interest of the debt; but let it be remembered, so are the land and national resources of Great Britain likewise. Does it not make some very considerable difference, that we should be embarked in the same boat with a comrade stronger and more able than ourselves? The interest is now charged on the joint security of the two countries. What was formerly the separate debt of Ireland is now made the joint debt of the whole country. This was effected in 1817; and the result was a lessening of charge, in three years, of 13,092,3991. Yet this arrangement is brought forward as a grievance at this moment. Why, the allegation is totally untenable and preposterous. The fact, therefore, is, that the consolidation in 1817, sweeps aside all calculations in respect to the proportion of two-seventeenths. Granting that there had been any inequality or injustice towards Ireland in the Union proportions, the transfer of the debt for which Great Britain made herself jointly responsible in 1817, is alone much more than a sufficient counterpoise to any want of equality in 1800, even supposing that want of equality to be proved. On these grounds, therefore, I wish Gentlemen to consider, whether the arguments, with respect to the two-seventeenths, are, after the consolidation of the Exchequers, in the slightest degree applicable? The consolidation of the debt, and the application of the whole resources of the country as a security for the interest, have completely set these objections at rest. I regret to be compelled to trespass on the attention of the House at so unseasonable a length. I can assure them I do so most reluctantly; but this is a question of no common importance, and points which I might, out of deference to the House omit, might be represented elsewhere as points on which the argument of the learned Mover could not be refuted. On these grounds, therefore, I trust the House will continue to me its indulgence. The next subject to which I beg to invite the attention of Members, is the state of the trade and navigation of Ireland. There have been insinuations thrown out relative to documents manufactured to suit the purposes of my argument: I can assure you that I should disdain to profit by any such miserable unfairness. But suspicion itself cannot object to the paper I now hold in my hand. No one can venture to suggest, that it is manufactured for the occasion. The paper which I now hold in my hand was given me by my right hon. friend, Their To 1800, was To 1815, was Increase £64,861,000 80,316,000 15,455,000 59,623,000 92,971,000 33,348,000 ... 102,600 125,000 But it may be repeated-"Oh! these Returns of exports prove nothing, or less than nothing." Why, Sir, was there ever such a doctrine as this? Do not the exports of a country show that a given quantity of labour is employed in producing those exports; and must not that labour have been remunerated? Is there a single branch of trade, or is there a single article of produce, that does not represent a given quantity of labour? Then the exports must be indicative of the employment of Irish labour, and the payment of a given amount of wages: but are they not indicative of something more also? Must not these articles be paid for? They must be bought; they are not given away. They must, therefore, indicate consumption of those articles for which they were changed. The learned Member's proofs of poverty and its effects, are really most peculiar. He first assumes, that a country has an increasing surplus produce, and therefore is poor; next, that by reason of its poverty, it parts with its surplus produce without receiving an equivalent. This must be his argument, because if we Irish receive back-as of course we must do something in exchange for the goods which ex Three Years ended 25th March 1790.. 1800.. 5th January 1810.. 1820. 1826.. Parts Parts. £ 3,535,588 4,299,493 6,535,068 6,008,273 4,125,333 4,015,976 15.270,471 16,291,725 8,454,918 839,014 6.35,009 1830..1,573,545 Two Years ended In the absence of Custom-house docuI am driven to the returns of ships and ments, which are incomplete since 1826, But let us go further:-the total value of the imports into Ireland, in the first period to which I have already referred, was 59,000,000l.; in the latter, it was 92,000,000l.: showing an increase of 33,000,000l. Now, whatever may be said of the poverty of the Irish people, as displayed in the exportation of large quantities of goods without equivalent, as is assumed, I think this argument cannot be applied to the import trade. I hope I shall not be told, that it is possible to argue this tonnage, as the best evidence of the state part of the question fairly without referring show what have been the numbers and of trade, and I shall, therefore, proceed to to official documents. I beg to ask those Gentlemen who, in their great kindness, tonnage of the vessels which have entered have expressed their horror of figures, and the ports of Ireland during the several their objection to the course I am compelled periods already referred to. I wish hon. Gentlemen to be aware that, in conseto pursue, if I am excluded from adverting to the amount of the exports and of the im- quence of the assimilation of the Customports-if I am excluded likewise from conhouse laws of England and Ireland, and sidering the number of ships, and the ton- the unrestrained intercourse of the crosschannel trade, we have no longer the nage of those ships-upon what principle is it possible for me, or any one else, to trade between the two countries. I remeans of recording the amount of the argue upon the trade and navigation of Ireland? Perhaps, also, if after collecting the gret that such should have been the result statements which are before the House, I of a change otherwise highly beneficial; did not refer to them, those very hon. Gen- and if it should be possible, without comtlemen who quarrel with my statistics might mercial inconvenience, to restore the former turn round upon me, and assert, that I was the British and Irish trade, I trust that the practice so far as to preserve a record of without facts to illustrate or to prove my Government may take the subject into case. It may, however, be fairly objected, their favourable consideration, for I scarcely that the statements I have as yet referred think I should be now called upon to argue to bring me no further than to 1815; and this question, if I possessed the means of it may be imagined, that the progress of trade in Ireland has not been so favourable exhibiting truly the commercial statistics since that period. of Ireland, and thus proving to demonstraAs a very important tion what has been her progress in wealth. argument might be raised upon this as- The measure of 1825, however, was cersumption, I beg to refer the House to the tainly most useful to both countries; but account marked No. 9, which brings the it has deprived us of the most valuable incommercial statements as far as the official formation as regarding the commercial imrecords enable them to be carried, namely, to 1826. It is a statement of the average we have lost one criterion of the state of provement of the country. But though amount of the exports and imports of Ire- Irish trade, we still have preserved the land for triennial periods terminating in amount of tonnage on which we can reason, that year. From this account, it appears, and this gives us the next best standard to that the annual average value of the im-refer to. The account which I hold in my ports is as follows: A STATEMENT, showing the Annual Average amount of the Imports and Exports of Ireland, for the Triennial periods terminating on 5th January, 1790, 1800, 1810, 1820, 1826, and 1830; and the Biennial periods terminating on 5th January 1832 and 1834 respectively; distinguishing the trade of Great Britain from the trade with Foreign parts. hand states the number of vessels entered into the ports of Ireland, including repeated voyages; though it does not inform us how frequently the same ships may have entered. material; the number of vessels might be But for my purpose, this is imof importance, if I were arguing this as a shipping question; because, in that light, repeated voyages, by a single vessel, differ materially from a series of voyages by different vessels; yet, as a matter of comA STATEMENT, showing the Annual Average number and tonnage of vessels entered inwards, in the ports of Ireland, in the Triennial periods terminating on 5th January, 1790, 1800, 1810, 1820, 1830, and 1834 respectively; distinguishing the trade with Great Britain from the trade with Foreign parts. merce, it is unimportant whether one vessel makes ten voyages, or ten vessels make one voyage each. This is an average for two years only-namely, 1808 and 1809, the books for the year 1807 being defective. prove to you (said he) the injury which the Union has inflicted on Ireland, by From this statement, it appears that the number of vessels have increased from 7,243, in 1790, to 15,189, in 1834; and the ton-showing that before the Union the connage from 622,013, to 1,523,291. 6 But sumption of that country with respect to there is one point in this table to which I particular articles was as 40 per cent, wish most particularly to invite the atten- and that of England was but as 20 per tion of the Members of this House, and cent, and that since the Union the conabove all the attention of those hon. Mem. sumption of Ireland has been only 20 per bers who are favourable to the Repeal of cent, while the consumption of England the Union. Let us observe at what has increased to 40 per cent. Therefore period this increase has taken place. Dur- the difference between the two proporing the years before the Union included in tions (continued the learned Member) this return that is, in the Triennial shows the diminution of wealth in Ire periods ending in 1790 and 1800-no in land since the Union.' crease took place in the number of ships; but, on the contrary, a slight diminution -namely, from 7,243 to 7,209, though in the tonnage there was a trifling increase namely, from 622,013 to 642,477; whereas, since the Union the shipping has regularly augmented, and that in a rapidly increasing ratio. Therefore, with regard to ships and tonnage, taking the year 1790 as our point of departure, the whole increase under the authority of the Irish Parliament was as an evanescent quantity, while that which has taken place under the authority of the Imperial Parliament has been great beyond all parallel. I must here advert to a fallacy in a part of the learned Member's statement, which I am bound to confute, because it seemed to be well calculated to produce a delusive impression on the public mind: I can Now, this is a most sophistical mode of reasoning the case, and I undertake to prove that it contains within itself the grossest of all fallacies. It may, to a certain extent, be just to compare the consumption of Ireland, at one period with its consumption at another; but to make a per-centage average of the consumption of one country as compared with that of another, can lead to no useful result whatever. It practically proves nothing. Allow me to put a simple case, to illustrate my principle. Let me suppose that one community consumes, in a given year ten quarters of wheat, and another community 1,000 quarters during the same period, and that in the following year the consumption of the first community increases to twenty quarters, and that of the second community to 1,500;-what is the result of these pro portions? In one community the con-, exceed 8,000,000l. If we refer to the sumption has increased to 100 per cent, earlier tables before me, I find, that the and in the other, only 50 per cent, though present value of the trade with Liverpool in the latter case no less than 500 quarters exceeds that of the total exports of Ireland of wheat has been added to the consump-in 1820 by 1,700,000l.; that it exceeds tion, while in the first an addition of only the exports of 1810 by 2,700,000l.; and ten quarters has taken place. Is it not that it exceeds the exports of 1800 and plain, then, that the relative proportions, 1790 by nearly 4,000,000l. And this, I as ascertained by per-centages, proves but may be told, is a proof of the increasing little in reference to the state of those poverty of Ireland! It has been already countries? But, dismissing this example, stated, I am aware, and it will probably a more agreeable illustration is suggested be repeated by the advocates for repeal, by the hour to which the present discus- that the amount of exports and imports is sion has, unfortunately, been protracted. no test of the nation's prosperity; and yet, 1 take, as an example, the consumption of with singular inconsistency, if in any imwine. Suppose that one community con- ported article, such as tea or sugar, they sumes a single hogshead of wine, and that can by any means show a decrease, they another community consumes 10,000 hogs- triumphantly point to the fact, as a proof heads; and that in the following year the of the decay and ruin of Ireland. Truly first community has increased its consump- mine is a most unfortunate country! Whetion from one to two hogsheads, and the ther the amount of imports or exports second community has increased its con- increase, or whether they diminish, the sumption to 15,000. In the former case one alternative or the other is a proof of the consumption is augmented in the ratio her misery in the eyes of the advocates of of 100 per cent, while in the latter it is Repeal. They are determined that, under only augmented in the ratio of 50 per cent. all circumstances, Ireland shall and must Yet it cannot be seriously doubted but be poor. In argument, they make poverty that the addition of 5.000 hogsheads to the their divinity, and they worship her with consumption of a community is a greater zealous devotion. I may be asked, how has indication of wealth and prosperity than this increase of commerce arisen? We owe the addition of a single hogshead. If I much to the wise system of legislation have been enabled to make myself in- adopted in late years; but the increase of telligible on this subject, the learned Mem- our trade has doubtless been also accele ber is put out of court as far as relates to rated by the extraordinary effects of the his doctrine of ratios of consumption. The agency of steam-navigation between the House will observe, in such an argument, two countries. In the mighty element everything depends on the point of de- of steam, acting in the production of wealth parture, upon which the applicability of on both sides of the Channel, there resides this reasoning exclusively depends. a power which, perhaps, as much as any interference of ours, must ultimately silence the senseless cry of Repeal. It will do so, by bringing the two countries more immediately into contact, by making the inhabitants better known to each other, and inducing the English capitalists to adventure in Ireland, and giving greater facilities to Irish enterprise. But one of the most important results which will be thus effected by steam-navigation, will be the approxim ation of the markets, and the connexion formed between individuals belonging to both countries, by the ties of their mutual wants and interests. It is even now the case, that certain articles of manufacture, after having undergone one process in Lancashire, are exported to Belfast; in that town they pass through another stage in the process, and are finally returned to Manchester for completion and sale. It is to operations like this that I refer with con On the subject of trade and navigation, hon. Gentlemen will recollect, that in the Report of 1830, to which so much reference has been made, it is stated, on the authority of Sir Charles Whitworth, that the total value of the exports of Ireland to Great Britain, for a period of seven years, from 1723 to 1729, amounted 2,307,7221. What will hon. Gentlemen think when they learn that the value of the export trade of Ireland with the port of Liverpool alone, as appears from documents in my possession, amounted in 1831 to 4,497,7081, in 1832 to 4,581,313l., and in 1833 to the enormous sum of 7,456,6021. The trade of 1833 is estimated at prices below the market value, and there are various articles of import wholly omitted. If these were all included, and the amount thus rectified, the total value of Irish imports into Liverpool will be probably found to I mean the exportation of Dublin porter. I am not a proprietor in the brewery, and, in praising the beverage, which I consider most excellent, I cannot be considered to be actuated by interested motives. But, it is a curious fact, that, a few years fidence as proofs, as well as causes, of the con- I ports lead to the same results, and to the nexion of interests between the two islands. conviction I have in my mind, that the But, Sir, the hon. member for the county trade of Ireland is advancing rapidly, and of Cork has made some observations else will continue to advance, if the Gentlemen where, which induce me to call his particu- opposite will only allow us to enjoy a little lar attention to a paper which I now hold tranquillity and peace. There is quite a in my hand. I allude to the observations modern branch of trade risen up in Ireland of the hon. Gentleman only so far as they were intended to contain statements of fact, That hon. Gentleman stated, with reference to a former argument of mine on this question, that it was easy to talk of Irish prosperity; but if I looked to my own port of Limerick (for the interest and pros-ago, Ireland was an importing country of perity of which I shall never cease to feel porter, while, at the present moment, a the deepest interest), 1 should there find very considerable export trade is growing commerce in decay, and the grass actually up in Dublin. In this point, and, perhaps, growing in the Custom-house yard. Now, in this point only, I fully expect the it is a most gratifying circumstance for me learned member for Dublin to concur with to have it in my power to relieve the hon. me. I only venture to entreat hon. MemMember's mind from all alarms on this bers opposite, who wish to give some actisubject. He will be glad to hear, that the vity to the trade of their country, to enadvance which has taken place in the ship-courage the fermentation of the vat, rather ping of that port is very considerable, as than the fermentation of politics. By so will appear from the account now before doing, they may greatly improve our trade me, which I will read to the House. and our internal condition; and, if they An Account of the Number and Regis-be ready, most heartily, to drink their will but take my advice, I, for one, shall tered Tonnage of Vessels cleared at the Port of Limerick. healths in their own porter. To return to the trade of Limerick: I have already shown the registered tonnage of vessels cleared at that port, and I will now read the following table, giving an account of the number and registered tonnage of vessels cleared at the creeks annexed to this port, in each of the four years ending the 1st of September, 1833:— 1822 1823 285 30,807 306 ......... 33,595 Tralee 505......... 66,232 1833 ...... 500 ... 65,761 89 8,178 102 8,603 112 9,402 Clare .... 24 2,635 33 3,512 57 6,358 Kilrush 33 25 2,863 2,294 28 2,631 43 4,574 40 4,125 These may be thought small matters, but they serve to indicate the progress of commercial intercourse in places where it was not hitherto found; they show the progress of trade in the more remote ports,—a consideration, in some respects, of even I should take the liberty of recommending, before it is again said that grass is growing on the quays of Limerick, that our orators should visit the Custom-house and the Chamber of Commerce, and consult the re-greater importance than the condition of cords of both establishments, and perhaps they might hesitate in making an assertion, to which the facts of the case would give an immediate refutation. I might offer to the hon. Gentleman a more precise account of the trade of Limerick, but that I am afraid of wearying the House by these dry details. Nevertheless, I trust the House will pardon me. The accounts of other trade in the larger cities. A similar increase of trade will be found to have taken place at Waterford, Belfast, Londonderry, and other ports; but I will not weary the House by going into details with respect to them. It may be asked, how I can account for the many complaints of distress, if it be true that commercial prosperity exists to the extent I have described? I do |