hon. gentleman, when he introduced those duties, stated, that if they operated as matter of revenue, and did not afford protection, he would increase them. That they had not had the desired effect, was clear from this circumstance, that the importation of Dutch butter last year doubled that of any former year; while the importation of butter from Ireland had decreased in the same proportion. The consequence was, that the price of Irish butter had fallen from SOS. or 90s. to 45s. | or 50s. This decrease in the butter trade would occasion a considerable quantity of pasture land to be put into tillage; thus, a greater proportion of corn would be grown, and forced into a market already glutted with that article. The consequence must be, a diminution of the means of the people of Ireland to purchase and consume the manufactures of England. It was said, that the importation of butter from Holland was of importance to the shipping interest of England. This, however, he denied; since not more than seven or eight vessels were employed in the trade. The motion he intended to propose in the committee was, "that an additional duty of 10s. per cwt. be imposed on foreign butter imported into this country." He had heard it argued that it was unfair to ask the citizens of London to eat salt butter for the benefit of Ireland. In answer to that, he would only say, that the measure he proposed would not exclude Dutch butter of the first quality. He concluded by moving, "that the Speaker do leave the chair."

Mr. Hudson Gurney said, he was glad to find, from the speech of the hon. gentleman, that the government had at last begun to resist the exorbitant demands of the Irish. It seemed to have passed as a matter universally understood, that the people of England were to pay every thing, and the people of Ireland nothing. [Hear, hear!] It was notorious, that the rents extorted from the peasantry of Ireland, were higher than any that were paid in England; and, to keep up these rents, we were now called upon to tax the butter of the citizens of London. He remembered voting in a minority of five against a duty on the importation of rape seed, in the discussion on which a right hon. baronet below him (sir J. Newport) had gravely argued, that it was right so to tax the clothiers of Yorkshire, as it might have some tendency towards inducing somebody to drain some bog with a long

name in Ireland. The other day the Chancellor of the Exchequer had exempted Ireland from the window tax [Hear, hear!]. Why, he asked, should an English tenant of what was hardly more than a cottage, pay a tax from which the owner of a palace in Ireland was to be freed? He would most gladly concur in any remission of the burthens which pressed on the means, or abridged the few enjoyments, of the Irish peasantry; but never, whilst he had the honour of a seat in that House, would he agree to impose a tax upon the people of England, for the purpose of keeping up the exorbitant rents of the Irish landlords [Hear, hear!].

Mr. Robinson said, that though he meant to oppose the proposition, it was on grounds very different from those just stated by the hon. gentleman. He did not object to this proposition, because he felt any unwillingness to give protection to the manufactures and agriculture of Ireland, but because he thought the circumstances of the case did not authorize protection farther than it had been carried. When, in 1816, he proposed the present duty, he certainly did say, that it was not intended for revenue, but for protection; and if it had not had the effect of a protecting duty, the same grounds on which he then brought it forward would naturally induce him to propose an addition, to accomplish the object he had in view. But that object had been attained as far as it was possible; because, however lower the price of butter might now be than it was some years ago, that article was not the only one that had diminished in value. Every species of agricultural produce had experienced a similar fall of price. And it should be observed, that the foreign butter, to which the duty applied, had also decreased in value; so much so, indeed, that, looking to the existing duty, with a reference to the reduced price of the article, it would be found equal to an impost of 50 per cent.; and if the hon. baronet's proposition were carried, the duty would be then equal to about 75 per cent. If the butter trade of Ireland could not support itself with such a protection as this, he knew not how it could be supported. With respect to the importation of butter from Ireland, so far from being less than heretofore, it was, for the last two years, greater than it had been at any period. The importation of

foreign butter had increased also; but if they found, notwithstanding this, that the Irish butter had a good market, it only proved that the consumption of the article was greatly extended. Butter was one of the few things in which Holland could pay this country for those articles which we disposed of to her; and if, on every occasion like this, we were to put restric tions on trade, we might as well declare at once that on principle we would have no commercial intercourse with foreign states. If this country sent goods abroad, it was proper that other countries should be allowed to transmit their products in

return.

Sir J. Newport complained of the observations which had fallen from the hon. member for Newton. What had that hon. member stated? That the House was constantly in the habit of granting relaxations to Ireland, more than to any other part of the empire. He denied this assertion, and would contend, that the relaxation of taxes to Great Britain was much more extensive in proportion than that which had been made to Ireland. This was proved by the report of the committee of 1815, which stated, that, since the Union, the taxation of Ireland had increased in a larger proportion, including the war taxes, than that of Great Britain. The hon. member had said, that he would concede any thing to make the peasantry of Ireland comfortable, but he would withhold every boon from the gentry. Now, he believed that the most effectual way of rendering the peasantry happy and comfortable was, to enable the gentry to spend their time amongst them [Hear, hear!]. He did not wish to use harsh terms, but he must say, that those observations had been most inconsiderately applied by the hon. gentleman. With respect to the question itself, they were told, that the consumption of butter had increased. But if four-fifths of that consumption was in favour of Holland instead of Ireland, then the present duty was not a protection, in the sense originally understood. Ireland, it should be observed, had but one manufacture to send to England-her other exports were native to her soil. With that one article she had to pay to England for her manufactures, and to pay rents to that large body of absentees who spent their wealth in this country. In consequence of the system that had been pursued, the exports of woollen from this

country to Ireland, which, in 1819, amounted to 2,000,000, was now diminished below one. This arose from improvident taxation and inefficient protection. England had absorbed the capital of the country in a very considerable degree, and left the people of Ireland without the means of consumption.

Mr. Ricardo said, the Irish gentlemen complained of want of protection, but what their rule of protection was he could not imagine. In this instance they had a protecting duty of 35s. per cwt.; but he supposed they would not be satisfied unless they had a complete monopoly of the trade. In his opinion, the proposition ought to have been the other way. Parliament ought to be called on to get rid of this protecting duty by decrees, by which means the trade would be rendered really beneficial to the country. The House was assailed on all sides for protecting duties. One day they were assailed by the butter trade, then by the dealers in tallow, then the West India planters complained, and the shipping interest also demanded legislative interference. But what did Adam Smith, that great and celebrated writer, say on this subject? His words were “ Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production, and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to only so far as is necessary for promoting that of the consumer. This maxim is so self-evident, that it would be absurd to prove it. But, in the mercantile system, the interest of the consumer is sacrificed to that of the producer, as if production and not consumption were the end of all industry and commerce." No man could doubt the truth of this proposition. With respect to the application now made to the House, it was founded on a petition from the city of Dublin, whigh falsely stated, that the trade in butter had fallen off considerably. So far from that being the fact, it was, with the exception of one or two years, one of the greatest years of exportation that had ever occurred.

Mr. S. Rice said, that, borne down as Ireland was with excessive taxation, he did not think the principles of political economy, however true in the abstract, could be applied to her. It was true, that a great deal of butter had been imported from Ireland into this country, but it was lying in the merchants' warehouses unsaleable. If protection was not afforded to the butter trade, Ireland would become

one great arable farm, and, by producing a greater quantity of corn, would tend to distress still more the agricultural interest of this country.

Mr. T. Wilson concurred in thinking that the principle advanced by Mr. Ricardo, was not applicable to the present state of this country, and remarked that the butter shipped from Holland was of a better quality than that which came from Ireland.

Mr. Western reminded the House, that when Adam Smith wrote, England could produce corn and butter as cheaply as any foreign country. The excess of taxation prevented us now from maintaining the same competition, and hence it was that protection became necessary. It was extraordinary that gentlemen should prefer a trade with foreign countries to a trade with Ireland, when it was clear that the latter course would increase the consumption of Our manufactures, and thereby promote the prosperity of the country.

Mr. Huskisson assured the House that he did not prefer the interest of foreign countries to his own, and that if he thought this additional protection would be of real and permanent benefit to Ireland, and of less injury to the country generally, he would give it his support. The hon. gentleman had compared the means of Ireland with those of Holland in the production of this article. Now, the fact was, that Holland was the most taxed country in Europe, not even excepting England. He objected to the present measure, because it would operate no relief to Ireland, and the effect of it would be, not to increase consumption, but, by raising the price of a bad article, to drive it altogether out of consumption. In the present state of Europe, it was peculiarly incumbent upon this country not to set foreigners the example of imposing additional restrictions on trade, but to convince them that it was our fixed determination to pursue that liberal system of commercial intercourse, which had been so auspiciously commenced.

Mr. Hutchinson said, that the principle of protection was that under which the commerce of this country had flourished. He did not, however, dissent from the general principles of the hon. member for Portarlington, but he could not help regretting that they should be applied at a moment when they could not but be detrimental to a suffering and impoverished country.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, June 21.

ROMAN CATHOLIC PEER'S BILL.] The Duke of Portland rose to move the second reading of this bill. In doing this he could not refrain from reminding their lordships of what had been the state of Roman Catholic peers before the acts which the present bill proposed to repeal had passed. They would recollect that an act which passed in the reign of queen Elizabeth had excluded Roman Catholic members from the House of Commons. At this early period of the Reformation, when plots were supposed to exist against the new religion, it was not thought necessary to exclude Catholic peers from the House of Peers. In the reign of Charles 2nd, when the country was alarmed with charges of conspiracy, an act passed, by which Catholic peers were excluded from their seats. This act of the 30th of Charles 2nd was afterwards repealed, and that of the 1st of William and Mary substituted in its stead; but if a jealousy of Roman Catholics was necessary in those times, it could not be contended that the same jealousy ought to exist now. At any rate, the jealousy ought not to be greater now than it was in the reign of Elizabeth, when the power of the church of Rome was in full vigour. The noble duke quoted the act of queen Elizabeth, which stated, that her majesty had confidence in the lords of parliament, and therefore that the act was not made to extend to them. Thus the law continued, allowing Catholic peers to sit in parliament till the 30th of Charles 2nd. During the whole period it never was objected to them that they acted in any manner hostile to the established religion. He could not, therefore, conjecture what reasons were to be urged against the present bill, and consequently could not be expected to answer them. In the time of Charles 2nd the jealousy and fears which prevailed afforded some pretence for the

exclusion, and at the Revolution the state of the country also afforded a ground for that measure. But where could any pretext be found now? Parliament had, within the last twenty-five years, repeatedly suspended the Habeas Corpus act. But was it ever contended to be necessary, to make that suspension perpetual, because the dangers which made those suspensions expedient might again arise? Yet who would not allow that such dangers were a thousand times more probable than a Popish plot, or the intrusion of a Roman Catholic prince upon the throne? But those who opposed this measure ought at least to show that some such dangers were probable; for he would venture to assert, without fear of contradiction, that if the alarm of the Popish plot, or the dangers which followed the Revolution, or some equivalent cause of alarm had never existed, the Roman Catholic peers would have continued to enjoy their seats in that House to this hour, and if any person professing to entertain the fears which were opposed to the passing of this bill, had made them the ground of a motion to exclude de novo Roman Catholic peers from this House, such a motion would have been unanimously rejected as one of the grossest injustice. He could see no difference between committing an act of injustice and continuing to connive at it. He regretted that his ignorance of the state of the law had made him so long a party to its continuance-and he had great satisfaction in endeavouring to atone for it by now moving the second reading of this bill.

Lord Colchester said :-My lords; differing entirely from the noble duke upon the important measure which he has brought under our consideration, I am desirous of stating briefly to your lordships, the grounds upon which I must endeavour to arrest its further progress. If, indeed, this day were set apart for declaring the sense of parliament upon the high and distinguished character of the Roman Catholic peers of the United Kingdom, the illustrious exploits of their ancestors, or their own personal merits, I beg leave to assure your lordships, with the most perfect sincerity, that there is no man living would concur more cheerfully or zealously than myself, in the expression or recognition of every sentiment which could redound to their praise and honour.

. But, my lords, it is impossible for me, upon any such considerations, to concur VOL. VII.

in this bill, which by express enactment, or direct consequence, delivers to his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects at large, the keys of both Houses of Parliament; a measure studiously framed for obtaining, immediately and separately, the concession of a general principle in aid of the Roman Catholic claims, which concession may be afterwards brought to account, and turned to advantage, upon our future discussions; and this measure is represented to us now, as the mere repeal of certain laws of exclusion, as if they had resulted only from the crisis of an unfounded popular panic.

This exclusion, however, if examined historically, will be found to have origi. nated in the general spirit of our legislation, established long antecedent to that period, commencing from the laws passed in the reign of Elizabeth,* against all Roman Catholic recusants indiscriminately, and continuing down to the period of the Test act, and the growing practice of the House of Commons, to remove its own Roman Catholic members; † no Roman Catholic then sitting in either house of parliament but by sufferance. The exclusion then established by the act of Charles 2nd, was afterwards substantially recognized and adopted at the Revolution, by the prince of Orange's declaration from the Hague,§ requiring that Roman Catholics should be shut out from both Houses of Parliament, but by the summons of a Protestant parliament, and by the Bill of Rights || enacted for the safety of "this Protestant kingdom" with a Protestant king. The like exclusion was formally and specifically enacted as to Scotland, and incorporated in the very act of Union, ¶ which requires, that the representative peers and commoners, and their electors also, should all be Protestant. And this exclusion, after the interval of three reigns from that of Charles 2nd, was again deliberately confirmed, and applied to the whole of Great Britain, in the first year of the accession of the house of Hanover; ** and

again in the reign of George 2nd;

the

last of these statutes confirming all the former securities by express words, and declaring them to be in as full force as if every clause and provision of the former acts were therein inserted and re-enacted.

Such, my lords, are the origin and spirit of our policy; and such are the laws now existing upon this important point. And we have been often counselled by the wisest of our ancestors, that laws founded upon a general principle, such as this distrust of political power in Roman Catholic hands, although originating in a particular danger which has itself ceased to exist, may nevertheless be rightly retained, as safeguards against all other sorts of danger which fall within the scope of the same principle. But we are now told by the supporters of the present measure, that it is time to reverse our policy, and to repeal all our former laws upon this subject, and that the present bill is the first and fittest step to be taken towards so desirable an end.

Upon entering on this new course of policy, and considering how far we can safely proceed in this plan of repeal, and as to what we may do, or may not do, in the way of legislation, if we examine the ground before us step by step, we shall be enabled to judge more satisfactorily of the effect and bearings of the particular measure which we are desired this day to adopt. And in such a course, I have always thought that little should be done upon mere importunity, nothing upon menaces (such as we have sometimes heard), but every thing that we can do for the ease of our Roman Catholic fellow-subjects, so far as it can be done with safety to our own establishment in church and state; and so much, whatever be its amount, should, I think, be done freely and promptly upon its own fair grounds of justice and policy; and having done that, we should there, once for all, make our firm and final stand.

Of civil rights, I have always been of opinion, that the whole career of honours and emoluments should be laid open to the Roman Catholic dissenters, as much as to the Protestant dissenters from our national church, short only of the ruling powers of our Protestant church and government. I rejoice therefore, in the wise exercise of royal favour, in recently calling forth

* 9 Geo. II. c. 26, § 6.

Roman Catholics of the highest rank to aid in the highest ceremonial of the royal state and dignity; and also in that signal mark of favour bestowed by the sovereign, in his late visit to Ireland, upon the most eminent of his Irish Roman Catholic subjects. The bar, the army, and the navy, are already open to them; and I see no reason whatever, against their admissibility to employment in all the services connected with the revenue, in all its various branches. It may be also matter of fair consideration, to equalize the condition and privileges of all Roman Catholics throughout the United Kingdom, and to give to all (so far as may be possible) the same as are now enjoyed by any in any part of it. And I should be glad to see this course proceed with no limitation to the favour and munificence of the Crown, or the liberality of parliament, as to all those offices, which (in the language of Mr. Burke *) are but instrumental in the executive administration of the state; reserving, nevertheless, and carefully reserving, to the king's Protestant subjects, all those higher offices which constitute its supreme rule and government.

Of religious toleration, and security for the worship peculiar to their mode of faith, there cannot be too much granted; and we should remove every painful restriction that trenches upon their feelings, and adds nothing at the same time to our defence. Of this sort would be the more complete protection of their worship from disturbance, if they need it; and the removal of that necessity which now compels them to celebrate their marriages in our church,t from whose rights and tenets their faith is abhorrent; and such relief I have cause to know was in the contemplation of a lamented friend, once the first minister of the Crown, whose life and power were unhappily and violently cut short by a premature fate.

But, my lords, the policy of our Protestant government still requires the continuance of our other existing restrictions upon all that concerns the ostentatious display of their worship; we must have no stately churches, + no processions in our

*Letter to sir H. Langrishe. 1792. + Marriage act, 26 Geo. II. c. 38, excepting Jews and Quakers.

Irish stats. 9 W. III. c. 1. § 8; 8 Anne, c. 3; 21, 22 G. III. c. 62; 35 Geo. III. c. 21; 40 G. III. c. 85; English stats. 31 Geo. III. c. 32, § 17.