvement like rent. Rent, it is notorious, does so operate, except in some cases, in anomalous Ireland, where high rents have roused slothful indifference to exertion. The penalty, however, is not imposed by the landlord, but is an effect of the competition for farms. COMPETITION FOR LAND AND RURAL EMPLOYMENT. Strangers, nay Irishmen, inquire how it is that the Irish small farmers, and all the peasantry, I! are so wretched, notwithstanding their having markets for their produce, which they cannot sufficiently supply—it must, they say, be Absenteeism that produces so great an anomaly. It is I] not produced by Absenteeism. It is the operation of the pasture system, in a variety of shapes. This system gives effect to the Tax on Foreign Corn : for without it, the supply of Corn in | Ireland, beyond an ample subsistence for the people, would enable her to increase the quantity I she sends to the English Market, and thereby force the English proprietors to give up their I wastes, and so not only exclude Foreign Corn, but make Corn as cheap as it is on the Continent. * The system forces the best members of the rural population to emigrate, by creating a reckless I competition for land, as leases lapse. The farmers who have held these lands resign their im- I provements rather than contend with improvident bidders; and they carry off any little capital L they have acquired, to enrich a Foreign country. This is of all the drains of Irish capital, the Bfipost injurious to Irish interests. It not only takes money from Ireland to be employed elsewhere, ^Eut in most cases to be employed against her, for as these Farmers emigrate principally to Canada, ‘^Hieir surplus produce meets that of Ireland in the English markets. ^»The system forces the Irish labourers to hire at an enormous rent—at least 8/. an acre—-patches ^^laiul in which to cultivate potatoes for subsistence. They pay for these patches, with their AGRICULTURE. 19 labour, while subsisting on the preceding year’s produce ; and when the new supply is paid for and at home, and the cabin rent of two pounds more, also worked up, the great objects of the year are accomplished, and they trust to chance for obtaining clothing and other domestic comforts. This is a most deplorable condition; and yet, it is the condition of the whole peasantry of Ire¬ land. No wonder then, that there should be famine, among a people thus left dependent for subsistence on a precarious crop cultivated at their own risk, under a frightful penalty. No wonder there should be a want of money apparent in Ireland, when the whole peasantry are remunerated for then* labour, not with money, but with a loan of a ridge of ground for potatoes and the shelter of a cabin. Were there a law to protect industry, the peasantry should be em¬ ployed throughout the year, and be remunerated in money, or in part with money, and part with provisions at market prices—there would be no hiring of land at an enormous rent to provide subsistence—there would be no ruin produced by the failure of the little crop which is at once the compensation for past labour, and the means of sustaining future exertions. The pasture system has fed the disposition for jobbing in land, which the Legislature designed to repress by the law against subletting. An Agent seeing that the extension of pastures, while population increased, would force the peasantry to give exorbitant rents for small farms, con¬ trived to obtain for himself or his connexions every farm on his employer’s estate, from which a tenant had been ejected. And these he sublet in small tenements ; by which he at once obtained a large income, and great political influence:—for holding on a freehold tenure, he conferred the elective franchise on the under tenants. Now, persons who are not agents, and do not contemplate subletting, also possess themselves of large tracts of land as leases lapse ; and on these lands they keep a herd and a stock of cattle. In one respect therefore the subletting act has been beneficial, as it prevents agents from persecuting old tenants, in order to get possession of their leases, and sublet the land. But in leading to the banishment of under tenants, from their little farms, and to the appropriation of those farms for pastures, the law, as originally framed, and without a law for protecting industry , was the most harsh enactment that was ever placed among the Statutes of the United Kingdom. If a law for protecting industry had existed in Ireland, a statute would not have been required to enforce covenants against subletting, already guai'ded by the common law; for as the land¬ holders would have been compelled to provide labour for the peasantiy, or maintain them in indolence, rural employments would have been abundant, the value of labour 'would have been enhanced, the condition of the peasantry would have been comfortable, and they would not have had that general desire which prevailed among them, for obtaining small farms, either as under¬ tenants or chief tenants. In Ireland, a tillage farm, is, with the majority of the people, a place of refuge from want; the last resouce of industry; and these farms are therefore almost all in the hands of struggling men, who are not able to purchase stock, and merely eke out a rack rent and a subsistence. The pasture farms, on the contrary, are held by the gentry, and by substantial graziers or cattle dealers. Thus the rural population depend for employment on the poorest occupiers of the soil; while the beasts of the field, more fortunate than man, are under the immediate care of the richest occupiers. This is the great evil of Ireland to which a legal remedy must be applied, that anarchy and ruin may be averted. This is the cause which forces the wretched population of the pasture districts ttj wander through Ireland, England and Scotland, during the Summer, in search of employment. /This is the cause of partial famines; of rural revolts ; of low wages; of ruined manufactures; of embarrassed trade ; of a bad system of husbandry; and of mud hovels, and misery. THE PROTECTION OF INDUSTRY. To counteract the great cause of Irish misery, a Repeal of the Union is not necessary, nor an Absentee Tax, nor any other measure which would be an anomaly in Government or Legislation ; but simply, a law which w'ould provide generally for the protection of industry, and compel every occupier of land to give employment to a certain extent, under a penalty of an acreable tax fori the maintenance of as many labourers, as his lands, if properly managed, would employ. Before man acquired the right of partitioning land, it was charged with the maintenance of thej human race; and that incumbrance, imposed on it by the Supreme Being, no law or other earthly authority can remove. In Ireland this sacred covenant has been in abeyance, but in like manner, as the law revived the landlord’s covenant against subletting, a statute may be framed to declarel that the abeyance of the Creator’s covenant shall not be deemed a waiver of it! The law for tfre protection of industry in Ireland should have three objects—the 1st, to pro¬ vide by a genei-al tax on lands, houses and rents, for the maintenance of helpless paupers, and destitute children, hospitals, &c. and to provide labour for able bodied paupers in the cities amU towns,—the 2d, by a portion of the Tax, to provide national schools of rudiments and industry —the 3rd, to provide employment for the rural population, by a tax on available wastes of eveiM kind, and on all arable lands which should not give constant employment to at least twenB labourers for every hundred acres ! Such a law as this would speedily heal the bleeding wounds of prostrate Ireland, and m^J her a great and 'happy nation. 20 FACTS ON IRELAND. The machinery for carrying it into effect, does not now exist, hut may be immediately con¬ structed. I shall submit an outline of it, under the head of Remedial Measures. The gentry and the graziers will, no doubt, exclaim against the provision for the Pea¬ santry. But, they have been allowed to have their own way too long, and have nearly ruined the country. Therefore the law must force them to try a new road to riches, and they will find it a straight one. To be sure they may not see many wild flowers and other indications of old pastures, as they pass along; nor great mounds of fences and ditches, that make Irish farms appear as if they had been entrenched camps—The pastures must give place to corn, and to recovery and green crops for the cattle—the mounds of fences, to hedges planted on the sur¬ face of the soil—the ditches (where necessary) to deep open drains, with the productive soil shelving to the water’s edge. But in lieu of these evidences of indolence and heartless indifference to the sufferings of the peasantry, they will see their lands loaded with abundance. They will hear too, the busy hum of industry. And they will behold around them a comfortable and con¬ tented population. The great principles of the proposed law, as it affects the rural population, are, to provide the means of obtaining an exemption from the tax, by giving sufficient employment; to make those who create misery, relieve it; and to extend cultivation. Wanting these principles, the English law for protecting industry, is defective. In England, the best employer is taxed to relieve pau¬ perism caused by others, who do not incur any special penalty. And the proprietors may shut up from industry their enormous parks, preserves, and wastes, without paying more for paupers than a portion of the general charge, while in most cases (in rural districts) they should pay the whole. < . The proposed arrangement does not respect mere personal rights; for, they avail not against the interests of the community, every member of which must surrender a portion of his rights, for the common weal. Some persons would apply the Church property to the support of the poor.—A fund of the kind might be very well applied to the maintenance of helpless paupers, poor children, and schools; but a fund for alms to be doled out to the people, would, so far from promoting industry and comfort, produce indolence mischief and misery. A few condemn a social provision for the poor, lest the maintenance of Roman Catholic pau¬ pers should devolve on affluent Protestants. Oh, heartless men! They must improve their understanding and hearts, by first reading of the rich glutton, and then of the good Samaritan. A few more would have the people left as they are, that the rich may gratify their benevolence or ostentation, by conferring alms. And others, would place the alms at the disposal of religious societies. Such persons forget that the most certain way to destroy the utility of a religious institution, is, to place riches under its control; for these tempt persons to join the institution who have no true vocation for a religious life, and thus the corruption and hypocrisy of some members create a distrust of all, and the institution loses its utility, and is despised by mankind. They also forget that helpless paupers form but a very small part of the population, which a legal provision is necessary to protect. Would they have the people, who merely ask for employ¬ ment, degraded, by asking or accepting alms ? Then, as to the desire for giving alms, which makes men, whose benevolence is tainted by folly or vanity, wish to have Irish beggary prolonged _it may be consoling to them to know that in every country where a state provision for pauperism and industry exists, there are many deserving persons who secretly pine in indigence—Women I reduced from a state of comparative affluence, by the sickness or death of husbands—daughters, by the sickness or death of parents or brothers—whole families, by unforseen calamities,- the mutations of an inscrutable destiny. Cases like these must exist in all countries; and it is not likely that Ireland will be exempt from such domestic afflictions. The giving of alms is no doubt enjoined by the Gospel. But it does not therefore follow that i the poor are to be left to the voluntary mercies of the rich. The Gospel enjoins many things | besides the giving of alms ; and it is in such respects made the fundamental principle of many l( national laws, as the law of marriage, &c. The Gospel injunction in these respects is not then lithe less fulfilled, because its fulfilment is rendered imperative by the Law of the State. MANUFACTURES. ARTS, AND TRADE. Although Manufactures and the Arts have decayed in Ireland since the Union, it does not, therefore, follow that the Union has been the cause. The change in the system of manufactu- ing and Trade, which has taken place in the United Kingdom since 1800; the distressed condi¬ gn of the great mass of Irish consumers—tillage Farmers and rural Labourers; and the sys- of Taxation; are the true causes of the decay of Manufactures and Arts in Ireland, and the withdrawal of a few consumers of Luxuries, occasioned by the Union, or the subse- ht removal of the impolitic protecting Duties charged for twenty years on the importation of MANUFACTURES, ARTS, AND TRADE, 21 English Manufactures, which gave a monopoly to a few Manufacturers at the expense of the whole country. LINEN TRADE. It is commonly complained that th,e Linen Manufactures, established in Ireland in lieu of her Woollen Trade, which William the Third destroyed, have been reduced to a ruinous condition by some breach of compact on the part of the English Government, committed with a view of favouring English interests exclusively. If this were the case, it would follow—that England must have injured, if not des¬ troyed the sale of Irish Linen in the out Markets, and that the Irish Exports have conse¬ quently diminished or ceased. But it appears by an Account of these Exports appended to the Parliamentary Report on Ireland, presented upon the 16th of July, 1830, that they have increased since 1800. I shall give the number of yards exported, in whole numbers. Observe the amount of the Exports in 1809 and 1813, when the general Trade was more prosperous than at any subsequent period. In the direct Exports to Foreign Countries there will be found a diminution from 1817, partly because their demand is supplied through England, (in 1821, the Exports of Irish Linen from England amounted to 9,442,431 yards,) and partly in consequence of over trading, at the beginning of the period, by which heavy losses were suffered. Great Britain.1801, 34 millions. 1805, 40 millions. 1809, 33 millions. 1813, 35 millions. Foreign Countries.1801, 3 ... 1805, 3 ... 1809, 4 ... 1813, 4 Great Britain.1817,50 ... 1821,45 ... 1825,52-2- ForeignCountries.1817, 6 ... 1821, 4 ... 1825, 2|r It is then manifestly the Home Trade in Linen, that has been curtailed, and not the Outward Trade. And this is attributable to causes wholly unconnected with the Union. lstly. The increased use of Cottons, both Irish and English, occasioned by their comparative cheapness; and which could not have been stopped by the protecting duties ; for even with those Taxes in addition to the cost price, the English Cottons would be infinitely cheaper than Irish Linen_Any one who takes the trouble of looking into the Warehouses for the sale of Cottons and Linen, or of visiting the Linen Hall of Dublin, now become a depot for Irish and English Cottons, will be satisfied that the extension of the Cotton Trade is a principal cause of the contraction of the Linen Trade. Even in the Counties where Linens are still extensively manufactured, the majority of the working classes use Cottons instead of Linen, either from necessity or choice. 2ndly. The high price of Linen, occasioned by the mode of providing the materials, and the system of manufacturing in Ireland. The regulations under which Flaxseed was imported and sold led to such frauds, that few, if any, Farmers ever ventured to cultivate for flax on their own risk as they cultivate for Corn. The hogsheads in which the seed was imported were branded, by persons appointed for the purpose, to certify that the seed was new. And then as soon as these vessels were emptied, they were filled with old seed unfit for use, and again placed in the Markets. So that this branding, devised for the protection of the Public, as part of the precious system for encouraging Trade, entailed ruin upon thousands of poor families, who lived by spinning flax, grown at their own risk on patches of ground hired from the Farmers. Flax, as I have observed, was seldom grown by the Farmers, except in small quantities. They let patches of ground for the purpose to the Peasantry, at enormous Rents. Hence the crop was dear, and of a quality far inferior to Foreign Flax, and to what Irish Flax might have been if reared in a soil fitly prepared. In this way the materials for Irish Linen were charged with so J great a cost price, that the coarse fabrics could not maintain a competition with Cottons. 3rdly. The interdict on the Importation of Flax and Yarn, maintained, contrary to the wishes of the Manufacturers, by the Linen Board—a crowd of Irish Noblemen and Gentlemen, who knew nothing whatever of the interests they were appointed to protect, and who thought, J more of keeping up the Rents than aiding the Manufacturers. The price of Irish materials compared with those of other Countries induced English Manufacturers, who were importing Irish Yarn, and making coarse Linens for the Bounty, to introduce Foreign Yarn, and ulti- I mately to import Foreign Flax, and spin it with Machinery. Besides these advantages, the I English Manufacturers, in manufacturing for the Bounty, cleverly confined themselves to the | coarsest fabrics, while the Irish exported fabrics of every quality, so that their competitors I obtained as much bounty on coarse Linen as they did on Linen of superior qualities. This extended A the English Trade, the spinning of Mill Yarn increased, the demand for Irish Hand-yarn* diminished, but greater quantities of Irish Flax were taken—and the Irish Manufacturers in vaiufl endeavoured to obtain materials on the same advantageous terms as the English. The Board of 1 Protectors would hear of nothing that interfered with the old system, until the Markets were I declining with alarming rapidity. Then the restrictions were removed, but it was too late ; foijJ although the materials were cheapened, there were not means of creating supplies to reduce tl^H prices sufficiently low to compete with Cottons. The change, however, served to sustainjf 99 FACTS ON IRELAND. Export trade. And it has led to the introduction of Mill spinning in Belfast, by which Yarn is prepared at home not only for the coarse fabrics but the very finest Linens in use. Thus it is clear that the depreciation of the Linen Trade was caused by mismanagement and restrictions_that it is the Home Trade which has declined—and that this can only be revived by bettering the condition of the great mass of Irish consumers. WOOLLEN, SILK, AND COTTON TRADES. Each of these Trades has undergone most extraordinary changes in Great Britain and Ireland within the last twenty years, which have occasioned as much suffering in one Country as in the other, comparatively with the extent of the Trade in each. That Ireland could not right herself as rapidly as England, is attributable to the magnitude of the English system, which provided immediate compensation for a great change. There is, however, no reason why the Irish Trades may not prosper as her means of consuming Manufactures improve. In the first quality of Woollens, Ireland may never have an extensive Trade, as that branch of manufacturing requires a division of labour, first in forming the cloth, and then in finishing it, which can only exist in a great system like that of England. In Cloths of second and still more inferior qualities there is no reason why Ireland should not be able to compete with England, for the supply of her own Markets and even those of Foreign Countries. .And there seems to be no cause whatever for the decline of the Manufacture of coarse Cloth, Blankets, Flannels, Serges, and Stuffs, but the poverty of Irish consumers. It is absurd to attribute the decline to Absenteeism, or the Repeal of the Protecting Duties. By every means, the Ormond Family endeavoured to maintain the Manufacturers of Kilkenny; and Carrick-on-Suir is in the heart of a district in which nearly all the Proprietors reside. It is, however, to Markets and not Proprietors that Manufacturers must look; and for these they will look in vain, while those who would create the Markets are impoverished. The Silk Manufacturing has always been a struggling Trade in Dublin, beyond which, with the exception of one establishment at Tullamore, the Trade has not extended in Ireland. The oldest Inhabitants of Dublin recollect to have heard in their early days, of efforts to encourage the Silk Trade; and one of the means resorted to, the regulation of wages by the Dublin Society on the Spittalfields plan, proves that the Trade could never have been prosperous—if it had, there would have been no occasion to dictate wages. The fabrics on which the Irish Wea¬ vers so much rely, Tabinets, are too nice and dear for general use. In these fabrics, it appears, that when they were in much demand, more than one-third of the Silk imported was worked up.* They must consequently have formed the chief branch of the Trade ; and these the Repeal of the Protecting Duties did not injure, there being no similar Manufactures in England. Neither could Absenteeism have injured the Trade ; on the contrary, the use of the Tabinets in Lon¬ don by Irish ladies, has introduced these beautiful fabrics to the notice of English women of the higher ranks and created a demand for them. In the general Silk Trade of Dublin, there has no & t been greater distress than in London, which is attributable to a variety of causes, but prin¬ cipally to the rivalry of Macclesfield, Derby, &c. where the Trade is free from wages rules. Prohibitory Laws and Trade regulations have occasioned all the distress that has been suffered by the operatives of the Silk Trade, in Lyons, London, and Dublin. But these removed, there is no reason why Dublin should not be able to manufacture Silks successfully, as well as a Provincial Town in England. If there be any local advantage, Dublin possesses it, in having so great a number of consumers. The richly clad ladies of Dublin must consume great quantities of Silk—it is only necessary for the Irish Manufacturers to provide the qualities and patterns desired. . The Cotton Trade of Ireland has been greatly extended since the prohibitory system was S abolished, and the Foreign Trade opened. Every effort of the Irish Legislature to establish the Trade to any extent, proved abortive, and the Loans advanced for the purpose were wasted. L Subsequently, however, the British Legislature, notwithstanding the opposition ot the Manu- ■ facturers, gradually altered the prohibitory system, and threw open the Foreign Trade. Then the Trade, which previously was embarrassed by a glut every third year, rapidly increased. At i the Union, the protecting duty on Grey and White Cottons was 68/.-per cent, ad valorem. On prints it was 46/. per cent. These monstrous Taxes were gradually reduced to 10/. percent, which rate commenced in 1816. The Manufacturers denounced the reduction as ruinous to their interests. But, whatever influence it might have had on individual interests, it benefited the Trade at large. The imports of the raw materials, (from all parts) in 1817, amounted to 3,286,429 lbs. But in 1801, when the highest protecting duties were payable on imported Manufactures, the imports of raw materials amounted to only 1,575,789 lbs. In 1825, when no protecting duty existed, the imports of raw materials amounted to 6,768,4531bs.f These facts prove that the protecting duties were doubly injurious to Ireland : lstly. In making apparel dear by creating a monopoly; 2ndly. in contracting Irish Trade. At present there is no protecting duty, ♦ Report of the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry, July 26, 1622. f Trade Accounts appended to the Report on Ireland presented to Parliament on the lGtli July, 1830. MANUFACTURES, ARTS, AND TRADE. 23 and the Trade is more advanced than ever. It partakes, no doubt, of the general embarrass¬ ment which affects manufacturing throughout the Empire; but Manufactories have increased— spinning is improved—the prints are equal to any that come from England, except the London prints_and Irish fabrics compete with those of England, both in England and abroad. There is nothing wanting but a good home Market. It is consumers that are wanting, and not protecting duties. MISCELLANEOUS MANUFACTURES. Those who look to Manufactures as means of promoting the prosperity of Ireland, seem to forget that manufacturing in Ireland can only he an effect of prosperity, not a cause of it. And in thus overlooking the sources of Irish Trade, they commonly attribute the decay of it to British rivalry, or the concession of Commercial advantages to England and Scotland which are not extended to Ireland. The Manufacturing Trade of the whole Empire, is now, with three exceptions, carried on (as far as the Law is concerned) under a system of perfect equality. The exceptions are the Soap and Candle Trade, Starch Trade, and Spirit Trade. In the first, the drawback system is extremely prejudicial to Ireland, and the English duty should be repealed, as the drawback of it on exportations to Ireland is converted into a Bounty in favour of the English Manufacturer— just like the drawback obtained on printed Cottons before the duty was repealed. In the second, the Irish have an advantage, Irish Starch being untaxed; and local advantages added to this, should give the Manufacturers the whole of the home Markets. In the third, for Revenue purposes, the system of England is exclusive; and by the adoption of a different practice from Scotland, in regard to the use of Malt, the majority of Irish Distillers lose the right to a draw¬ back, which the Scotch obtain, under the same law, and they contrive to make this drawback a Bounty ! To this circumstance an importance has been attached, of which it is wholly undeserving. The Irish Distillers would make it appear that it is the Law, and not their own practice, that has given the Scotchmen an advantage :—whereas they may obtain the draw¬ back if they qualify themselves, by using Malt exclusively, like the Scotch, and not Malt and raw Corn mixed. To give the affair an appearance, to excite public feeling, it is averred that the interests of Irish Agriculture are involved in it— as if Ireland could he at a loss for a Corn Market. The Paper Trade of the United Kingdom is now under one Law. But the people are led to believe that this equality has been ruinous to Irish Traders. This is not the case. The equality of the Law in regard to all Manufacturers, is now proved to be essential to the protection of Ireland. The Excise Tax, which is certainly an impolitic Impost as it operates against the diffusion of knowledge, but which is payable throughout the United Kingdom, has been the cause of embar¬ rassment in the Irish Trade, not however in curtailing Consumption, but in giving Smugglers the power of destroying fair Traders. Every artifice that ingenuity could devise, has been resorted to by some Manufacturers, in order to evade the duty, and they have been materially aided by the corruption of perjured Excisemen belonging to the old Revenue system. One of the artifices resorted to, was, to print forms or directions on the Paper in the Mills ; and then it passed out free of duty to the consumers—the counterfeiting of Excise Stamps and signatures was another mode of evasion ; and when coun¬ terfeiting was stopped by an improved Stamp and certificate, arrangements were made for giving a drawback of the Duty to all Customers who returned the stamped wrappers to be put on fresh supplies. This system, with combination of Workmen, and the introduction of Machine-made Paper from England and Scotland, caused for a time, great embarrassment in the Trade, but now, the Irish Paper made by Machinery is rapidly getting into use. It is, however, impossible that the Trade can be prosperous under the Excise system, for both in England and Ireland smuggling is still carried on. If the Duty were repealed, as a concession to Trade and the desire for know¬ ledge, the Irish Manufacturers could withstand all competition. The Leather Trade, is now free from the Excise system and nothing is wanting to its prospe¬ rity but an improvement in the condition of the People. The Glass Trade, is under a general Law for the United Kingdom, passed in 1828; but in consequence of a disclosure of the intention to assimilate the Laws and Duties, some months be¬ fore the new Law obtained operation, the British Manufacturers stored a long supply of Glass in Ireland, which is still in consumption, to the great detriment of the Irish Trader When, however that stock shall have been used, Ireland will obtain the command of her own markets, notv'Lnstand- ing the advantange which the English and Scotch manufacturers possess in h:.,'llig their Works beside the Coal pits. It appears by the evidence of Mr. Williams, an Irish manufacturer, which is annexed to the Report of the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry made in July 1822, that to manufacture Bottle and White Glass in equal quantities, the Furnace for the former wouhU consume 40 tons of Coal in a week, while the Furnace for White Glass would consume onl^jl tons per week. Thus the cheapness of Fuel gives England and Scotland a great advanj^jj 24 FACTS ON IRELAND. However this, under equal Laws, will be entirely counteracted by the Irish Manufacturer’s being beside the Market, and so avoiding a great loss by breakage and carriage which is suffered on Glass imported. The Irish White Glass Trade is very extensive, in Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Belfast, and Derry. Sugar-Baking, failed in Ireland, partly by English competition supported by a Stock purse 1 to countervail the charges on Importation, &c. but chiefly (perhaps wholly, for without such a disadvantage the competition might have been withstood,) by the state of the Irish Su^ar Market. The Sugar consignees being almost all in Scotland and England, the British Manufacturers have supplies suited precisely to their Trade. They have also, vents for their low Sugars, and uses K foi what may be called offal, that Ireland had not then, and has not now. The low Sugars in Ireland are only required for preserving, and even the qualities so used are much superior to qualities necessarily made up by the Manufacturers. The great consumption of refined Sugar in Ireland is in punch; and none but Sugar of a superior quality will be so used. These are the circum¬ stances which form perhaps the true cause of failure in the Irish Trade. However no interest is now suffering ; and Ireland consumes but a comparatively small quantity of refined Sugar. Potteries once existed in Ireland, for the coarser Wares. There is no reason why Irish Potters should not be able to supply their own markets. It is not want of Consumers that has repressed this primitive trade—the demand for English Wares being very great. The Hat and Hosiery Trades depend at present almost wholly on the consumption of the upper and middle classes. Therefore it is not surprising that they are depreciated. i Reviewing in this way, the state of the Irish Manufactures, I establish the important fact, that they have not been depreciated, by the Union, or the abolition of the protecting duties, and that nothing is wanting to advance them to a state of prosperity but improvement in the' condition of the Peasantry, who are now impoverished by the pasture system, an evil .which cannot be removed without a Law, such as I have suggested, for the protection of industry. Irishmen commonly attribute the failure of every manufacturing Establishment to the influence of English competition, although but the effect of those ordinary causes of bankruptcy, which are constantly closing English Establishments. The English Manufacturers are now labouring under very great difficulties. There seems indeed to be a general depreciation of Trade through¬ out Europe. In France, with all her prohibitory Laws, and her exemption from drains of capital, manufacturing is so much embarrassed that the operatives menace a revolt. It is then deluding the Irish working classes to tell them that they are in distress because they have not extensive Manufactories, and prohibitory Laws, and Taxes to enforce the residence of all Proprietors of the soil. Ireland at present wants not Manufactures but the means of pur¬ chasing them, and these can only be obtained from her agricultural resources, which are the origi¬ nal causes of social wealth and happiness. JDevelope these , and the demand for Manfactures will speedily extend manufacturing.* ARTS. Under this head I shall only refer to the arts of printing and engraving, for they are the only Arts, once carried on extensively, which have been much depreciated. In Scotland these Arts are flourishing—with the exception perhaps of Copper-plate engraving, which the steel engraving of London must have diminished—it cannot then be maintained that Printing at least has declined in Ireland from any other cause than want of energy or capital among the Irish Publishers. Most certainly they do not want a Market. Unfortunately, this much may be said for them : the old character of Irish Publishing has not been yet obliterated. Then there is the Copy-right Act, which very justly interdicts the re-printing in Ireland, of works published in Great Britain. But, living Authors are not wanting to the success of Print¬ ing in Ireland. The supplying of the reading Community, and Schools, with all those valuable works over which Authors or Publishers have no control, would be sufficient to maintain several great Publishing Establishments. It is impossible that Capitalists, forming such Estab¬ lishments could be unsuccessful in Dublin, with her University, her Schools of Medicine and Surgery, her Law Courts, her Seminaries, and her thousands of enlightened Families. THE TRADE OF DUBLIN. Since the Union, the wholesale Trade of Dublin has undergone a great change, as the supplies of many principal inland and western Towns, are not now obtained in the Metropolis. The 1 -poverty of the mass of the People throughout the Counties of Dublin, Meath, Kildare, and Wicklow, is aao<\her cause of decay in the wholesale Trade, for those who would be consumers of Imports cannot purchase them. The Retail Trade, though greatly extended, also suffers from the latter cause, as do the • ^Trades of Shoemaking, Tailoring, Brass and Tin Working, &c. &c. JAe Article on Manufactures, in Commentaries on Ireland, &c.—Milliken, Dublin.—Ridgway, London.—1831. MANUFACTURES, ARTS, AND TRADE. 25 The Slaughtering Trade has declined, because the War has ceased. This it is said injures the poor, as there is less offal for them. Offal was never had for nothing—consequently the pooi- have not suffered by the cessation of war. And as to the working classes, they ought to have more available parts of the beeves and sheep than the offal. The Victualling Trade has undoubtedly increased, and it will be increased still more when the u - J -—7 * v xx inuiu VV util U1C improved condition of the working classes shall enable every family among them to use animal food daily. « The Fisheries are said to have declined—yet, strange to say, the Dublin markets are never svffi- GVt flu oi/rnn/'i/j/V /ip/i If* 1.^ _ _ a 1 Z' 1 ». . •* ^ ciently supplied with fish. If there be distress among the fishermen, it must be of their own creation. The Glove Trade of Dublin, would employ a great number of men and females, but few can be found who know how to sew and finish gloves, and still fewer who can cut them out. This is attributable to ruinous trade rules relative to apprentices, and to the want of schools of indus¬ try where young females w-ould be instructed in every branch of needle work. In Paris there are such schools attached to the convents ; and it is the females instructed there, that sew and finish so handsomely, the French gloves worn by the higher classes in Dublin. The glover from whom I buy, employs a considerable number of hands, and although his business is not very ex¬ tensive he is obliged to import gloves. Whereas, if he could get proper hands he might not im¬ port, as material is now dressed in Dublin fit for all purchasers. This man, though but an humble tradesman, sells as many pair of imported kid gloves in the day, as would give constant employment to twelve females ! The Operative Tradesmen have injured their interests by trade rules. And they are misled by appearances when they attribute any decay of trade among them, to the Union. Thev overlook altogether the condition of those who would be their best customers. If the peasantry in the adjoining counties were bettered in their condition, the present shoemakers, hatters, basket makers, tailors, tin workers, cutlers, locksmiths, &c. &c. would not be capable of supplying the demand for their wares, which would arise in the small towns. Besides Dublin, like Edinburgh, is every day increasing in extent, and yet rents are very high, for although noblemen and commoners who formerly lived in Dublin, now live partly in London, and partly on their estates, their houses are occupied by a most affluent gentry, with the exception of a few hotels, schools, and public- establishments, once occupied by families who for the most part reside on their Irish estates during a great portion of every year, while numerous splendid residences are being erected daily. House tradesmen,—(carpenters, bricklayers, smiths, painters, cabinet makers, &c.) are all fully employed, as well as coachmakers in every branch. Therefore if the Union were to be repealed it would be impossible for the present tradesmen in Dublin to meet the increased demand for labour ; and even if they could , it is not likely that they would be allowed to meet it without competition. The Repeal would be followed by an influx of shopkeepers and tradesmen of everv kind; and the result would certainly be, that many of the present shopkeepers would lose their trade_ (already the effects of new establishments are felt by them)—and the tradesmen would be obliged to work at the masters’ wages, or seek employment elsewhere. I have already directed the attention of the working classes to a prospect of increased employ¬ ment through an improvement in the condition of their countrymen by means of a law for pro¬ tecting industry. I have proposed for them, an alteration in the Revenue system, in order that the pressure of Taxes may be equalized. And I will now advert to two means by which they may aid the improvement of Irish Trade—lstly, let no Tradesman, (however humble) buy for Inmselt or his family, second-hand apparel or furniture : he would thus reserve his means, which he now expends to benefit the higher and middle classes who sell their rlnthes. Rm tv uujc sum fjl \\J\JI, lor Ol, § C 26 FACTS ON IRELAND. This Parliament then, might attempt to render itself more democratic than the British Par¬ liament, and the Government should oppose it by bribery and other corrupting means. Or it might withhold its confidence from the Ministry supported by the British Parliament, and there should be two Administrations, which would amount to separate Government. In the event of a demise of the Crown during the infancy of the Successor, the Irish Parlia¬ ment might elect a different Regent from the one chosen by the British Parliament. This also, would amount to separate Government. In the event of a War the Irish Parliament might disapprove of it, and refuse supplies; some of its leading Members being under the secret influence of the hostile Government. 'England can never subject her power to the possibility of such checks as these ; and therefore slia-nhust resist the measure of Repeal until even separation cannot be refused. But, it is sometimes said that the measure is agitated as a menace, necessary to the attain¬ ment of an end_the improvement of Ireland. Here agitation defeats the attainment of its alleged object. The measures necessary for the improvement of Ireland, will never be obtained without the co-operation of the English Commoners; and as they foresee that Repeal would destroy the Empire, by weakening its energies, distracting its Councils, and frustrating the resolves of Government, they dare not co-operate with Ireland, when the measure of relief demanded would facilitate the accomplishment of ruinous and treasonable designs. Menacing England thus, was not found necessary to the attainment of Catholic Emancipation. When that measure of relief was demanded, every allusion to Repeal was studiously repressed. It cannot then be necessary now, when Ireland only requires for the improvement of her condi¬ tion, measures, that would not be repugnant to England’s sectarian prejudices, but would contri¬ bute to promote her Commercial interests. REMEDIAL MEASURES. 1st, A Law to relieve from Tithes, and protect Industry, as already suggested, and to esta¬ blish, in every Parish, Primary Schools for free Education in Rudiments and Industry. The Law to protect Industry would compel Proprietors to have a practical manager on each of their Estates, who would maintain a Model Farm, exhibit the best system of cultivation, and provide the best kinds of Seed and Stock. It would also break up the the pasture system, the true origin of Irish misery. TT . , . , 2nd, A Law to relieve the Trading and Working Classes of the United Kingdom from the unequal and ruinous pressure of State Taxes, by substituting for many of the Present I axes, a Tax on Rents, Annuities of all kinds, the Interest on the Public Debt, Dividends on the Stock of Banking and other Companies, and the Interest on Bonds, Mortgages, &c. lhis lax to be collected by means of a Centage Stamp on Receipts, to be obtained under penalty by per¬ sons about to pay Income, previously to making the payment, of which the amount ot the 1 ax would be a part. „ , , 3rd, A Law to establish a uniform system of Banking, on the Scotch plan, (paper cunency excepted,) for the whole of the United Kingdom. This would give Ireland the use ot much Capital which now goes annually to London, for investment, under the system created by the Public Debt, there being no mode of increasing Banking Capital, which in Ireland is absurdly limited by Law, while in Scotland it increases with the wealth of the community. In the Banking Capital formed by merely the Working Classes in Scotland amounted to twenty millions : that is, they had by continually placing their savings at the disposal ot the Bankers, accommodated their fellow Tradesmen to this enormous extent.* . 4th. A Law for establishing a general municipal system in Ireland. The corporations to be opened to all payers of local taxes—the whole of each county to be thus incorporated—the tax payers to assemble yearly in their respective parishes in cities, towns and baronies, and elect Representatives from among the principal Rate Payers— these Representatives to elect at the first sitting after the passing of the law, a certain number of their body, to be magistrates for life, unless deposed by the Government for misconduct; and all vacancies to be filled by election— These magistrates to be elected in succession, chief Mayors of each county, and deputy Mayors tfor baronies. The Representatives to determine on all local measures, impose local taxes, azc. IThe Mayors, Deputies, and other Magistrates, to form a kind of superior assembly, to hat or fleet the measures of the Representatives; also, to administer the local laws, superintend schools, ispitals, prisons, &c. protect trade from fraudulent dealers, and be guardians of the poor, and jtectors of the working classes. The taxes to be accounted for, annually , to Parliament. See Article on Currency in Commentaries on Ireland, Milliken, Dubliu.-Ridgway, London, 1831. REMEDIAL MEASURES. 27 This Law would preserve and extend the best parts of the Corporation system of Dublin__ placing the Lord Mayor over both city and county. It would however remove the old guild system, preserving to Freemen their life interests. It would also assimilate the Grand Jury system of England and Ireland, by confining Grand Jurors to the administration of Justice. It would vest the appointment of all Sheriffs in Government, as Officers of the Crown, distinct from the Municipalities, like Lieutenants of counties and their deputies. And it would abolish all tolls and turnpike charges, enabling each Municipality to provide for every local object by taxes equally assessed.* 5th. A Law to declare that after the passing of the Remedial Laws, no Statute, (except one amending or repealing old Laws, or one for some object strictly local or private, even as affecting each branch of the Empire,) shall be passed for Ireland, exclusively. This law would complete the identity of British and Irish interests; and the Representatives of each Country would then act for the whole Empire. * See an admirable account of the Municipal Laws of France and other Nations, in Bryan’s Practical View of Ireland. Wakeman, Dublin, 1831.