§ This bill being recommitted,
§ Mr. Humeexpressed his surprise and regret that sir H. Parnell had not succeeded in obtaining the appointment of the committee for which he had moved some time ago, as had that motion been agreed to, ample evidence would have been adduced to show that every impedi- 301 ment to a freedom of intercourse between the two countries ought to be effectually removed, and yet it was proposed, in the present bill, to continue for twenty years all those duties which formed the greatest impediment to that intercourse. He strongly protested against the renewal of such duties, contending, that at all events they ought to be reduced, with a view to diminish the evil which they served to produce.
§ Sir H. Parnellargued forcibly against the bill, the purport of which was, a general and indiscriminate renewal of all the duties upon all manufactures transmitted from one country to the other. When these duties were originally laid, they were for the avowed purpose of introducing and establishing manufactures in Ireland, and this, however erroneous it might be deemed, was a distinct and general object; but the right hon. gentleman, in proposing the further continuance of these duties said, he did so, in order to protect capital that was vested in their manufactures. This was certainly a very different motion from that which originally gave rise to those taxes. But the right hon. gentleman has not stated any distinct case to show where the capital was so invested as to require this protection, and this should be done before the continuance of such duties was agreed to. For where duties of this nature were not necessary for the protection of Ireland, they must operate as direct taxation upon that country. From the representation of the deputies of the Irish manufacturers who had communicated with the right hon. gentleman, it appeared that they could have no desire to continue the taxes, or what were called protecting duties, upon plated ware or pottery, for as these articles consumed in Ireland (there being no manufacture of them), were imported into Ireland from this country, the duty referred to only served to impose an additional tax upon the Irish consumers. Therefore it was desirable that pottery and plated ware should be wholly omitted from the schedule annexed to this bill. But there were other articles in this schedule to which he must request the attention of the committee, and upon the necessity of excepting which he could offer various arguments if time were allowed for due consideration. From the thin state of the committee he did not deem it proper to enter into the subject at any length, but he felt it his duty to state as briefly as 302 possible the points which appeared to him to deserve the peculiar attention of the chancellor of the exchequer. Of the tax upon the import of brass wrought into Ireland, the Irish manufacturers particularly complained, for the effect of that tax, instead of operating for their protection, which was its professed object, was nothing more or less than a tax of ten per cent upon British machinery going into Ireland. The objection of the Irish manufacturers to this tax was indeed so strong, and so obviously just, that the Custom-house officers were known to have received instructions to relax as much as was consistently possible upon the import of brass in machinery. The tax upon cottons was also much objected to in Ireland, as it was known to be very injurious in its operation, and the tax upon apparel was rather a subject of ridicule, as he never heard of any such import into Ireland, unless of old clothes from Liverpool and Bristol. If parliament were determined to legislate upon sound principles, it could not surely assent to the continuance of such taxes, especially under the pretence of protecting duties for Ireland. There were indeed only three or four articles in this schedule for whose interest it was at all necessary to continue the proposed duties. These articles were cottons, calicoes, silk, and glass. But the removal of the duties on these ought to take place, if the proper construction were given to the Act of Union. But upon what ground was the duty to be continued as to articles of cabinet-making? The expense of freight and carriage from this country afforded sufficient protection to the Irish cabinet-makers against any competition from this country; and it was known that those csbinet-makers were very desirous to have the ports of England open for their furniture, where they calculated, from their superior skill and workmanship, to obtain very profitable markets. The Irish coach-maker also objected very much to the tax upon the import of English cloth, of which they used so much, as well as to that upon other articles which they used as springs. The effect indeed of these taxes was, to add ten per cent to the price of Irish carriages. But the tax upon leather was peculiarly objectionable—for as it became impracticable, from the absurd regulations of the Irish excise, to manufacture good leather in Ireland, the Irish boot-makers and saddlers generally used English leather, and 303 thus this tax was an additional impost of ten per cent upon the Irish consumers. The taxes, therefore, which he had mentioned should be altogether repealed. They were, indeed, for the most part, originally imposed under that mistaken system of the Irish parliament, which sought to confine the demand for Irish manufactures to the poverty of Ireland, instead of endeavouring to open to them the rich market of England. The erroneousness of that policy was now as it had been long evident; for the Irish manufactures which had access to the English market were those which had most prospered, as appeared from the success of the butter and linen trade, of the distilleries, and of the agriculture of Ireland. After enforcing, by a variety of impressive observations, the several points to which he had adverted, the hon. baronet expressed his intention to move amendments as to those taxes, which, as he had argued, ought to be discontinued, and concluded with proposing, that instead of"1840,"as the period for the farther continuance of that part of the taxes to which he did not object, "1830" should be inserted.
After some discussion, the question, that the words proposed to be left out should stand part of the clause, was put and agreed to. The report was then brought up.