CHAPTER VII.

THE COMMERCIAL ARRANGEMENTS BETWEEN ENGLAND AND IRELAND EFFECTED BY

THE ACT OF LEGISLATIVE UNION.

The commercial arrangements effected between England and Ireland at

the time of the Union are embodied in the sixth article of the Act of

Union. This article provides that in respect of trade and navigation

the subjects of Great Britain and Ireland are to be on the same footing

from the 1st of January, 1801; that there are to be no duties or

bounties on the exportation of produce of one country to the other;

that all articles (except certain specified articles scheduled, which

were to be subject to certain countervailing duties) the produce

of either country are to be imported free from duty; that articles

enumerated in Schedule II. are to be subject for twenty years to the

duties therein mentioned; that the woollen manufacturers are to pay on

importation into each country from the other the duties now payable

on importation into Ireland; that the duties on salt, hops, and wools

are not to exceed the duties that were then paid on importation into

Ireland; that the duties on calicoes and muslins are to be liable

to the duties then payable on these commodities on importation from

Great Britain to Ireland till the 5th of January, 1808; that after

that date these duties are to be reduced to 10 per cent. till January

5th, 1821, and then to cease altogether; that duties on cotton-yarn

and cotton-twist are to be liable to the duties then payable on these

commodities[151] till January 5th, 1808; that these duties are to be

reduced annually from that date, and on the 5th of January, 1816,

to cease altogether; that the produce of either country, subject to

internal duty, is, on importation into each country, to be subject

to countervailing duty; that the produce of either country exported

through the other is to be subject to the same charges as if it had

been exported directly from the country producing it; that duties

charged on the import of foreign or colonial produce into either

country are, on their export to the other, to be drawn back so long as

the expenditure of the United Kingdom shall be defrayed by proportional

contributions, but that this provision is not to extend to duties on

corn.

The Speaker of the Irish Commons--the Right Hon. John Foster

(afterwards Lord Oriel)--was the chief among several able opponents

of these regulations. In 1799 and in 1800 he made powerful speeches

in opposition, and went largely into the subject of the commercial

relations of the two countries, and exposed their past and future

inequalities and injustices towards Irish interests. His objections to

the 6th Article of Union were, briefly, as follows:--

"That they lowered all protecting duties that were above 10 per cent.

to that amount, and thus exposed the infant manufactures of Ireland

(which the Irish Parliament had in latter years begun to protect) to

the overwhelming competition of the great capital and long-established

skill and ability of England. That no less than seventy articles of

our manufacture would thus be injured, and our cotton manufactures in

particular, in which we had begun to make most promising advances,

would be nearly ruined. That no preference over foreign goods in the

British market was given. That the 'new and excessive' duties on salt

were made perpetual, those on hops and coals unalterable. That our

brewery was left unprotected, etc., etc."

The opponents of the Union drew up a solemn and elaborate protest

in order to perpetuate on the records of Parliament, and hand down

to posterity, their views on that subject. Lord Corry moved the

Protest and Address to the King, which thus speaks of the commercial

arrangements proposed and subsequently carried out under the provisions

of the Act of Union: "Were all the advantages which without any

foundation they have declared that this measure offers, to be its

instant and immediate consequence, we do not hesitate to say expressly

that we could not harbour the thought of accepting them in exchange

for our Parliament, or that we could or would barter our freedom for

commerce, or our constitution for revenue; but the offers are mere

impositions, and we state with the firmest confidence that in commerce

or trade their measure confirms no one advantage, nor can it confirm

any, for by your Majesty's gracious and paternal attention to this

your ancient realm of Ireland, every restriction under which its

commerce laboured has been removed during your Majesty's auspicious

reign, and we are now as free to trade to all the world as Britain

is. In manufactures, any attempt it makes to offer any benefit which

we do not now enjoy is vain and delusive, and whenever it is to have

effect, that effect will be to our injury. Most of the duties on

imports which operate as protections to our manufactures, are under

its provisions either to be removed or reduced immediately, and those

which will be reduced are to cease entirely at a limited time, though

many of our manufacturers owe their existence to the protection of

those duties, and though it is not in the power of human wisdom to

foresee any precise time when they may be able to thrive without them.

Your Majesty's faithful Commons feel more than an ordinary interest in

laying this fact before you, because they have under your Majesty's

approbation raised up and nursed many of those manufactures, and

by so doing have encouraged much capital to be vested in them, the

proprietors of which are now to be left unprotected, and to be deprived

of the Parliament on whose faith they embarked themselves, their

families, and properties in the undertaking."[152]

Mr. Pitt could not have been ignorant of the effect which English

competition would produce on the infant and practically unprotected

manufactures of Ireland. Thus fifteen years previously, when

introducing his Commercial Propositions of 1785 in the English House

of Commons, he calmed the fears and raised the hopes of the English

manufacturers:--

"It was said that our manufactures were all loaded with heavy taxes.

It was certainly true, but with that disadvantage they had always

been able to triumph over the Irish in their own markets, paying an

additional ten per cent. on the importation to Ireland, and all the

charges. But the low price of labour was mentioned. Would that enable

them to undersell us? Manufacturers thought otherwise--there were great

obstacles to the planting of any manufacture. It would require time for

arts and capital, and the capital would not increase without the demand

also, and in an established manufacture improvement was so rapid as to

bid defiance to rivalship."[153]

The Irish Parliament, in wishing to protect their infant manufactures,

were strictly within the lines of modern economic science. Thus Mr.

John Stuart Mill speaks of the wisdom of protecting duties in countries

whose conditions are similar to those of Ireland as described by Mr.

Pitt:--

"The only case in which, on mere principles of political economy,

protecting duties can be defensible, is when they are imposed

temporarily (especially in a young and rising nation) in the hopes

of naturalising a foreign industry in itself perfectly suitable to

the circumstances of the country. The superiority of one country

over another in a branch of production often arises only from having

begun it sooner. There may be no inherent advantage on one part or

disadvantage on the other, but only a present superiority of acquired

skill and experience. A country which has this skill and experience yet

to acquire may in other respects be better adapted to the production

than those that were earlier in the field; and, besides, it is a just

remark of Mr. Rae that nothing has a greater tendency to promote

improvements in any branch of production than its trial under a new

set of conditions. But it cannot be expected that individuals should

at their own risk, or rather to their certain loss, introduce a new

manufacture and bear the burthen of carrying it on until the producers

have been educated up to the level of those with whom the processes are

traditional. A protecting duty continued for a reasonable time will

sometimes be the least inconvenient mode in which the nation can tax

itself for the support of such an experiment. But the protection should

be confined to cases in which there is good ground of assurance that

the industry which it fosters will, after a time, be able to dispense

with it, nor should the domestic producers ever be allowed to expect

that it will be continued to them beyond the time necessary for a fair

trial of what they are capable of accomplishing."[154]

The Irish manufactures, which had revived by the protecting care of the

Irish Parliament, died when that safeguard was removed.

Mr. Bushe, who was eighteen years Solicitor-General under a Tory

Administration, and twenty years Chief Justice of Ireland, thus briefly

described in the Irish Parliament the course of policy pursued by

England towards the "sister country":--

"For centuries have the British nation and Parliament kept you down,

shackled your commerce, paralysed your exertions, despised your

character, and ridiculed your pretensions to any privileges, commercial

or constitutional."[155]

"I cannot think," says Mr. Chaplin, from his place in the English

House of Commons, "that any reforms or remedial legislation that may

be adopted (for Ireland) can be considered satisfactory or complete

which do not include encouragement and, if necessary, assistance for

the re-establishment of those industries which in former days were

destroyed by the bitterly unjust and selfish policy of England."[156]

PRINTED BY CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, LA BELLE SALVAGE, LONDON, E.C.

FOOTNOTES:

[151] On importation from Great Britain to Ireland.

[152] Mr. Whiteside read this Protest in his speech in defence of Mr.

C. G. Duffy, in the State Trials, 1844. ("R. _v._ O'Connell," pp. 528,

529.)

[153] "Parliamentary Register," xvii., pp. 255, 256.

[154] "Principles of Political Economy," p. 556.

[155] "Life of Plunket," ii., p. 354.

[156] Hansard, 261, Third Series, p. 836.

_By the same Author._

The Irish Parliament:

What it Was and What it Did. By J. G. SWIFT MACNEILL, M.A.

Price 1s.

"_It contains, I think, within a wonderfully narrow compass, the heart

and pith of a large as well as sad chapter of history._"--RT. HON.

W. E. GLADSTONE, M.P.

"Mr. Swift MacNeill explains the constitution of the Irish

Parliament, both before 1782 and--what has been called Grattan's

Parliament--after 1782, and shows the differences and relations

between it and the English Parliament; and he offers such an

account of the working of the system--impartial in spirit and

supported by abundant quotations from contemporary public men, both

Irish and English--as is fitted to warn us against its revival, at

least without serious modifications."--_Contemporary Review._

"The history of the national Parliamentary government of Ireland is

but vaguely known, and it is important just now that information

respecting it should be accessible in a popular form. This work

puts the subject into a nutshell."--_Literary World._

"We have never seen the workings of the old Irish Parliament placed

before the reader in so accessible a form as in this volume, for

which both Mr. MacNeill and Messrs. Cassell & Co., who are the

publishers, deserve the best thanks of every reader."--_Liverpool

Mercury._

"The book has a value which it would not be easy to overrate, and

should find its way into the hands of every politician."--_Plymouth

Western Daily Mercury._

"A little book of exceeding value."--_Londonderry Journal._

"This concise but clear and comprehensive treatise from the pen

of Mr. J. G. Swift MacNeill, M.A., is issued at a peculiarly

appropriate time, and will from that circumstance, no less than

from its own merits, be gratefully welcomed by those who are

anxious for light and leading on a question which has suddenly

become one of the most pressing, as it has long been one of the

most important, with which the statesmen of the present day are

called upon to grapple."--_Nottingham Guardian._

CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, _Ludgate Hill, London_.

_Eleventh and Cheap Edition, cloth_, 3s. 6d.

The Life of the

Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone.

_By G. BARNETT SMITH._

"A trustworthy and interesting picture of a noble life and

character."--_Daily News._

"A sober, solid, but interesting contribution to the political

history of the Victorian epoch."--_Daily Telegraph._

"The book should be read by every one who takes the least interest

in the political history of the country."--_Daily Chronicle._

"An elaborate and ably-written biography of Mr. Gladstone as a

statesman and a writer."--_Echo._

"Mr. Barnett Smith's Life of Mr. Gladstone is _a work of

national importance_, and it should be read and studied by all

classes."--_Nottingham Daily Express._

"Many a thoughtful working man will hasten to add this book to his

little store of fondly-cherished volumes."--_North British Daily

Mail._

"A very complete account of Mr. Gladstone's relations to the

history of the past forty years."--_Observer._

"A noble biography of a noble man."--_Aberdeen Free Press._

"The minute accuracy of the painstaking record is indeed wonderful,

considering the vastness of the field over which the biographer has

been obliged to travel. _The volumes are, in fact, a history of

England during the past half century_, as well as a biography of

the individual whose name they bear."--_Freeman._

"The most superficial glance at the book is enough to secure the

impression of great power in many departments on the part of the

subject of it, and of great penetration, care, deliberation, and

tact on the part of the author."--_Nonconformist._

"_The most comprehensive and satisfactory Life of Mr. Gladstone_

which has yet been compiled and given to the public."--_Edinburgh

Daily Review._

CASSELL & COMPANY, LIMITED, _Ludgate Hill, London_.

English Interference with Irish Industries · 第 7 / 7 章