WHAT IS THE VALUE OF IRELAND TO ENGLAND?

Otago Daily Times, Issue 7557, 7 May 1886, Page 4

WHAT IS THE VALUE OF IRELAND TO ENGLAND?

In the " Nineteenth Century,", Mr Robert Giffen writes an essay discussing the.-

economic value of Ireland to Great Britain*. MrGifEen says':—" To put the matter shortly and in the roundest figures—there can, of course.be no exact figures of income and: '■_ capital, — Ireland in population : has sunk from one-third to less than "one-seventh; in gross income,. from two - seventeenths to less than one-seventeenth j£ iff capital, from a proportion that was material to about one-twenty - fourth • only; in taxable resources', ■ from a 'proportion that was- also material, being perhaps about one-tenth, to a proportion .that is

almost inappreciable—the proportion of only 1 to 50. In resources Ireland has nodoubt increased absoluely. The Irish peopleare much better • off individually," partly because there are .fewer people than

:here were .50 years .■•.■ago,'*but with

much . the same resources; but as a .community in relation' to Great Britain there is an immense decline. The relative decrease of the disaffected part of Ireland only is quite as remarkable. From being about one-tenth of the United Kingdom in resources, it has tiecome abont one-fortieth.or less. ■ As.regards taxable income,. the proportion of the whole of Ireland to the United Kingdom being only about 1 to 50, that of the disaffected part of Ireland only must be about 1 to 100."

IRELAND ANDTHEIMPEEIALTHEASUBT. Mr GifEen finds thatV-Ireland has not helped us as the framers of the Union expected it would.-."Actually at the present moment Ireland is no gain to the exchequer of Great Britain. -. ....'-'. An exact account is impossible. It seems to be .believed, however,.according;.'to"'the return No. 36, session 1884, that, after corrections are made on this head, about : £6,700,000 represents, the contributions' of .Ireland to Imperial purposes exclusive', of post-office, &c, the contributions of Great Britain being nearly 10 times that amount.;:'ln other words,- .Ireland; whilei constituting, only about' a "twentieth part_ of the' United Kingdom'in resources, nevertheless pays a tenth or eleventh of the tasesi Ireland ought to pay about £3,500,000, and, it pays nearly £7,000,000. To the extent of. the difference Great Britain is better off. in the partnership : than could have been expected beforehand." ! Further, it seems that although1 is

disproportionately.-■ taxed,"- Great''-Sritain

does not gain so much as appears from the revenue side only, because she has'to keep there a large garrison," paydisproportionately for local government," and .lend sums

which are not repaid. Governmentis thus a loser by Ireland to the extent of about £2,750,000 per, annam, although itreceivesfrom Ireland over £3|OOOJOOO more .revenue than Ireland, on a fair computation, ought to pay. If .Ireland only paid'a fair contribution for Imperial purposes we should

be out of pocket by this £3,200,000 more, or

nearly £6,000,000." This is the "account " as far as the Government1 is concerned."

Considering the community as a whole, it is

held that there is " some profit, but not a large profit," on English capital.invested in Examining the items, .the'"author finds that, the gain to the community, whatever it'is, would be balanced.:by the.deficit on Government account. The-trade :ques-,-tion is then gone, into with/some minuteness, and the conclusion is reached-that Ireland is probably not a';customer for British labour for more than a few millions. PROFIT AND LOSS OSSEPAEATIOX. V. Looked at from an Irish standpoint, Ire-' i land, Mr■ - Giffen' thinks^ would,■'".on the I direct Government account," "gain by s'eparaj tion or a rovisal of existing arrangements; I while, "assuming no political;danger to arise," both sides would gain. .Ireland would lose by the withdrawal of English troops, and " separation, if it should;bring about an interruption of trade between Ireland and Great Britain, would, be disastrous to Ireland." For Great Britain is-almost her sole market,1 and any capital needed must come; from England. Thus the conclusion from the economic point of view is that "Great Britain,: has not much to lose!;? in , dissolving partnership, while "Ireland" has." Then: follow considerations bearing;on " the indirect political danger " involved in separation—a large subject, rather, glanced at- than discussed, and not always sound. ..-■:.. . ~"

ME GIFFEN'S LAND-SCHEME. After remarking that the enormous reduction or absolute extinction of thelrish representation in the Imperial' Parliament, with or without terms of Home Rule for , is a measure on which both parties in Great Britain might justifiably unite.:—-""Another remark I have to make is with reference to a certain scheme which appeared in the Statist v newspaper, and which 'became: known as ' Economist's' plan of settling the land and Home Rule questions in Ireland. "There is ?. j no reason why I should not assume responsibility for a suggestion which I was en-i couraged to ventilate, when I first putit forward in conversation, by official'and political fri^ids, although for. obvious reasons I\ am most anxious to 'keep put of; politica controversy, and could take.no .part, either ... in my own name or anonymously,- in,the incessant discussions of: the. last few months. . What Lshould like to point out is,that the idea of buying out Irish landlords at the expense of the Imperial exchequer,: and of - handing over a rent-charge to Irish -local

authorities in lieu of- the present Imperial ' payments for the internal administration of Ireland, is closely related to" the ;iview of - Ireland's economic position which11 have set forth in this-paper.. It is all basecl on the notion that Ireland is a comparatively small State which has gained a footing in; the Imperial system of Great Britain to which it is not entitled, and for which, therefore, : another system, excluding Irish representatives wholly, or nearly so, from trie-Imperial Parliament,- must be i devised. "{lf -'Irish local authorities can be set ?up- amicably, -

and with the; consent of Ireland's representatives, so much the better ;:r if';Tio-such; authorities can be set up, then it will become necessary still to exclude hostile Irish representatives from the Imperial Parliament and set up local authorities of a. non-popular kind. As far as I can see, there .is nogetting out from between the horns of this dilemma. In either case a settlement of the.land question seems expedient, in order-to give the new authoritiesa chance, and-in order to disentangle the Imperial and :; Irish; exchequers. -No iherely Irish"authorities could buy out the landlords, because they "would not have credit enough. -.' Ifthei exchequers - are not disentangled the Irish people would have the apparent grievance of being taxed without representation, .whereas in some form or other they; could be:■. represented in local councils. . It.is therefore expedient at the same time at once to buy out Irish landlords effectively, which can be done by the Imperial exchequer^ and to give the new local authorities a revenue which they could collect and administer themselves, and which would be the" equivalent of the contributions to the Imperial exchequer they would continue to make under existing taxes, deducting a certain fixed proportion as due from them for the Imperial protection.: Subject, to the condition that the Imperial Parliament imposed no new taxes on- Ireland, which it is not worth while doing, there would be no injustice in such an arrangement, and the Irish people could not then say they were taxed without representation. But the existing intolerable anomaly would be got rid of, and Great Britain would cease to be governed in a large degree by a hostile faction coming from a country which contributes nothing to Imperial strength."

Mr Giffen winds up his exposition by repeating his. statement that Ireland, with, no intention to be unjust, is yet overtaxed in comparison with Great Britain, and alleging that the State absorbs nearly the whole taxable income of the country. He thinks that this, among many others, is a reason "why on this side of .St. George's Channel we should speak with some modesty on the Imperial Parliament being capable of dealing with. Irish affairs."' .' .-. ;.' ;. '.-.■■'