venue, which may be taken as tolerably exact measures of the trade, both foreign and internal, of each country, has, even upon the fuppofition of an equality of rates, increafed in a much greater proportion in Scotland than in England. But we are asked, Has Scotland advanced in profpe⚫rity fince the Union as much as Irelande ?' Any one who had given entire credit to the frequent complaints of tyrannical oppreffion exercised by this country almost contantly towards Ireland, might be apt to conceive, that whatever should make it probable that the improvement of Scotland had done much more than keep peace with that of England during that period, must tend, à fortiori, to fhew that it must have greatly furpaffed that of Ireland. But knowing how often thofe complaints have been made from party confiderations, or dictated by spleen and ill hu mour, I do not think we ought to content ourselves with fuch a general presumption. No fingle branch of trade or manufacture, common to the two countries, can afford a fatisfactory criterion by which to decide the queftion. The linen trade has been compared, and calculations have been stated to fhew that. Ireland has outrun Scotland very much in that branch. But linen, though a great, is far from the only confiderable manufacture of Scotland. It is admitted to be the only one of any moment in Ireland. Perhaps a comparifon of the annual revenue of each will furnish a better teft. Mr. Fofter's Speech, p. 104. I think :! I think it will not be denied, that, to meet the extraordinary expenses of the times, the taxes in Ireland have been strained of late to nearly as high a pitch as is confiftent with the eafe, comfort, or induftry of its inhabitants; at least, whoever is acquainted with the two countries will allow, to judge from general appearances in each, that the people of Scotland as are little overpowered by the preffure of their fhare of the public burdens of this kingdom, as thofe of Ireland are by the taxes levied on them. If I may take this for granted, it will follow, without going into the different rates of duties impofed on the different objects of taxation in cache, that, of the two, that country which, in proportion to its population and natural advantages, yields the greatest annual amount of public income must be in the most profperous fituation. Now how does the cafe ftand? Scotland is acknowledged to contain much fewer inhabitants than Ireland, though in extent the first somewhat exceeds the latter country; the foil of Scotland is much the leaft fertile; its climate is not fo temperate as that of Ireland; and its ports and other natural advantages for foreign trade, one great fource of revenue, are much inferior. e The duty on diftilled fpirits in 1797, was much higher in Ireland than in Scotland, and is fo ftill. That on malt în Scotland is now but 74d. 10 per Winchester bushel, or 5s. 5d. per quarter; in Ireland it is 6s. 6d. Ir. or 6s. Br. per barrel. A barrel Ir. is about 5 bushels, a quarter 8 bufhels. The duty in England is but 10s. 6d. per quarter. The rates of the postage of letters in Ireland and Scotland in 1797, were nearly the fame, and, I believe, continue to be fo. Yet, Yet, with fo many differences in favour of Ireland, it will be found that the grofs revenue levied in Scotland in the year before the laft, which is the latest period of which I have been able to get a full account for both countries, came within confiderably lefs than 100,003/. of that of Ireland. The latter amounted to 1,965,130l. Ir. equal to 1,813,9661. Br.d; the former to 1,734,4721. leaving a difference only of 79,4944, According to the many advantages I have just stated as belonging to Ireland, if the two countries were in an equal degree of profperity, the revenue of Ireland ought to have exceeded that of Scotland in an infinitely greater proportion. I have fpoken of gross revenue; but the expense of collection is fo much lefs in Scotland than in Ireland (probably also an effect of the Union), that on the comparison of the net produce of each, the balance turns very confiderably in favour of Scotland; for, in the fame year, the net produce of the Scotch revenue was 1,487,0361; that of Ireland only 1,437,5167. Ir. or 1,325,937. Br. Here the difference is no less than 160,0997. in favour of Scotland, being the fum which that country contributed more than Ireland, in that year, to the general aggregate expenditure of the empire, confidered as a whole. e The statement as to Scotland I have extracted from the accurate reports of the Finance Committee. Those refpecting Ireland come from a fource which I can rely upon as perfectly authentic. d 13. Ir. make 12l. Br. and 13: 12 : : 1,965,130 : 1,813,966,21. 13:12:: 1,437,516 : 1,326,9371% It It is faid, the trade of Glasgow, the chief commercial city of Scotland, has decreased fince the American ward. If this were correct, I do not fee what inference could be drawn from it in regard to the effect of the Union. But I have extremely good authority for ftating, that although the merchants of that city have loft the Virginia trade in confequence of the American revolution, their commerce and navigation are on the whole very confiderably augmented. They have now, particularly, a very extenfive traffic with the Weft Indies, of which they had none formerly; and, as to their manufactures, that of cotton is immense, and the reft are in general at least quadrupled within the laft twenty years. T But has the population of Scotland kept pace in due proportion with that of Irelande? Sir, the population of Ireland is, as I have faid, undoubtedly confiderably greater, in proportion to its extent, than that of Scotland; but if the much smaller number of inhabitants of the latter poffefs as much or more useful wealth, that is, if they can with equal cafe to themselves, which I have endeavoured to render probable, contribute as much or more towards the exigencies of the public as thofe of the former, it it very difficult to see how Ireland can be confidered as in a state of more rapid progreffion in point of riches and individual or national profperity than Scotland. I cannot help fufpe&ting, however, that there are fome great mistakes on the subject of the population of these kingdoms, and the progreffive increase of numbers in each during the prefent century; that the numbers in d Mr. Fofter's Speech, p. 105. Ibid. Ireland Ireland have of late been greatly exaggerated, or those in Scotland (and indeed in England) much under-rated. It is faid, the population of Scotland at the Union was a million, and that it is now but a million and a half; whereas Ireland, whose inhabitants then were little more than a million and a half, has now a population of near four millions and a half. I do not know from whence thefe numbers, or at least some of them, may have been taken; but ftatements might have been found, according to which the comparison would have turned out ftill more to the advantage of the argument for the fake of which it has been made. According to De Foe, the number of inhabitants in Scotland at the time of the Union was, inftead of one, efteemed to be two millions; and moft of the modern calculations have reduced them in our time to the number, ftated, of about a million and a half, fome confiderably underd. On the other hand, all the authorities I have happened to meet with for raifing the population of Ireland fo high as four millions and a half, according to what I have just now mentioned, except that most refpectable one to which I then meant to refer, are to be found in publications which furnifh others of equal weight for taking it still higher, namely, at five millions". a Mr. Fofter's Speech, p. 165. b Ibid. p. 165. But, • Chalmers's Eftimate, p. 224, note; Sir 7. Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland, vol. xx. p. 621. Dr. Webfler's Tables. Dr. Webster, in 1755, made them only 1,265,380; Sir J. Sinclair, in 1798, 1,5 26,492. * Four millions and a half Meffrs. Hamilton Rowan and Tone Jackson's Trial, p. 80: Report of the Secret Committee of the House of Commons of Ireland, 1798, Appendix No. xxii. p. 195: Mr. Keough's Authentic Statement |