ration of which is referred to that legiflature; and from this claufe a probable intention may be inferred of adopting fuch laws as fhould be made in Great Britain in the place of the laws fo repealed, provided the restraints and benefits were equal in respect to both countries. The opinion of the legislature at that time is exprefs, that uniformity of commercial laws would promote the interest of both kingdoms; and if that advantage could not have been obtained without injuring the independency of Ireland, that opinion would not have been advanced at the moment of its establishment. Compare that act and the prefent bill. The act establishes the British commercial laws, which contain cqual benefits and restraints, as laws in Ireland, with a retrospect of 290 years; and extends the idea of fimifarity of laws between the two kingdoms not only to feamen, but to commerce generally. This bill makes it a fundamental condition of the propofed agreement, that the fhips and feamen of both countries fhould, by the laws of both, be fecured in the fame privileges, advantages, and immunities; but as to commerce, restrains the fimilarity of laws to that commerce only, which confifts of British property, and arifes to Ireland from British conceffion, or is immediately and neceffarily a part of that fyftem; and even there binds the British legiflature to the rule of equal retraints, and equal benefits, of which the Irish legiflature being alfo to judge, a concurrence of legiflation would have grown out of this fyftem, in the exercife of which the fentiments of both nations must have been confulted, and the confequence would have been an enlargement of the objects and power of Irish legislation, and certainly no diminution of independency. By the operation of this bill, the fubject of every law proposed for our adop tion, would be diltinctly confidered either during its progrefs, or foon, after it paffed in Great Britain; but by the act of 1782 the acts of near three centuries were adopted in one heap. If the bill is unconftitutional, the act is infinitely more fo. But neither is fubject to that imputation, becaufe fimilarity of laws is a juft and constitutional principle, if neither of the coun tries can be bound without the affent of its legiflature. The juftice of the rule, that Cu jus eft dare ejus eft difponere, was ne ver queftioned; but Great Britain offers to relax this rule in favour of Ireland, and to engage to give her felf no benefit in her own colonies that he does not give to her fifter kingdom; to impofe on her no reftraint in that commerce which the gives, that he does not impofe on herfelf; and to make Ireland in fome measure a joint legiflator with herself over a part of her own empire. It is and ever has been a part of the British colony fyftem, to fa vour the produce and manufactures of her colonies against the interference of fimilar articles from foreign colonies and ftates. She expects, that, as long as you choose to enjoy the benefit of this fystem, you fhould do the fame, and that thefe fimilar articles fhould be made fubject to the fame duties on im. portation into this kingdom as in Great Britain. To this we have hitherto conformed without objec tion or inconvenience. The fame principle applies equally to the like articles imported from the united ftates of America; and therefore to four of thefe articles, namely, rum, peltry, whalebone-fins, and oil, of which the British colonies can fur (L 4) nish nish a complete fupply, the fame condition is annexed. That this was confidered as part of the colonial fyftem, and not founded on any intention to regulate the trade of Ireland by British law, is manifeft from this-that motions made on this occafion in both houfes of the British parliament, to regulate our trade with the states of America in fome articles unconnected with the colony fyftem, were rejected on this avowed principle, that Great Britain had no power to regulate any part of our foreign commerce. If by this agreement Ireland was to retain the liberty of importing from other countries produce or manufactures fimilar to thofe of the Britifh colonics, fhe would not take the colony trade on the fame terms with Great Britain. It is true the British act of 1780 allows Ireland a felection; but we framed our import duties from the year 1779 pursuant to the refolution of our houfe of commons in that year, and followed the British laws; and, as by the propofed agreement we were to have the liberty of importing British colonial produce from this kingdom into Great Britain, fhe thought it neceffary to annex it as a condition to this agreement, that we fhould fubject fimilar articles from foreign countries to the fame duties, regulations, and restrictions, as in Great Britain; becaufe otherwife we might import thofe articles, as the produce of the British colonies, into her ports, with little probability of detection, and fubvert her whole colony fyftem. This argument applies equally to the four enumerated articles from the American states. But whether we adopted British colony laws in a fmaller or greater number of articles, makes no dif ference in the constitutional principle. If it violated our independency in one cafe, it would be equally a violation of it in the other. But it is a violation of it in neither. The objection, that if we refufe to adopt the British law we fhould lofe the benefit of this agreement, applied with more weight to the con dition of 1780, because Great Britain gave us then more than she has now to grant. When I reflect, how long Scotland had endeavoured to obtain from England the protection of her navigation laws, and the benefits of her colony trade; that, what is now offered to be permanently granted to Ireland without any infringement of her rights of legiflation, could not be purchased by Scotland without the surrender of her legiflative fovereignty; when I reflect with what effufions of pub lic gratitude we received that very boon, which fome of us feem now to difdain and fpurn; and how carefully and affectionately it had been cherished by our legiflature in the acts of every fucceeding feflion; I view with amazement the wonder. ful revolutions of human fentiments, and confider the conftitutional jealoufy arifing from the propofed fyftem of colonial legiflation, as one of thofe popular delufions, which have too often inflamed the paffions and mifled the reafons of men. A farther conftitutional objection has been made to that part of the bill, which grants in perpetuity the furplus of our hereditary revenue above 656,000l. and to the fupport of that grant by a fuppofed perpetual revenue bill. As to the grant, it is neceffary to obferve, that the guarding the feas had been a heavy expence to this kingdom as early as the the reign of king Charles the First *. At the Restoration fpecific duties were granted, and granted in perpeuity, for the better guarding and defending of the teas against all perfons intending, or that may intend the difturbance of the intercourse of the trade of this your majefty's realm, and for the better detraying the neceflary expences thereof, which otherwife cannot be effected without great charge; and for increase and augmentation of your majetty's revenue 4." The probable amount of the propofed grant for many years to come would be far inferior in value to one year's amount of the duties granted by that act, and granted in the first place for this fpecific purpose. This part of the bill would provide for the fame fervice with more aconomy, and with much better effect. When I fay with much better effeet, I fpeak from experience. In the late war frigates were stationed off the coast of Scotland to protect the trade of that country. I prefented a memorial from Cork to the then adminiftration of Ireland, pray ing that the fame attention fhould be fhewn to the fouthern and western coafts of this kingdom. I was not able to prevail. But when this navy becomes the navy of the em pire, to the fupport of which Ireland contributes, it would be Irith as well as British; and there could be no longer a foundation for any diftinction. Our contribution would centre among ourselves, and would encourage our industry, by the inveftment of our quota in our own manufactures. As to the fecond objection to this part of the bill, the fact has been mifapprehended. It is no part of • Strafford's Letters, vol. i. p. 68, 152. 14th and 15th Ch. 11. chap. 9. the bill that this grant fhould be fupported by a perpetual revenue bill. It would have been fupported with good faith; but, like the reft of our revenue, by annual bills in aid of the acts of excife and customs, which are now perpetual. It has been objected in a neighbouring kingdom, that the grant of this furplus is a diminution of the royal power and property. It cer tainly is fo, and has justly and liberally been conceded, to strengthen the whole empire by a great commercial adjustment between thefe two countries. But to state this part of the bill as an incroachment on the rights or power of parliament, or as weakening or limiting the freedom of the conftitution, is a strange perverfion of the most obvious tendency and effect, of a re gulation calculated to promote the manufactures, protect the commerce, ftrengthen the conftitution, and provide for the defence of the nation. As to objections made, on conftitutional principles, to thofe parts of the bill that relate to the British Eaft India company, I fhall confider them more fully when I come to the commercial parts of the fub ject, to which they properly be long. I will only fay in this place, that I confider thofe parts of the propofed agreement as an exchange, by mutual confent, of a commerce which exifts in theory only, and which may never be productive, for a certain immediate and advan tageous commerce to a great empire in that part of the globe, and to Great Britain, neither of which we can acquire without fuch an exchange; and, this poffible commerce being reaffumable at our plea fure, fatisfaction of the British legislature must be firft declared. If our conduct fhould be founded on just grounds, it is not improbable that no fuch diffatisfaction would be de fure, by parting with the confide ration given for it, and as we barter commerce for commerce, and not commerce for conflitution, that no objection of a contitutional nature can justly apply to thofe para-clared, but that wife and moderate graphs of the bill. I cannot difcover in any of thofe infances the fmalleft particle of legiflative power gained by Great Britain, or loft by Ireland. The former has always made laws to regulate the trade with her colonies and fettlements in Africa and America; by this agreement the is to continue to do fo. The Irifh legiflature now follows thofe laws, and has declared by feveral of her ftatutes, that it is reasonable to do fo. After this agreement, fhe will continue to follow them as long as the thinks it reafonable. But, when this event shall have taken place, Great Britain, in making thofe laws muit confider, what regulations appear equal to the Irifh legillature, or fhe hazards the continuance of this agreement. What legislative power is Ireland to lofe? When a bill fhall be brought into either of our houses of parliament, relative to the British colonies, or to the four articles from the American ftates, fhall we not have the fame power over that as every other bill? Can we not amend any part, or re ject the whole? Can we not fay, the reftraints and benefits are not equal, or, though they are equal, they are not wife, and they thall not be the law of Ireland? But then you risk the agreement-fo would the British legillature, if the made any law relative to her colonies and fettlements, which the Irish legiflature should think unjust. But the determination of the agreement would not neceffarily follow our varying or rejecting their bill; for by the propofed agreement the dif men might fuggeft fome expedient, to recommend fome middle courfe that would be agreeable to both countries, and that the British legiflature would vary or change its law. But, it is faid, you could not originate the bill. In refpect to the British colonies and fettlements, no man could be to unreasonable as to defire it; as to foreign colonies, and the four enumerated articles, our right to originate would be unquestionable. I speak of the right, not of the exercife of it, the prudence of which must depend on the occafion. If Great Britain neither gains nor Ireland lofes any power of legiflation, where is the injury to our independence? Where is the bridle that is to be thrown, it seems, over the neck of the high-fpirited feed? It is held out, not by thofe who offer, but by thofe who would fcare him from his provender. I therefore thought and still think, that there was no good reafon on conftitutional grounds against the introduction of the bill; for which reafon I voted. Confidering the fubject in its true light, as merely commercial, I thought that there were ftrong reafons to induce even thofe, who objected to fome of the commercial regulations of the bill, to vote for liberty to bring it in. A commercial fettlement between the two kingdoms is acknowledged by every reafonable man to be much wanted; and how this can be ob tained, without temperate difcuffion, and the communication to each other of the points in which they agree, and of thofe in which they they differ, I cannot comprehend. In the accomplishment of the Britifh union, many delays and differences in opinion had arifen. Though the commiffioners, appointed tor that purpose under the authority of the parliaments of both kingdoms, had on both fides.figned and fealed the articles of union, yet the Scotch parliament made many important alterations, which were adopted by the English parliament. In the proceedings to establish a commercial union between Great Britain and Ireland, difficulties and dilerences in opinion must neceffarily have arifen among men of the best intentions. Our propofitions have been altered by the British houfe of commons; their refolutions have been altered by the lords of Great Britain; and thefe alterations were adopted by the houfe of commons of that kingdom. In the progrefs on the Irish bill the fulleft difcuffion was intended. Every objection would have been heard, and every well-founded objection doubt lefs must have been allowed, and every proper alteration made. Nothing final during this feffion was ever in contemplation. A great length and variety of examination muft have preceded the fettlement of the fchedule of duties and regu lations. This schedule must have been laid before our two houfes of parliament in the next feffion for their approbation; and, after all this had been done, nothing could have been concluded, until the Irish parliament had declared its fatisfac tion in the acts of the British legiflature. The bill offered to Ireland many commercial advantages of the most important nature. It fecured for ever the linen trade of this king dom. The agreement, effectually. to favour our manufactures, would have been of great value to us. The encouragement which it gave to our fail-cloth manufacture, would have occafioned an annual profit to a very great amount. The perpetual fupply of rock-falt would have been useful to our victualling trade and fisheries; of bark to our manufacture of leather; and of coals to all our manufactures. The perpetual exemption of this laft article from duty on the export to Ireland, would have been a great and peculiar advantage to our manufactures. The inhabitants of Great Britain pay for their own coals, from port to port, five fillings the chaldron. An intention has been mentioned not long fince to tax this commodity at the pit. If this bill had paffed, the tax would have been drawn back, and this kingdom fecured againft any impofition, which the neceffities of Great Britain may induce her to lav on the export of this neceffary article. If Great Britain had not given of late years the ftrongest proofs, that fhe is not difpofed to look to times of leís liberality, for precedents to govern her conduct in refpect to her lifter kingdom, it would not be prudent to mention, that English coals came formerly to Ireland under a duty of four fhillings the ton, impofed on the export by an English act *. I allo thought the circuitous colony trade from Ireland to Great Britain would have been highly useful to this kingdom, and particularly to the city of Cork. I thought the opening of the British markets to our manufactures would be, in one refpect, of the utmost importance to this kingdom, I mean by the re-exportation of Irish manu Carte's Life of Duke of Ormond, vol. i. p. 84. factures |