The Sun.
London, England, 1853-05-24 00:00:00

NEW ZEALAND COMPANY.

Mr. BAILLIE wished to ask the noble lord the mem-
ber for the city of London if it was the intention of the
Government to introduce a bill to deprive the New
Zealand Company of certain moneys which the British
Parliament had been induced to vote to them upon false
representations.
Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the negative.
_ _

Mr. MANGLES and Mr. AGLIONBY repelled the impu-
tation of fraud, and declared that if an opportunity were
afforded for discussion, they should be prepared to prove
that the New Zealand Company were justly entitled to
the money.

MANNING THE NAVY.
Sir G. TYLER asked the First Lord of the Admiralty

whether he would place upon the table of the house the

evidence upon which the report of naval officers on man-
ning the navy was founded ?
Sir S. GRAHAM said, it was true certain naval officers
were appointed by the Board of Admiralty to make certain
inquiries, but those officers had no power to compel the
attendance of witnesses. The evidence was given in pri-
vate, and the parties were not subject to cross-examina-
tion. ;Under these circumstances, it was not the intention
of her Majesty's Government (as we understood) to act
upon the report.

FISCAL RELATIONS OF GREAT BRITAIN AND
IRELAND.

Colonel DUNNE said, before the house went into com-
mittee on the income tax, he felt it his duty to call the at-
tention of the kelpie to the necessity of institutinc, a pre-
liminary inquiry as to the fiscal and political relations of
Great Britain and Ireland, with a view to ascertain whether
Ireland did not at the present moment bear her fair share
of imperial taxation. There were various reasons why the
house should grant the inquiry. First, there was very
little knowledge among members of the house and in this
country of the actual condition of Ireland, and he re-
gretted to say that it would be found that she had not
prospered to the same same extent as England since the
union. Secondly, no previous Chancellor of the Exche-
quer bad even attempted to extend to Ireland such an
enormous additional weight of taxaticn. Thirdly, the pro-
position was a direct breach of the articles of union be-
tween the two countries. He did not ask the house not
to extend her fair share of taxation to Ireland, but he
asked them to extend it only in the legal and proper way,
and not to proceed in a manner quite contrary to the
Act of Union because they had a majority of the house
with them. (Hear, hear.) By the act, or, as it was termed
in the statute itself, " the treaty between the two coun-
tries," it was settled that its provisions should be per-
petual, and they bound the house now as much as when
the act was passed. The first article, relating to the fiscal
arrangements of the two countries, declared that the pro-
portion of taxation to be borne by Ireland should be

§-17ths of that of England, and a subsequent clause set
forth several modes in which the revenue of- the country
might be assessed—such as the relative value of exports
and imports, and the consumption of spirits, malt, sugar,
and such exciseable articles, &c. It was well known the
treaty was extremely injurious to Ireland, and the burdens
since laid on Ireland were much heavier than she could or
ought to bear. The requirements of England and the wars
in which she engaged, raised the taxation of Ireland year
after year to an enormous amount. Nor had the expectations
been realised of an increased colonial trade for the latter
country, which many had indulged in at the time of the
union. The whole debt of Ireland at the time of the union
was 25,000,0001. In 1815 it had increased to (as we under-
stood) 125,000,0001. The revision of taxation and revenue
provided for by the Act of Union at the end of every seven
years never took place ; and in 1815 a motion was made
for the consolidation of the two Exchequers of Ireland and
England. Many persons imagined that act abrogated the
Treaty of Union, but he denied that it did. It was a mere
fiscal arrangement. He asserted, then, that according to
the Act of Union at any time Ireland chose to call for the
consideration of the taxation of the two countries she had a
right to have her request granted, and that was never more
necessary to be done than at the present moment, when she
was threatened with this new tax. (Hear, hear.) Lord
Fitzgerald showed in 1815 that Ireland had lost enormously
up to that time by the
,nnion. If they refused the com-
mittee of inquiry for which he sought, they would abrogate
the articles of the union, and give cause for fresh discon-
tent in Ireland. For years hon. gentlemen opposite had
been speaking against the agitation for the repeal of the
union. That agitation no longer existed. Did they wish
to see an agitation to enforce the observance of the union ?
Let them Lave equal taxation when Ireland was in the
same state as England. She was worse off now than in
past years—much worse off than at the time of the union.
The loss caused by the terrible calamity which had occurred
there in the last few years had been estimated at from
30,000,0001. to 33,000,0001. By a measure which was said
to have produced great benefits to this country Ireland had
lost upwards of 6,000,0001. more in the difference in the
price of corn. Whatever advantage might have accrued
to those who paid the poor rate, he maintained the loss was
still to that extent so far as Ireland was concerned. In
many respects Ireland was infinitely worse off than she
was before the union. She had lost her manufactures,
and she had suffered much from the absenteeism created
by the attendance of Irish members of both houses in this
country. Her surplus revenue was not spent within her
own shores, but, on the contrary, on an average of 2,000,0001.
was remitted to the exchequer of this country. The re-
venues of the Woods and Forests amounted to 61,0001. a-
year, which, with a very small exception, were sent over
to this country. It appeared by the returns which had
been laid before the house, and by other means of informa-
tion, that within the last 35 years no less than 282,000,0001
had been transmitted from Ireland to England, putting
together the surplus revenue, the amount spent by absen-
tees, and the proceeds of the Woods and Forests. Here
there were full reasons for granting this committee of in-
quiry. The only answer they could condescend to give
was, that they had a majority of the house against it, but
he had a better opinion of the English people than to
think they would rely on such a reply to a fair demand.
He asked nothing more than justice—nothing but a
fair inquiry before they called on Ireland to bear
increased taxation. It was said that Ireland would I
receive an equivalent for the income tax in the ro-
mission of the consolidated annuities. This was to him
an absurd argument, for what (lid the consolidated annui-
ties consist of ? They consisted of advances to Ireland
which were administered by the English Government, and 1
so ill administered that Ireland received no benefit from 3
them. The Irish proprietors appealed to the highest tri-
bunal in the country, viz., to a committee of the House of
Lords, who reported that those annuities were open to se-
rious objection. It was absurd, therefore, to say that the
remission of that burden was a proper equivalent for the
income tax. But, besides, he thought that considering
the vast mass of landed property which had changed
hands since those annuities were imposed, and which had
been purchased at a reduced price in consequence of their
y ino nn,o
wt hreerme
iwt
toiunlgd
hi ne
nhai st opinion,all.
For ba
all
thesegreat
reasonsimp_ ro
hePimri pisgged to move " That it is expedient, before addi-
tional taxation be extended to Ireland, that a select com-
mittee be appointed to inquire into and considerc the fiscal
°hietetalhxpeaeir taxation
etoaflxaGreattaxation:' ,king-
dom and political relations and relativ‘vo
Bri-
tain and Ireland, and to
.repoarrte
little' attention which
does not bear her fair share
of
tlife'
hon. and
theaPbeeygerthaheee ofottcohctelpants of Minister
Mr. FRENCH ample.'
on .
had
her Pi 1 opr ta iadr 1 tc'i
n gttho au
be
his
quiet evenhono
honourable
in
aabpl
renracnhenh,
lwefhodollorohwadr.inignzeipttratehedeiesleilvveriny
.the(rilcnolenaarri'snehociefuar.) He
(Mr.
went§ ;ad hthagolf, that they
and gallant friend, had to.stat_et .on the part of his consti,
did not shrink from their fair,