ing to
diametrically opposite conclusions. The crux of the discussion, stripped
of academical reasoning, was simple. Everything turned, obviously, on
the nature, amount, and origin of Irish expenditure. Sir David Barbour
had passed lightly over these vital points, recommending only that any
future _saving_ of expenditure in Ireland ought to be used for Irish
purposes--a further admission of Ireland's separate political
existence--and shutting his eyes to future _increases_ of expenditure.
Lord Farrer and his colleagues, while agreeing that it was impossible to
alter the taxation of Ireland so long as the Union lasted, agreed that
additional local expenditure in Ireland could not be regarded as a
set-off to undue taxation, not only because such a doctrine was
inherently fallacious on economic grounds, and would hardly be listened
to in the case of any other country than Ireland, but because Irish
expenditure was subjected to no proper means of control. Both Irish
revenue and Irish services, the former being only theoretically, the
latter actually, distinct and separate, were outside the control of
Irishmen, who had therefore no motive for economy. Nor was there any
proper measure of determining what expenditure was good for Ireland and
what was bad, though they held that there was reason to believe that
much of Irish administration was both bad and costly. With regard to the
extensive system of Imperial loans, whose charge swelled the Irish
expenditure, they quoted the unchallenged evidence of Mr. Murrough
O'Brien[109] to the effect that the system of Imperial loans for
temporary emergencies and charity loans--"made to keep the people quiet
or to keep them alive"--tends to increase the poverty of Ireland, "does
not prevent the recurrence of famine, distress, and discontent," and
that "a great deal of the money nominally meant to be spent on
productive works has been misspent and wasted." They also dwelt, with
emphasis, on official figures showing the extravagance of Civil
Government in Ireland, the cost having risen from 1s. 10d. per head of
the population in 1820 to 19s. 7d. per head in 1893, whereas the cost of
Civil Government in Great Britain had only risen from 1s. 7d. to 11s.
5d. The charge for legal salaries and five principal Departments in
Ireland was double the right figure according to population, and
represented an excess cost of nearly L200,000. In wealthy and
progressive Belgium, Civil Government cost 10s. p