Legislative union: evidence taken before the Irish House of Commons

Back to Search Bibliographic Data Print
UNION WITH IRELAND. 

EVIDENCE taken before the Committee of the Ikish House of Commons 

on the subject of The Legislative Union-. 

Orrf,. 
_(., 
_iy The House of Commons, fo 6e i-_-pn»(ca', 12 Ju/jt 1833, 

EVIDENCE Before The Committee of the Whole House, On His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant's Message respecting 

A Legislative Union with Grea. 
-Britain. 

Mr. 
Jos/iwa Pim, Examined. 
QAYS he has read the articles of Union respecting the Trade between the Countries ; he ^ comes before the Committee without previous intimation, and is not prepared to go into general observations on those articles; he is a general merchant, and is conversant in the cotton trade; with respect to raw cottons, thinks they are not likely to be affected by the propositions; as to manufactured cottons, the propositions would be fatal to them. 
The cotton manufacture took root in this country subsequent to 1782, and has gradually advanced since; the import of raw material has also increased; considerable increase of importation of spun cotton, which implies increase of manufacture; one mill erected near Celbridge ; much cotton spun and manufactured in Ireland; the duties on spun cotton protect Irish spun cotton, but not to such an extent as to prevent importation of spun cotton, which is an increasing trade, with or without a duty on spun cotton. 
The Irish manufacture could not exist without a hio-h duty in its favour. 
Manufacturers have got and required Parliamentary aid since 1782 ; could not go on without high duties; the knowledge of existing duties, and confidence m their continuance,induced many manufacturers to go on; if taken off, some manufacturers would suffer to the amount of their entire property ; thinks the existing duties on calicoes and muslins are prohibitory, and thinks them necessary for Irish manufacture; labour 111 the cotton manufacture is lower in England than in Ireland; the cotton manufacture is well established in England, is not yet so in Ireland ; he views the cotton manufacture only as regards the manufacturer, and not the consumer; he does not see what the consumer has to do with the question before the Committee. 

Mr. 
Jo/tn Orr, Examined. 
Says he is a muslin manufacturer and printer of calicoes; thinks the proposed measure of Union would ruin his tr^de entirely; causes are various; fuel plenty in England, labour cheaper, great machinery, has long enjoyed the exclusive monopoly of their own market; are resorted to for various manufactures from all quarters of the world; a cuhco printer therefore in England is under no apprehension of printing 1 000 or 2,000 pieces of a ceitaii. 
fancy, consequently if fancy is approved, he sells nine-tenths immediately at a profit, the remaining tenth might be heavy on his hands, and ,f the manufacturers in Ireland were not guarded by high duties, that tenth would be sent here and sold at a loss even of twenty or thirty per cent, to the English manufacturer, which would be good policy ; when he embarked in the manufacture of cotton in Ireland, he was engaged in Scotland in the muslinmanu-facture, and it was the protection given him there that induced him to embark in the business here; never would have expended the money he has done had he thought those duties would have been withdrawn; printing of calicoes is a fancy trade; the measures now proposed would give a decided preference to English manufacture ; thinks it would be a false and treacherous policy in aWion to encourage a manufacturer to come from another country under the faith of protecting duties, afterwards to be taken off, which would be to rob him, he has been here 25 years ; less than the present protecting duty would be impolitic ; it pievents the English merchant from sending the redundancy of his manufacture here to overpower the Irish manufacturer ; the present duty is as a protecting duty near 50 per cent ; <,alue of cotton goods now manufactured in Ireland annually supposes to be 750,000/. 
he means Ihe whole of the cotton manufacture; he employed previous to August 1796 above3,000 people; not so many at present; a great shock has been felt in the cmton trade, horn the 517. 

a 

P