The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENDiG, JUNE 13, 1863.

tries at that period, and contended that throughout the
period since the Union the taxation of Ireland had been so
unduly severe as to bring about a state of things quite con-
trary to the spirit of the Act of Union. The theory always
had been that the Union was to be for the benefit of the
two countries ; but when it was found that one was pros-
pering, while the other was being exhausted by over-taxa-
tion, it was clear that the Act of Union was not being fairly
carried out. He had no wild or absurd notions about the
future of Ireland; but, instead of seeing the population
frittered and driven away in emigrant ships to foreign
shores, he sincerely hoped and trusted he should live to see
the people of Ireland happy and prosperous in their own
country, That day would not arrive, however, until some
different system of taxation were adopted; and, with the
view to obtain some recognition of that by the house, he
would conclude by moving for the committee of which he
had given notice.
Colonel FRENCH seconded the motion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question was one that deserved serious consideration, and
there was no necessity for any apology for bringing it be-
fore the notice of the house. He could not, however, agree
with the hon. and gallant member in all his views. For
instance, he could not agree in the general statement that
taxation was no diminution of the wealth of the country
so long as the money was spent within the limits of the
country. With regard to " absentezism," as it was called,
that was undoubtedly a matter for very deep regret; but
he could nut see how it could be made less frequent
except by setting before the landlords' eyes the better
example of the British landlords. The hon, and
gallant gentleman complained that Ireland paid more than
her fair share of taxation, and that, thoagh the figures
showed but seven millions, she actually paid eleven mil-
lions ; the difference being made up by her in, as he said,
the Irish tradesman taking duty-paid goods from England
to the extent of £4,600,000. If that were so, Ireland must
be richer than England, because England did not pay
£4,600,000 on Customs' duties annually, The Customs re-
venue levied in England was equal to 18s 7d per head, and
in Ireland 7s 10d ; excise in England was 13s 6d per head,
and in Ireland 9s; stamps in England 7s 6d per head, and
in Ireland is 101 d ; land and assessed taxes in England 2s
lid per head, and in Ireland nothing; the income tax in
England was 9s Id per head, and in Ireland 2s 61d; but
those figures were no proof that Ireland was lighter taxed
than England,•because the low rate of taxation might, ow-
ing to the poverty of the country, be in fact more oppres-
sive than the higher rate in England. Ireland, however,
paid no duties which England did not ; but England paid
duties which Ireland did not. The right hon. gentleman
then entered into minute details of Irish expenditure in com-
parison with England. The property-holding classes in
Ireland must not be considered poorer than those in Eng-
land, but in the adjustment of income tax in Ireland con-
siderable modifications had been made in favour of the
ter. In England the owners of landed property were as-
sessed up to the rack rent, and in some instances on more
than they received (exception only being allowed for the

land tax and sewerage), but in Ireland the assessment
was based on less than the owner received in rent, viz.,
on the poor law valuation. The operation of schedule
D in the two countries was similar; for where in England
a tenant would have to pay on £250, in Ireland he
would only have to pay income tax on £125. It
was difficult to imagine himself an Irishman, and to inform
them what was for their interest and benefit; but he was
convinced that equality of taxation lay at the root of full
political equality. Admitting distress to exist, the remedy
must depend, in a great measure, on Ireland's own energies
and powers ; and he saw no injustice, danger, or inconveni-
ence in assisting that country with loans of public money
for internal improvements. He hoped the hon. gentleman
would not preps his motion, because the Government could
not assent to it.

Mr. LONGFIELD admitted that up to 1852 Ireland was
improving. It had prospered, despite of its exhaustion
after the famine, and would have continued to prosper had
the same circumstances prevailed. What were those cir-
cumstances? He answered, lightness of taxation. At that
period the taxation of Ireland was about Ws, the head.
What was it now ? Double that amount. In 10 years its
taxation had been doubled, and in that would be found the
cause of its present depression. He could not deny, in the
abstract, that the taxation of Ireland should be the same as
that of England; but he held that the condition of the two
countries should also be considered in the matter, and that
in this case what was just in the abstract was neither just
nor wise when reduced to practice. He should support the

motion.
Mr. GREGORY also bore testimony to the importance o:
the motion, and then proceeded to call attention to the con.
dition of the western parts of Ireland.. He described it as
being of a most lamentable character, and reminded his
hearers that what was last year denied was now admitted to
the full by the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself. The
right hon. gentleman, in the course of his speech, had stated
that equality of taxation was the basis of political equality ;
but what they complained of in Ireland was that, while ex-
penditure was going on in every part of England, there was
nothing done for Ireland but in a grudging spirit. The
right hon. gentleman had also claimed credit for the Govern-
ment with regard to the Galway grant, and said they had
dealt with great .liberality in the matter—thus setting at
nought the decision of the committee of the House of Com-
mons. This was one of the prevalent causes of discontent in
Ireland, that whenever an act of justice was carried out in
that country the Government proclaimed it to be a conces-
sion. The people of the west of Ireland were desirous of ob-
taining a loan for constructing a work of great local impor-
, tance—a harbour of refuge ; and as he believed the right hon.
baronet was anxious to alleviate Irish distress, he trusted he
would turn his attention to this matter. (Hear, hear.)
Sir P. O'BRIEN said that something more than the tem-
porary relief of distress, which was general all over the
country, was required for ameliorating the condition of Ire-
land, and he believed that nothing would tend more to the
improvement. of Ireland than the settlement of the relations
between landlord and tenant.
Mr. COGAN said it was a melancholy position for an
Irish member to get up in that house to confirm the ex-
istence of distress in Ireland ; but, coming from the
more favoured district of Leinster, he could bear testi-
mony to the statement that great distress existed in all
parts of the country. They did not, however, claim on
this occasion any grant from the Consolidated Fund, but
merely asked for a committee to investigate the causes of
the distress, and also the mode in which the taxation of the
country was regulated. There were other questions, also,
which required to be considered. And these were chiefly
tenant-right and religious equality. (Hear, hear.) The hon.
gentleman then referred to the presence of the Chief Secre-
tary for Ireland at a meeting in the City the day before, the
object of which was to raise a sum of £50,000 for the pur-
poses of proselytising in West Connaught. So far as his po-
litical experience went, and his reading of history, it was
new to him to see a Minister of the Crown placed in so deli-
cate a position as the right hon. baronet taking part in a
meeting the object of which was to destroy the faith of the
people of West Connaught. (Hear, hear.)
Sir R. PEEL complained that the debate had wandered
far beyond its original limits, and took exception to the
course pursued by the hon. member for Galway in importing
the Galway grant into the question of Irish distress. He
had also reason to complain of the severe terms in which
the last speaker had thought proper to comment upon his
appearance at a meeting yesterday in the City. He could
assure the house that when he entered the room he had no
intention of speaking ; but he was merely led to attend the
meeting in consequence of a book which he had received,
entitled, " Good News from Ireland." (A. laugh.) After
Lord Hairowby had taken him to the meeting, it was cer-
tainly true that he got up and said that he had gone there
for the purpose of hearing the remarks of the speakers ; but
at the same time, as a man who was firmly attached to his
own religious creed, he took a true liberal Protestant view
of the observances of others, and had no desire to interfere
with; those observances. Upon those grounds, and those
grounds alone, he ventured to take part in the discussion,
and to move a vote of thanks to the chairman. But no ex-
pression with reference to the Roman Catholic religion had
escaped his lips ; and, in conclusion, all he had to say upon
that part of the case was that he felt himself, under
such circumstances, at perfect liberty to attend meetings
of the kind. The right hon. baronet then went into a variety
of statistics to prove that up to the year 1859 Ireland had
made more prodigious strides in the march of civilisation
and general improvement than any country in Europe ; and
if since that period her progress had been checked, it was
owing to the excessive drought of the season of 1859, and
the excessive wet of the season of 1860 and 1861. Un-
doubtedly there had been an enormous emigration from Ire-
land, and even at that moment it was going on; for great
inducements were held out by the American Government to
persuade vigorous young Irishmen to leave their country,
and take service in the American army. The Irish Govern-
ment, however, had been at some pains to prove to those
poor people that they were being deluded in the grossest
manner, and the recent declarations of General Meagher
showed that the gallantry of the Irish was not meeting with
the consideration which it deservedin America. He entirely
dissented from the declaration that the Irish who left their
country retained to their last moment a hatred of England.
however, if it was the fact that they did, he could only say
that the realm whence they went was no loser by the de-
parture of such people. In conclusion the right hon
baronet stated that. from all the information before him, he
was led to believe Ireland was likely to be blessed with an
abundant season ; and he expressed a hope that the hon.
and gallant member would rest satisfied with having origi-
nated a most interesting discussion.
Mr. WHITRSIDE accused the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer of attempting to perplex and puzzle the house by a
display of statistics. The chief point of the right hon. gentle-
man's speech seemed to him to be that the Irish people
should submit to the taxation put upon them with patience.
The hon. gentleman (Col, Dunne) had charged the British
Government with not carrying into effect the terms of the
Act of Union. That he thought a very fair charge to make,
androu lis eb though`
ycontinually , that
a e ther hon. and gallant gentleman had
treated the question with great moderation. He hoped
Government would take into their consideration how
beat relieve the people from the distress caused by ex-
cessive taxation. A. country would never be made prospe-
rous
on religious questions. The
g the consideration of the house.
Mr. MAGUIRE
said Irelan
anddcohmepinslaintanedeedthathterpe üblic
money was not expended there,
was
motion was deserving