Page:Protestant Exiles from France Agnew vol 2.djvu/494

 on 28th February 1878, leaving, with other children, a son, William Granville Saurin, Esq.  . — Henry Duquery was an Irish barrister, a cotemporary of Saurin, whose praises also are sounded by Mr. O’Regan, who says that he “had the elegance of Addison,” and adds —

“Of the chaste, accomplished, and classic Duquery, it is related, on his own authority, that he read Robertson on the day before his best displays, to catch his unrivalled style, and to harmonize his composition by that of the master of historic eloquence.”

There can be no doubt that he was of French Protestant descent, for the King’s letter, dated 3rd May 1762, gave him an Irish pension of £200 per annum, “to be charged on the French pensions.” I have not the date of his being called to the bar, but he was made Third Sergeant in Ireland on 17th August 1789.

The name of Henry Duquery, barrister and M.P., is in the list of the original members of a patriotic and convivial club, which humorously designated itself, “The Monks of the Order of St. Patrick, commonly called the Monks of the Screw, assembled at their convent in St. Kevin Street, Dublin, on and after September the 3rd 1779.” The club was dissolved in 1795.

Mr Duquery was promoted to be Second Sergeant on 30th July 1791. He sat in the Irish House of Commons as M.P. for the borough of Rathcormack, in the county of Cork, from 1790 to 1797, and farther I have not traced him.

The following is a specimen of his parliamentary oratory:—

[On 10th February 1794 Mr. Grattan moved a Resolution that it would tend to the advantage of both kingdoms, if Irish manufactures were admissible into Britain, according to the tariff settled in Ireland for duties payable on the importation of English commodities.]

Mr. said, “To give an idea of the commercial disadvantages under which Ireland labours in her intercourse with England, it may not be unnecessary to state a few items from the tariffs of both countries. How then stand the tariffs on woollen cloths or (what is called) old drapery? In Great Britain there is an import duty of £2, 0s. 6d. per yard on Irish woollens; while the duty on English woollens imported into Ireland amounts to no more than 50d. per yard. On woollen stuffs and mixed goods or (what is called) new drapery, the same system of hostility to the manufactures of Ireland has been followed by the parliament of Great Britain. The import duty from Ireland into England is six shillings per yard, and from Great Britain here only three halfpence. Cotton goods are admitted here at a duty of 10 per cent. — in England the duty is 30 per cent. Printed linens, notwithstanding all that is said of the protection afforded by England to the linen manufacture of Ireland, are subject to an import duty there of 65 per cent., while here they are admitted at 10 per cent. Our manufacture has been considered sufficient for upwards of four million of people; but was not such a disproportion of duties calculated to destroy even that? When Ireland had not been more than thirty years in possession of the manufacture of printed linens, England laid on a heavier duty to enable her to rival us. After trying the experiment, she found she could not; and the consequence was that the trade fell into the hands of the Germans, the Hollanders, and the Swiss. Thus the trade was lost to Ireland, without being the smallest advantage to Great Britain. The manufacture of sail-cloth was rising in this country about the year 1750 to a flourishing state, until checked by the monopolizing spirit of England — which, however, has not been productive to the latter nation of any advantage. So that Ireland might, with respect to these particulars, tell Great Britain, you have

Robb’d us of that which nought enriched you, But makes us poor indeed.’

“Nations were born to assist nations; and the more exactly Great Britain and Ireland square their reciprocal commercial and political intercourse by this maxim, the more prosperous will be the common affairs of both. England is peculiarly adapted to the manufacture of fine woollen cloths, and might therefore leave to Ireland the advantages on coarse woollens. It begins now to be known that the spirit of monopoly is as injurious to trade, as that of conquest is to the happiness of society. The consequence of depriving Ireland of the woollen manufacture was to throw that trade directly into the hands of France, to the detriment of Great Britain. And Sir Matthew Decker, than whom no higher authority on the subject of trade can be adduced, is of opinion that the rivalry of France would not have become so formidable to Great Britain, but for the restrictions laid on the woollen trade of Ireland, and that if the two nations would not suffer themselves to be divided in sentiment on account of the narrow gut of ocean which separates them, they would both become more great and prosperous.

“The linen manufacture may perhaps be sufficient for Ulster; but is Munster to droop in poverty? I entertain too high an opinion of the British ministers to think they will yield to the folly of the manufacturers. The Resolution proposed by the right honourable gentleman does not go to agitate any political question; it goes only to procure the British duties to be