Mr. Peelstated, that it was not his intention to persist in the motion of which he had given notice on the preceding evening, for leave to bring in a Bill to prevent the exportation, from Ireland to this country, of starch and blue. In abandoning the measure, however, he was not influenced by any of the arguments made use of by the right hon. baronet (sir J. Newport) in the short discussion which took place last night. For he did not see the impropriety of preventing the export of those articles from Ireland, when their manufacture was suspended here. Indeed, if 458 the argument of the right hon. baronet, that the strict letter of the Act of Union should be adhered to, were pushed to its full extent, it might be said, that though, by its provisions, they were allowed to legislate for corn, flour, meal, and biscuit, yet they must not legislate for bread. The suspension of the manufacture in England, had occasioned unbounded speculation in the sister country; and he had received a letter from a gentleman in Kilkenny, stating, that a person there had thrown up the business of a tanner, for the purpose of turning his premises into a starch manufactory. Such speculations as these must necessarily consume a vast proportion of grain, proper for the sustenance of man. For the sake of encouraging the manufactures of Ireland, when the restriction took place in England, it was not extended to the former country, therefore, he argued, that, if there was an infraction of the Act of Union, it was in favour of Ireland. He then stated, that his right hon. friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, having some reason to doubt whether the Starch Restriction Act, introduced by him last session, was so effectual as he hoped, in preventing the manufacture of that article, intended to repeal it: and it was considered better that the subjects of both countries, in compliance with one of the articles of the Act of Union, should be put on an equality, by permitting each of them to proceed in the manufacture, than by prohibiting them both.
Mr. Ponsonbydid not mean to discuss the merits of the measure which the hon. gentleman had abandoned; but he wished to observe, in consequence of what fell from the hon. gentleman, that it ought not to weigh with the House, whether an infraction of the Act of Union benefited the manufacturer of this country or of Ireland; their only duty was, to maintain the Act as it stood. The articles were equally binding on both countries, and all the House had to do was to see that they were strictly complied with.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerconcurred in the justice of the right hon. gentle. man's observation; but was of opinion that the measure of his hon. friend, if carried into effect, would not have been contrary to the spirit of the Articles of Union. He then moved that the British Starch Prohibition Bill be entered as read; and gave notice, that he would to-morrow move that it be taken into consideration by a Committee of the whole House.