Page images

No. 4.-Linen trade

Provisions No. 4.-Cattle

2,844,402 2,448,404


4-5,461,048 Are not those precisely the articles mentioned by Mr. Pitt? Do they not amount to above between four and far millions ? Where is the mistake? Or who appears to be in a labyrinth?

However, in the next paragraph, Mr. Foster again asserts; (page 851 Mr. Pitt fays, our LINEN constitutes four-fifths of our export to all the world."

Mr. Pitt's words are (page 49) “ The increasing produce

of the chief article of manufacture (linen) AND four fifths " of her whole export, are to be ascribed not to that inde“ pendent legislature, bat to the liberality of a British Par. “ liament."' Surely this does not state that linen constitutes four fifths of the Irish export. ... Mr. Foster proceeds; (page 85) “ The British paper “ fhews, that what goes to Britain, which takes, as ke (Mr.

Pitt) says, feven eighths of all our linen, is not see half “ even of our exports to her much less can it be feur fijies “ of our exports to all the world.”.

Now the British paper, or the Inspector General's ac. counts present to my eye, at this inftant, that the linen trade exceeds the half of the WHOLE export to Britain by eighty eight thoujand, nine hundred and eighty nine pouds.I have detailed it before in page 14.

And, as Mr. Pitt says, Britain does take feren eighths of the Irish linens, and more by 653,824 yards *.

Again :--As Mr. Pitt really says (nat, however, as 900ted by Mr. Foster, that the liners are four fifths of the Irish

* Annual medium during four years preceding 25tà March 1798. To America and foreign states of Europe and Africa

4,904,719 To Great Britain



and I believe he will allow there are article ?

exports to all the world, but) that the Irish linens, and ala four fifths of the whole Irish exports depend on Britain; the fact is decidedly so. As to linens, it has been abundantly demonftrated already. And as to her whole exports, it appears, by the custom-house books of IRELAND, that they amounted on an average of the last four years to £-4,691,634 and her exports to Britain amounted to Consequently her exports to Britain are more than ten parts of eleven.

I believe, therefore, it is obvious how far Mr. Pitt is wide of mistatement, and Mr. Foster of accuracy.

But this Gentleman afferts, that Mr. Pitt again forgets a fact, in ftating that ! Articles which are essential to her “ Trade, and to her fubfiftence, or serve as raw materials “ for her manufactures, are sent from hence [Britain] free Let Mr. Fofter inspect the Tables in the Official Accounts,

which are ellen. ‘rial to trade, and to subsistence, or serve as raw materials, that are sent to Ireland free of duty; and from the trade of many of which other countries are actually prohibited in favour of Ireland. But, to satisfy the public, I shall give, the Tables from the official documents, and then every man may himself judge. how far Mr. Fofter has been candid. (Sce Tables F. and G.)

In order to show the great advantages to Britain, from the Irish trade, Mr. Foster, by a partial view of her commerce, tells us allo, (page 89), that “the Export trade, of her “ manufactures from Britain to Ireland, is equal to about

one third of her Export to all Europe." On a fair and proper comparative view, however, of the commerce of Britain with Ireland, what says the Inspector General ? He informs the Parliament of Great Britain, that en an average of four years preceeding January 1799, the

Mr. Pitt's Speech, page 48.


" of duty.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Total Exports of British Manufacture amounted to about thirty millions and an balf; and the British manufa&ures exported to Ireland, amounted to about two millions and an half,—that is, a TWELFTH part of her export. * Such I conceive, with the Inspector General, to be the juft and accurate comparative view.

I shall not trouble you further on this head with long details, but fall state to you some of the refults of those figures now before me, and the truths established by the official documents. And I desire Mr. Fofter" to contradict me if he can.

Ireland depends upon Britain for the fale of eight parts out of nine, of all the articles of her trade. Those eight parts of Irish exports are received by Great Britain almoft, the whole of them, duty free. Whereas, Ireland charges duties on them, and raises a revenue for herself at home, at the expense of Britain ; because, the purchasers and consumers in Britain must pay those charges in the price of the articles. A great part, however, of what Britain sends to Ireland, she imposes no duty on; but Ireland raises revenues on them. Ireland raised during the laft year, SEVEN HUNDRED, E THIRTY-ONE THOUSAND Peunds, REVENUES on the British Trade; and on the Trade with ALL THE WORLD BESIDE, but One Hundred and Seveztees Thousand Pounds, Revenues. +

Although Britain carries on about 1-9th of her commerce with Ireland, yet the British revenue by no means derives from this commerce with Ireland one-ninth of its profits. For, if we deduct from the annual revenues received by Britain, through Irish commerce, those bounties which Britain pays to Irish linens annually; we fhall perceive, that,

* Official accounts, No. 17, Exports to Ireland, 6:2,631,899–Total Exports, 6-30,648,892.

+ Lord Auckland, Table VÍ. Revenues derived to Ireland, from her Trade with Great Britain

4.731,966 From the World beside


[ocr errors]

Britajn receives * but one pound from Irish trade, where 9351. is the due proportion. Such, then, is the truth, according to the accurate accounts of the Inspector General of Great Britain, (No. 179) But, if Mr. Foster be right the Custom-House books of Great Britain display to the Parliament of this Kingdom a pofitive falsehood.

The dilemma, which ensues, is that we must discredit either Mr. Fofter, or this evidence to which he appeals. We cannot afsent to contradictions. In those accounts, however, to which he has referred, and which are now before my eyes, the total reverse appears of what Mr. Foster asserts. Yet he tells us, and puts it before us in various shapes, that the existing trade is much more beneficial to Britain than it is to Ireland! - But I most obviously and unerringly fee, and I do affert, on no equivocal authority, that it is not even mutually beneficial.-He assures us, that if the Horse of Commons whereof he is now Speaker, be incorporated with the English Commons, this Union will injure your trade and manufactures. The direct contrary of all this, has been demonstrated through the irrefiftible arguments of different, and moft able' men; fome of whom have been the guides and ornaments of paft times; others of whom have been the political prophets of our own days, and the admiration of the good and wise. I see an Union, therefore, through fuck mediums, without being distorted by the fallacy, or dimmed by the shade of intereft, as the true and only measure that can give stability or * Revenues received on an average

of four
years; P

eced ing January 5, !799.

By Britain from Ireland, 4-40,911
Bounties paid by Britain to Ireland, 34,783

Remains 6,128
We shall find, therefore, that 6,000 l. revenue from Ireland,
bears a proportion to the revenues of Britain which arise from
trade, and amount to 5,734,5251, as one pound to nine
hundred and thirty-five Pounds.


improvement to those eminent advantages which Ireland now enjoys. These must be utterly loft, if she does not become one with Britain, without distinctness of views or feparation of irierelts. . Thus, therefore, I do fee, and, I doubt not, that the people of Ireland will moft plainly sce, the direct reverse of what Mr. Foster would impress upon us.

-The trade of Ireland does not afford such adran. tages to Great Britain, that all apprehenfion of its lors is

the part of the former; and therefore we should not agree with him to keep the House of Commons in Ireland, in manifest opposition to national prosperity, and Imperial good.

The next Question, to which the arguments of Mr. Foster


be reduced, is as follows: SECOND POINT.-Is all extenfion of the trade of Ireland, under Union, by an eltablijhment or participation of the great branches of British manufakture, radically imposible ?

idle on

In support of this point, Mr. Foster states (in page 68,) that iron, woollen, cotton, and pottery wares, conftitute the principal manufactures of Great Britain. And he proceeds to Mew, that iron is imported into Ireland, at only 125. 6d. per ton; and into Britain, at near 31. (it is, in fact, at 31. 45. 6d.) yet Britain manufactures and exports this iron to Ireland, to the amount of 119,000l. annually, though she pays a further duty on importation into Ireland, of 121. 145. per cent. And this extraordinary power and fuperiority in trade, arise, says Mr. Foster, from the vicinity of coals to the British manufacture.

Now that this is not the case, will clearly appear; and, consequently, his assertion of the radical impoflibility of Ireland's not extending her manufactures under an Union, because she has not coals in her vicinity, muft fall to the ground.

It is not solely the vicinity of coals, but the various relations of commerce that promote manufactures. If it were the vicinity of coals, why shoald fuch extensive manufac

« PreviousContinue »