(a) In saying “tax revenue” the Commissioners meant to exclude non-tax revenue—­e.g., Post Office receipts, etc.—­but the Commissioners in their various separate Reports generally employed the figures of total revenue.  Taking these as our basis, the Irish revenue then raised would have been nearly one-twelfth instead of one-eleventh of the British revenue.  In other words, of the total revenue of the United Kingdom, Ireland paid nearly one-thirteenth. (b) As to the true Irish taxable capacity of “one-twentieth,” some confusion arises owing to the use of the phrase by different Commissioners in different senses.  Mr. Childers and Sir David Barbour appear to have meant one-twentieth of the United Kingdom’s taxable capacity, the others one-twentieth of Great Britain’s.  In order to be on the conservative side, I shall adopt the former estimate.  The discrepancy is not material to the conclusions of the Commissioners, as, for reasons which I need not go into, they agreed that the minimum amount of over-taxation was two millions and three-quarters.

This was the main outstanding conclusion of the Royal Commission.  Translated into figures, it showed the following facts:  In 1893-94 the total revenue of the United Kingdom from all sources was L96,855,627.  Of this sum the revenue contributed by Great Britain from all sources was L89,286,978; by Ireland, L7,568,649—­that is, between one-eleventh and one-twelfth of the British revenue.

If Ireland in 1893-94 had paid in proportion to her true taxable capacity of one-twentieth, the maximum arrived at by any member of the Commission, the revenue derived from her would have been L4,842,781.

In other words, there was held to be an excess payment from Ireland of L2,725,868.

It was not suggested by any member of the Commission that Ireland, since the Union, had grown richer at a more rapid rate than England, and was therefore more capable of bearing taxation.  On the contrary, it was admitted that she had grown, relatively, much poorer.  On the most moderate estimate, therefore, the over-taxation of Ireland since the Union, computed strictly on the principle laid down, could be represented as amounting in 1894 to something like two hundred and fifty millions, or, if we date from the fiscal union of 1817, two hundred millions.

The answer given by the Commissioners to Question 3, so far as it goes, is explanatory of the previous answer.

“That the Act of Union imposed upon Ireland a burden which, as events showed, she was unable to bear.

“That the increase of taxation laid upon Ireland between 1853 and 1860 was not justified by the then existing circumstances.”

And they added the opinion “that identity of rates of taxation does not necessarily involve equality of burden.”

Their answers, so far as they were complete, to the other inquiries contained in Question No. 3 about the tax revenue of Ireland and the net contribution of Ireland in the past to Imperial services, are to be found in figures included in the body of the Report, and these figures formed, of course, the basis of their unanimous conclusion as to the over-taxation of Ireland.