§ The house having resolved itself into a committee on the Irish Spirit Drawback Bill,
§ Sir John Newportrose to complain of it as the renewal of a measure which, when originally passed, was nothing less than a violation of the act of union. It appeared to him that such articles of the union as were beneficial to G. Britain and injurious to Ireland, were acted upon, and that no disposition had been manifested by the parliament to promote the prosperity of Ireland. He was one of those who, in the parliament of Ireland, had supported the union, because he expected many important benefits from it to that country. If these benefits were not to follow from it, the union must be considered as a curse instead of a blessing.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid the sentiment just expressed by the hon. baronet, respecting the union with Ireland, was one calculated to produce as many mischievous consequences as any that ever had been uttered in that house. He called on the hon. baronet to state one instance in which the principle he alluded to had been acted upon by parliament. If he knew of any instances in which a disposition prejudicial to Ireland had been shewn, let him bring them before the house. As to the principle of the present bill, the hon. baronet did not withhold his approbation towards it at the time when he had a seat in his majesty's councils. If ever there should be a question to be decided, whether advantages were to be granted to Ireland or to G. Britain, he was confident that the house, so far from acting injuriously towards Ireland, would be inclined rather to turn the scale of advantage in her favour. He could recollect no instance in which the proceedings of that house could justify the insinuation of the hon. baronet.
§ Sir J. Newportstated, that he considered the act of union to have been violated in the law for disallowing the drawback on 82 the exportation of spirits distilled in Ireland; inasmuch as undue advantage was given to the English distiller in the English market. In that instance, he contended, the interest of Ireland was largely sacrificed; and that bill was introduced at the end of a session, when the attendance of members was very thin. He thought it fairer to state his opinion, as well as the opinion of many others, in that house, than to have it canvassed out of doors. He had supported the union originally, because he had hoped it would be productive of many public advantages to Ireland. He did not think so now, for he saw innumerable instances in which the interests of that country had been sacrificed.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that the hon. baronet, though called on to prove his assertion, produced only one solitary instance. Now, if the, house should, come to the examination of the act of union, and the hon. baronet should state the article which he considered to have been infringed by this bill, he himself would undertake to prove that such article was one which required explanation, and that what had been done was strictly conformable to the spirit of the act of union. Let not the hon. baronet make general charges, but state the specific grounds on which his principle stood. As to this particular bill, he surely could not object to the continuance of it for a certain time.
Mr. Fosterdeclared he had always found in that house a most favourable disposition towards Ireland. The bill in question was the only instance the hon. baronet could produce to prove his assertion. He defied him to produce any other; or even to shew in what manner this bill was unfavourable to Ireland.
§ Sir J. Newportsaid that spirits were prohibited from being sent from Ireland to England, unless they were warehoused.
Mr. Fosterreplied, that there never was an instance so opposite to the thing he wanted to establish, as that noticed by the hon. baronet. That bill had been introduced by a friend to the Irish distilleries, namely, by himself. It permitted them to warehouse their spirits if they chose, and to export them with as much drawback as could be allowed consistently with the articles of union. It was therefore rather favourable than otherwise to the Irish distiller.
Mr. Mac Naghtenconceived that nothing could be more mischievous than to suffer such language as that used by the hon.
83 baronet to go uncontradicted to Ireland. No circumstance could be so dangerous to the peace of Ireland, as that of declaring that her interests had been sacrificed by Great Britain. I have, continued the hon. gent., been a member of this house, and attended here since the union, and I declare to God, I know of no instance in which the disposition of the house has not been always favourable to Ireland.
§ Mr. Wilberforcedeclared, he never felt more pain than he now did, at what fell from his right lion, friend. He had ever observed in that house a disposition to do the amplest justice to Ireland. The present charge was not alone directed against his majesty's ministers, but against every member of that house, and he felt it was directed against his own parliamentary conduct. He hoped his right hon. friend would abstain from sowing the seeds of hostility between the two countries, and endeavour to do away the effect of his assertion.
§ Sir J. Newportpersisted in his assertion. He avowed every deference to the opinion of the hon. gent, but said he could not be deterred by any imputations upon his motives, from making his complaints in that house, where they might be answered or redressed, rather than out of doors, where they could only excite murmurs and discontents.
§ Mr. Parnellcontended that his right hon. friend was right in the supposition, that the act would tend to injure the Irish distillers. If the act of union gave an advantage in one point to one of the countries, he supposed it gave an equivalent to the other: that was matter of consideration at the time of its enactment, and certainly it would be highly unjust now to alter any of the provisions which were advantageous to Ireland. He thought the imputation cast on this act was perfectly justified by the circumstances: as to the surprise which the chancellor of the exchequer intimated, at the supposition that this bill went to injure Ireland, he did not see any particular grounds for it: the report of the committee now sitting on the subject of distillation he thought might tend, together with the operation of this act, materially to prevent the sale of Irish manufacture.
Mr. D. Browneconsidered the speech of the hon. baronet as calculated to do much mischief in Ireland; the interests of which country, he contended, had always been treated with candour and fairness by that house.
§ Mr. W. Taylorobjected to the present bill as unnecessary.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that the act in question was in force while the hon. baronet was in administration, and he made no complaint against it during all that time, nor introduced a single regulation for encouraging the spirit trade of Ireland, although it was entirely in his power. Therefore, as this was the only instance the hon. baronet could advance to show that Ireland had been unfairly dealt with, he hoped the house would attach to it the weight which it deserved.—The bill then went through the committee.