You will here please to observe, that the profit allowed to Wood by the
patent is twelvepence out of every pound of copper valued at _1s. 6d_.
whereas _5d_. only is allowed for coinage of a pound weight for the
English halfpence, and this difference is almost 25 _per cent_. which is
double to the highest exchange of money, even under all the additional
pressures, and obstructions to trade, that this unhappy kingdom lies at
present. This one circumstance in the coinage of three hundred and sixty
ton of copper makes a difference of twenty-seven thousand seven hundred
and twenty pounds between English and Irish halfpence, even allowing
those of Wood to be all of the heaviest sort.

It is likewise to be considered, that for every halfpenny in a pound
weight exceeding the number directed by the patent, Wood will be a
gainer in the coinage of three hundred and sixty ton of copper, sixteen
hundred and eighty pounds profit more than the patent allows him; Out of
which he may afford to make his comptrollers easy upon that article.

As to what is alleged, that "these halfpence far exceed the like coinage
for Ireland in the reigns of His Majesty's predecessors;" there cannot
well be a more exceptionable way of arguing: Although the fact were
true, which however is altogether mistaken; not by any fault in the
Committee, but by the fraud and imposition of Wood, who certainly
produced the worst patterns he could find, such as were coined in small
numbers by permissions to private men, as butchers' halfpence, black
dogs and the like, or perhaps the small St. Patrick's coin which passes
for a farthing, or at best some of the smallest raps of the latest kind.
For I have now by me some halfpence coined in the year 1680 by virtue of
the patent granted to my Lord Dartmouth, which was renewed to Knox, and
they are heavier by a ninth part than those of Wood, and in much better
metal. And the great St. Patrick's halfpenny is yet larger than either.

But what is all this to the present debate? If under the various
exigencies of former times, by wars, rebellions, and insurrections, the
Kings of England were sometimes forced to pay their armies here with
mixed or base money, God forbid that the necessities of turbulent times
should be a precedent for times of peace, and order, and settlement.

In the patent above mentioned granted to Lord Dartmouth, in the reign of
King Charles 2d. and renewed to Knox, the securities given into the
exchequer, obliging the patentee to receive his money back upon every
demand, were an effectual remedy against all inconveniencies. And the
copper was coined in our own kingdom, so that we were in no danger to
purchase it with the loss of all our silver and gold carried over to
another, nor to be at the trouble of going to England for the redressing
of any abuse.

That the Kings of England have exercised their prerogative of coining
copper for Ireland and for England is not the present question: But (to
speak in the style of the Report) it would "seem a little
extraordinary," supposing a King should think fit to exercise his
prerogative by coining copper in Ireland, to be current in England,
without referring it to his officers in that kingdom to be informed
whether the grant was reasonable, and whether the people desired it or
no, and without regard to the addresses of his Parliament against it.
God forbid that so mean a man as I should meddle with the King's
prerogative: But I have heard very wise men say, that the King's
prerogative is bounded and limited by the good and welfare of his
people. I desire to know, whether it is not understood and avowed that
the good of Ireland was intended by this patent. But Ireland is not
consulted at all in the matter, and as soon as Ireland is informed of
it, they declare against it; the two Houses of Parliament and the
Privy-council addresses His Majesty upon the mischiefs apprehended by
such a patent. The Privy-council in England takes the matter out of the
Parliament's cognizance; the good of the kingdom is dropped, and it is
now determined that Mr. Wood shall have the power of ruining a whole
nation for his private advantage.

I never can suppose that such patents as these were originally granted
with the view of being a job for the interest of a particular person, to
the damage of the public: Whatever profit must arise to the patentee was
surely meant at best but as a secondary motive, and since somebody must
be a gainer, the choice of the person was made either by favour, or
_something else_[7] or by the pretence of merit and honesty. This
argument returns so often and strongly into my head, that I cannot
forbear frequently repeating it. Surely His Majesty, when he consented
to the passing of this patent, conceived he was doing an act of grace to
his most loyal subjects of Ireland, without any regard to Mr. Wood,
farther than as an instrument. But the people of Ireland think this
patent (intended _no doubt_ for their good) to be a most intolerable
grievance, and therefore Mr. Wood can never succeed, without an open
avowal that his profit is preferred not only before the interests, but
the very safety and being of a great kingdom; and a kingdom
distinguished for its loyalty, perhaps above all others upon earth. Not
turned from its duty by the "jurisdiction of the House of Lords,
abolished at a stroke, by the hardships of the Act of Navigation newly
enforced; By all possible obstructions in trade," and by a hundred
other instances, "enough to fill this paper." Nor was there ever among
us the least attempt towards an insurrection in favour of the Pretender.
Therefore whatever justice a free people can claim we have at least an
equal title to it with our brethren in England, and whatever grace a
good prince can bestow on the most loyal subjects, we have reason to
expect it: Neither hath this kingdom any way deserved to be sacrificed
to one "single, rapacious, obscure, ignominious projector."

[Footnote 7: A hint at the Duchess of Kendal's influence in the
procuring of the patent. [T.S.]]

Among other clauses mentioned in this patent, to shew how advantageous
it is to Ireland, there is one which seems to be of a singular nature,
that the patentee shall be obliged, during his term, "to pay eight
hundred pounds a year to the crown, and two hundred pounds a year to the
comptroller."[8] I have heard indeed that the King's council do always
consider, in the passing of a patent, whether it will be of advantage to
the crown, but I have likewise heard that it is at the same time
considered whether the passing of it may be injurious to any other
persons or bodies politic. However, although the attorney and solicitor
be servants to the King, and therefore bound to consult His Majesty's
interest, yet I am under some doubt whether eight hundred pounds a year
to the crown would be equivalent to the ruin of a kingdom. It would be
far better for us to have paid eight thousand pounds a year into His
Majesty's coffers, in the midst of all our taxes (which, in proportion,
are greater in this kingdom than ever they were in England, even during
the war) than purchase such an addition to the revenue at the price of
our _utter undoing_.

[Footnote 8: By the terms of the patent, Wood covenanted to pay to the
King's clerk, or comptroller of the coinage, ВЈ200 yearly, and ВЈ100 per
annum into his Majesty's exchequer, and not as Walpole's report has it,
ВЈ800 and ВЈ200. [T.S.]]

But here it is plain that fourteen thousand pounds are to be paid by
Wood, only as a small circumstantial charge for the purchase of his
patent, what were his other visible costs I know not, and what were his
latent, is variously conjectured. But he must be surely a man of some
wonderful merit. Hath he saved any other kingdom at his own expense, to
give him a title of reimbursing himself by the destruction of ours? Hath
he discovered the longitude or the universal medicine? No. But he hath
found out the philosopher's stone after a new manner, by debasing of
copper, and resolving to force it upon us for gold.

When the two Houses represented to His Majesty, that this patent to Wood
was obtained in a clandestine manner, surely the Committee could not
think the Parliament would insinuate that it had not passed in the
common forms, and run through every office where fees and perquisites
were due. They knew very well that persons in places were no enemies to
grants, and that the officers of the crown could not be kept in the
dark. But the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland[9] affirmed it was a
secret to him (and who will doubt of his veracity, especially when he
swore to a person of quality; from whom I had it, that Ireland should
never be troubled with these halfpence). It was a secret to the people
of Ireland, who were to be the only sufferers, and those who best knew
the state of the kingdom and were most able to advise in such an affair,
were wholly strangers to it.

[Footnote 9: The Duke of Grafton. Walpole called him "a fair-weather
pilot, that knew not what he had to do, when the first storm arose."
Charles, second Duke of Grafton (1683-1757), was the grandfather of the
third duke, so virulently attacked by Junius in his famous letters. [T.
S.]]

It is allowed by the Report that this patent was passed without the
knowledge of the chief governor or officers of Ireland; and it is there
elaborately shewn, that "former patents have passed in the same manner,
and are good in law." I shall not dispute the legality of patents, but
am ready to suppose it in His Majesty's power to grant a patent for
stamping round bits of copper to every subject he hath. Therefore to lay
aside the point of law, I would only put the question, whether in reason
and justice it would not have been proper, in an affair upon which the
welfare of a kingdom depends, that the said kingdom should have received
timely notice, and the matter not be carried on between the patentee and
the officers of the Crown, who were to be the only gainers by it.

The Parliament, who in matters of this nature are the most able and
faithful counsellors, did represent this grant to be "destructive of
trade, and dangerous to the properties of the people," to which the only
answer is, that "the King hath a prerogative to make such a grant."

It is asserted that in the patent to Knox, his "halfpence, are made and
declared the current coin of the kingdom," whereas in this to Wood,
there is only a "power given to issue them to such as will receive
them." The authors of the Report, I think, do not affirm that the King
can by law declare _anything_ to be current money by his
letters-patents. I dare say they will not affirm it, and if Knox's
patent contained in it powers contrary to law, why is it mentioned as a
precedent in His Majesty's just and merciful reign:[10] But although
that clause be not in Wood's patent, yet possibly there are others, the
legality whereof may be equally doubted, and particularly that, whereby
"a power is given to William Wood to break into houses in search of any
coin made in imitation of his." This may perhaps be affirmed to be
illegal and dangerous to the liberty of the subject. Yet this is a
precedent taken from Knox's patent, where the same power is granted, and
is a strong instance what uses may be sometimes made of precedents.

[Footnote 10: Knox's patent, as Monck Mason points out, did not contain
the right to have his coins pass as the current coin of the realm; that
was permitted by a proclamation of the lord lieutenant, and could in the
same manner be withdrawn. Knox's patent differed materially from that
granted to Wood, since he was obliged to take back his coins and give
gold or silver for them, and no one was compelled to take more than five
shillings in the payment of each ВЈ100. See note, p. 66. [T.S.]]

But although before the passing of this patent, it was not thought
necessary to consult any persons of this kingdom, or make the least
enquiry whether copper money were wanted among us; yet now at length,
when the matter is over, when the patent hath long passed, when Wood
hath already coined seventeen thousand pounds, and hath his tools and
implements prepared to coin six times as much more; the Committee hath
been pleased to make this affair the subject of enquiry. Wood is
permitted to produce his evidences, which consist as I have already
observed, of four in number, whereof Coleby, Brown and Mr. Finley the
banker are three. And these were to prove that copper money was
extremely wanted in Ireland. The first had been out of the kingdom
almost twenty years, from the time that he was tried for robbing the
treasury, and therefore his knowledge and credibility are equal. The
second may be allowed a more knowing witness, because I think it is not
above a year since the House of Commons ordered the Attorney-general to
prosecute him, for endeavouring "to take away the life of John Bingham
Esq; member of parliaments by perjury and subornation." He asserted that
he was forced to tally with his labourers for want of small money (which
hath often been practised in England by Sir Ambrose Crawley[11] and
others) but those who knew him better give a different reason, (if there
be any truth at all in the fact) that he was forced to tally with his
labourers not for want of halfpence, but of more substantial money,
which is highly possible, because the race of suborners, forgers,
perjurers and ravishers, are usually people of no fortune, or of those
who have run it out by their vices and profuseness. Mr. Finley the third
witness honestly confessed, that he was ignorant whether Ireland wanted
copper money or no; but all his intention was to buy a certain quantity
from Wood at a large discount, and sell them as well as he could, by
which he hoped to get two or three thousand pounds for himself.

[Footnote 11: Ambrose Crowley (not Crawley) was alderman and sheriff of
London. He was knighted January 1st, 1706-1707, and sat in the House of
Commons as member for Andover in 1713-1714. [T.S.]]

But suppose there were not one single halfpenny of copper coin in this
whole kingdom (which Mr. Wood seems to intend, unless we will come to
his terms, as appears by employing his emissaries to buy up our old ones
at a penny in the shilling more than they pass for), it could not be any
real evil to us, although it might be some inconvenience. We have many
sorts of small silver coins, to which they are strangers in England,
such as the French threepences, fourpence halfpennies and eightpence
half-pennies, the Scotch fivepences and tenpences, besides their
twenty-pences, and three-and-four-pences, by all which we are able to
make change to a halfpenny of almost any piece of gold or silver, and if
we are driven to Brown's expedient of a sealed card, with the little
gold or silver still remaining, it will I suppose, be somewhat better
than to have nothing left but Wood's adulterated copper, which he is
neither obliged by his patent, nor hitherto able by his estate to make
good.

The Report farther tells us, it "must be admitted that letters-patents
under the Great Seal of Great Britain for coining copper money for
Ireland are legal and obligatory, a just and reasonable exercise of His
Majesty's royal prerogative, and in no manner derogatory or invasive of
any liberty or privilege of his subjects of Ireland." First we desire to
know, why His Majesty's prerogative might not have been as well
asserted, by passing this patent in Ireland, and subjecting the several
conditions of the contract to the inspection of those who are only
concerned, as was formerly done in the only precedents for patents
granted for coining for this kingdom, since the mixed money[12] in Queen
Elizabeth's time, during the difficulties of a rebellion: Whereas now
upon the greatest imposition that can possibly be practised, we must go
to England with our complaints, where it hath been for some time the
fashion to think and to affirm that "we cannot be too hardly used."
Again the Report says, that "such patents are obligatory." After long
thinking, I am not able to find out what can possibly be meant here by
this word _obligatory_. This patent of Wood neither obligeth him to
utter his coin, nor us to take it, or if it did the latter, it would be
so far void, because no patent can oblige the subject against law,
unless an illegal patent passed in one kingdom can bind another and not
itself.

[Footnote 12: "Civill warre having set all Ireland in a combustion, the
Queene [Elizabeth] more easily to subdue the rebels, did take silver
coyne from the Irish, some few years before her death, and paid her army
with a mixed base coyne, which, by proclamation, was commanded to be
spent and received, for sterling silver money. This base mixed money had
three parts of copper, and the fourth part of silver, which proportion
of silver was in some part consumed by the mixture, so as the English
goldsmiths valued a shilling thereof at no more than two silver pence,
though they acknowledged the same to be worth two pence halfpenny."
(Fynes Moryson's "Itinerary," pt. i., p. 283). [T.S.]]

Lastly, it is added that "such patents are in no manner derogatory or
invasive of any liberty or privilege of the King's subjects of Ireland."
If this proposition be true, as it is here laid down, without any
limitation either expressed or implied, it must follow that a King of
England may at any time coin copper money for Ireland, and oblige his
subjects here to take a piece of copper under the value of half a
farthing for half-a-crown, as was practised by the late King James, and
even without that arbitrary prince's excuse, from the necessity and
exigences of his affairs. If this be in no manner "derogatory nor
evasive of any liberties or privileges of the subjects of Ireland," it
ought to have been expressed what our liberties and privileges are, and
whether we have any at all, for in specifying the word _Ireland_,
instead of saying "His Majesty's subjects," it would seem to insinuate
that we are not upon the same foot with our fellow-subjects in
_England_; which, however the practice may have been, I hope will never
be directly asserted, for I do not understand that Poining's act[13]
deprived us of our liberty, but only changed the manner of passing laws
here (which however was a power most indirectly obtained) by leaving the
negative to the two Houses of Parliament. But, waiving all controversies
relating to the legislature, no person, I believe, was ever yet so bold
as to affirm that the people of Ireland have not the same title to the
benefits of the common law, with the rest of His Majesty's subjects, and
therefore whatever liberties or privileges the people of England enjoy
by common law, we of Ireland have the same; so that in my humble
opinion, the word _Ireland_ standing in that proposition, was, in the
mildest interpretation, _a lapse of the pen_.

[Footnote 13: It was not intended that Poyning's act should interfere
with the liberty of the people, but it is undoubted that advantage was
taken of this law, and an interpretation put on it far different from
the intention that brought it on the statute books. It was passed by a
parliament convened by Sir Edward Poyning, at Drogheda, in the tenth
year of Henry VII.'s reign. Its immediate cause was the invasion of
Perkin Warbeck. That pretender assumed royal authority in Ireland and
had several statutes passed during his short-lived term of power. To
prevent any viceroy from arrogating to himself the powers of law-making
it was enacted by Poyning's parliament:

"That no parliament be holden hereafter in Ireland, but at such season
as the King's lieutenant and counsaile there first do certifie the King,
under the Great Seal of that land, the causes and considerations, and
all such acts as them seemeth should pass in the same parliament, and
such causes, considerations, and acts affirmed by the King and his
counsaile to be good and expedient for that land, and his licence
thereupon, as well in affirmation of the said causes and acts, as to
summon the said parliament, under his Great Seal of England had and
obtained; that done, a parliament to be had and holden as afore
rehearsed" ("Irish Statutes," vol. i., p. 44).

Two statutes, one, the Act of 3 and 4 Phil., and Mary, cap. 4, and the
other of II Eliz. Ses. 3, cap. 8, explain this act further, and the
latter points out the reason for the original enactment, namely, that
"before this statute, when liberty was given to the governors to call
parliaments at their pleasure, acts passed as well to the dishonour of
the prince, as to the hindrance of their subjects" ("Irish Statutes,"
vol. i., p. 346).

"By Poyning's Law," says Lecky, "a great part of the independence of
the Irish Parliament had indeed been surrendered; but even the servile
Parliament which passed it, though extending by its own authority to
Ireland laws previously enacted in England, never admitted the right of
the English Parliament to make laws for Ireland." ("Hist. Ireland," vol.
ii., p. 154; 1892 ed). [T.S.]]

The Report farther asserts, that "the precedents are many, wherein cases
of great importance to Ireland, and that immediately affected the
interests of that kingdom, warrants, orders, and directions by the
authority of the King and his predecessors, have been issued under the
royal sign manual, without any previous reference or advice of His
Majesty's officers of Ireland, which have always had their due force,
and have been punctually complied with, and obeyed." It may be so, and I
am heartily sorry for it, because it may prove an eternal source of
discontent. However among all these precedents there is not one of a
patent for coining money for Ireland.

There is nothing hath perplexed me more than this doctrine of
precedents. If a job is to be done, and upon searching records you find
it hath been done before, there will not want a lawyer to justify the
legality of it, by producing his precedents, without ever considering
the motives and circumstances that first introduced them, the necessity
or turbulence or iniquity of times, the corruptions of ministers, or the
arbitrary disposition of the prince then reigning. And I have been told
by persons eminent in the law, that the worst actions which human nature
is capable of, may be justified by the same doctrine. How the first
precedents began of determining cases of the highest importance to
Ireland, and immediately affecting its interest, without any previous
reference or advice to the King's officers here, may soon be accounted
for. Before this kingdom was entirely reduced by the submission of
Tyrone in the last year of Queen Elizabeth's reign, there was a period
of four hundred years, which was a various scene of war and peace
between the English pale and the Irish natives, and the government of
that part of this island which lay in the English hands, was, in many
things under the immediate administration of the King. Silver and copper
were often coined here among us, and once at least upon great necessity,
a mixed or base metal was sent from England. The reign of King James
Ist. was employed in settling the kingdom after Tyrone's rebellion, and
this nation flourished extremely till the time of the massacre 1641. In
that difficult juncture of affairs, the nobility and gentry coined their
own plate here in Dublin.

By all that I can discover, the copper coin of Ireland for three hundred
years past consisted of small pence and halfpence, which particular men
had licence to coin, and were current only within certain towns and
districts, according to the personal credit of the owner who uttered
them, and was bound to receive them again, whereof I have seen many
sorts; neither have I heard of any patent granted for coining copper for
Ireland till the reign of King Charles II. which was in the year 1680.
to George Legge Lord Dartmouth, and renewed by King James II. in the
first year of his reign to John Knox. Both patents were passed in
Ireland, and in both the patentees were obliged to receive their coin
again to any that would offer then twenty shillings of it, for which
they were obliged to pay gold or silver.

The patents both of Lord Dartmouth and Knox were referred to the
Attorney-general here, and a report made accordingly, and both, as I
have already said, were passed in this kingdom. Knox had only a patent
for the remainder of the term granted to Lord Dartmouth, the patent
expired in 1701, and upon a petition by Roger Moor to have it renewed,
the matter was referred hither, and upon the report of the attorney and
solicitor, that it was not for His Majesty's service or the interest of
the nation to have it renewed, it was rejected by King William. It
should therefore seem very extraordinary, that a patent for coining
copper halfpence, intended and professed for the good of the kingdom,
should be passed without once consulting that kingdom, for the good of
which it is declared to be intended, and this upon the application of a
"poor, private obscure mechanic;" and a patent of such a nature, that as
soon as ever the kingdom is informed of its being passed, they cry out
unanimously against it as ruinous and destructive. The representative
of the nation in Parliament, and the Privy-council address the King to
have it recalled; yet the patentee, such a one as I have described,
shall prevail to have this patent approved, and his private interest
shall weigh down the application of a whole kingdom. St. Paul says, "All
things are lawful, but all things are not expedient." We are answered
that this patent is lawful, but is it expedient? We read that the
high-priest said "It was expedient that one Man should die for the
people;" and this was a most wicked proposition. But that a whole nation
should die for one man, was never heard of before.

But because much weight is laid on the precedents of other patents, for
coining copper for Ireland, I will set this matter in as clear a light
as I can. Whoever hath read the Report, will be apt to think, that a
dozen precedents at least could be produced of copper coined for
Ireland, by virtue of patents passed in England, and that the coinage
was there too; whereas I am confident, there cannot be one precedent
shewn of a patent passed in England for coining copper for Ireland, for
above an hundred years past, and if there were any before, it must be in
times of confusion. The only patents I could ever hear of, are those
already mentioned to Lord Dartmouth and Knox; the former in 1680. and
the latter in 1685. Now let us compare these patents with that granted
to Wood. First, the patent to Knox, which was under the same conditions
as that granted to Lord Dartmouth, was passed in Ireland, the government
and the Attorney and Solicitor-general making report that it would be
useful to this kingdom: [The patentee was obliged to make every
halfpenny one hundred and ten grains Troy weight, whereby _2s. 2d_. only
could be coined out of a pound of copper.][14] The patent was passed
with the advice of the King's council here; The patentee was obliged to
receive his coin from those who thought themselves surcharged, and to
give gold and silver for it; Lastly, The patentee was to pay only _16l.
13s. 4d. per ann._ to the crown. Then, as to the execution of that
patent. First, I find the halfpence were milled, which, as it is of
great use to prevent counterfeits (and therefore industriously avoided
by Wood) so it was an addition to the charge of coinage. And for the
weight and goodness of the metal; I have several halfpence now by me,
many of which weigh a ninth part more than those coined by Wood, and
bear the fire and hammer a great deal better; and which is no trifle,
the impression fairer and deeper. I grant indeed, that many of the
latter coinage yield in weight to some of Wood's, by a fraud natural to
such patentees; but not so immediately after the grant, and before the
coin grew current: For in this circumstance Mr. Wood must serve for a
precedent in future times.

[Footnote 14: The portion here in square brackets was printed in the
fourth edition of this Letter and in the work entitled, "Fraud
Detected." It is not given in Faulkner's first collected edition issued
in 1735, nor in "The Hibernian Patriot," issued in 1730. [T.S.]]


Let us now examine this new patent granted to William Wood. It passed
upon very false suggestions of his own, and of a few confederates: It
passed in England, without the least reference hither. It passed unknown
to the very Lord Lieutenant, then in England. Wood is empowered to coin
one hundred and eight thousand pounds, "and all the officers in the
kingdom (civil and military) are commanded" in the Report to countenance
and assist him. Knox had only power to utter what we would take, and was
obliged "to receive his coin back again at our demand," and to "enter
into security for so doing." Wood's halfpence are not milled, and
therefore more easily counterfeited by himself as well as by others:
Wood pays a thousand pounds _per ann._ for 14 years, Knox paid only
_16l. 13s. 4d. per ann._ for 21 years.

It was the Report that set me the example of making a comparison between
those two patents, wherein the committee was grossly misled by the false
representation of William Wood, as it was by another assertion, that
seven hundred ton of copper were coined during the 21 years of Lord
Dartmouth's and Knox's patents. Such a quantity of copper at the rate of
_2s. 8d. per_ pound would amount to about an hundred and ninety thousand
pounds, which was very near as much as the current cash of the kingdom
in those days; yet, during that period, Ireland was never known to have
too much copper coin, and for several years there was no coining at all:
Besides I am assured, that upon enquiring into the custom-house books,
all the copper imported into the kingdom, from 1683 to 1692, which
includes 8 years of the 21 (besides one year allowed for the troubles)
did not exceed 47 tons, and we cannot suppose even that small quantity
to have been wholly applied to coinage: So that I believe there was
never any comparison more unluckily made or so destructive of the design
for which it was produced.

The Psalmist reckons it an effect of God's anger, when "He selleth His
people for nought, and taketh no money for them." That we have greatly
offended God by the wickedness of our lives is not to be disputed: But
our King we have not offended in word or deed; and although he be God's
vicegerent upon earth, he will not punish us for any offences, except
those which we shall commit against his legal authority, his sacred
person (which God preserve) or the laws of the land.

The Report is very profuse in arguments, that Ireland is in great want
of copper money.[15] Who were the witnesses to prove it, hath been shewn
already, but in the name of God, Who are to be judges? Does not the
nation best know its own wants? Both Houses of Parliament, the
Privy-council and the whole body of the people declare the contrary: Or
let the wants be what they will, We desire they may not be supplied by
Mr. Wood. We know our own wants but too well; they are many and grievous
to be borne, but quite of another kind. Let England be satisfied: As
things go, they will in a short time have all our gold and silver, and
may keep their adulterate copper at home, for we are determined not to
purchase it with our manufactures, which Wood hath graciously offered to
accept. Our wants are not so bad by an hundredth part as the method he
hath taken to supply them. He hath already tried his faculty in
New-England,[16] and I hope he will meet at least with an equal
reception here; what _that_ was I leave to public intelligence. I am
supposing a wild case, that if there should be any person already
receiving a monstrous pension out of this kingdom, who was instrumental
in procuring this patent, they have either not well consulted their own
interests, or Wood must[17] put more dross into his copper and still
diminish its weight.

[Footnote 15: On this subject of the want of small money in Ireland,
Monck Mason traverses the Report in the following manner:

"There appears to be a manifest prevarication in their lordships' report
upon this part of the subject; they state, that the witnesses testified,
that there was a want of small money in Ireland; they attempt,
therefore, to impose a copper currency, which certainly was not wanted.
To satisfy the reader upon this point, I shall quote, from the
unpublished correspondence of Archbishop King, the following extracts:
the first, from his letter to General Gorge, dated the 17th October,
1724, is to the following purpose.

"'... As to our wanting halfpence for change, it is most false; we have
more halfpence than we need, already; it is true, we want change; but it
is sixpences, shillings, half-crowns, and crowns; our silver and our
guineas being almost gone; and the general current coin of the kingdom
is now moydores, which are thirty shillings a-piece; at least nine pence
above the value in silver: now, they would have us change these for
halfpence, and so the whole cash of the kingdom would be these
halfpence.' ...

"But the true state of the case, as to coin, is more circumstantially
developed in the following letter of the same prelate to Mr. Southwell,
which was written a few months before, viz., on the 9th June, 1724.

"'... And yet, after all, we want change, and I will take leave to
acquaint you with the state of this kingdom as to coin. We used to have
hardly any money passing here, but foreign ducatoons, plate pieces,
perns, dollars, etc. but, when the East India Company were forbid
sending the coin of England abroad, they continued to buy up all our
foreign coin, and give us English money in lieu of some part of it; by
which we lost twopence in every ounce, the consequence of this was, that
in two years there was not to be seen in Ireland a piece of foreign
silver.

"'If any be brought, it is immediately sent away, the two, or as I am
informed, the three pence in the ounce, given by the East India Company,
being a temptation not to be resisted; but, the truth is, very little is
brought in, for the merchants that carry our commodities to foreign
markets, find it more to their advantage to carry directly to London
whatever they receive in cash; and whereas formerly they used, when they
had disposed of their cargo, to load their vessels with such commodities
as there was a demand for in Ireland, and bring the rest in cash, they
bring now only the commodities, and send the silver to London; and when
they have got the twopence in every ounce from the East India Company,
the rest serves to answer the returns we are obliged to make to England,
for the rents we are obliged to pay to noblemen and gentlemen who have
estates in Ireland and live in England, and for the pensions, and other
occasions which are many; by this means they gain likewise the exchange,
which is commonly four or five per cent, better to them than if they
sent cash.

"'It Is farther to be observed, that 21 shillings, which is the value of
a guinea in England, makes in Ireland 22 shillings and 9 pence, whereas
a guinea passes for 23 shillings with us, therefore, he who sends silver
into England, gains three pence more by it than if he sent guineas; this
advantage, though it may seem little, yet in a manner has entirely
drained us of our English money which was given in lieu of foreign
silver.

"'But farther, if any carry foreign gold to England, they cannot easily
pass it, and if they do, it is at a greater loss than there is in the
guineas, this has taken away our guineas, so that there is hardly one to
be seen; we have hardly any coin left but a few moydores and pistoles,
which can, by no means, serve the inland trade of the kingdom.

"'To give, therefore, a short view of our case, it is thus; We can have
English coin but by stealth, there being an act of parliament forbidding
the exportation of English coin; if, therefore, we should send our gold
or silver to England to be coined, we cannot have it back again, or if
we could, we cannot keep it for the reason above; we cannot for the same
reason have foreign silver; let us add to these, that by the act of
navigation and other acts, we cannot make our markets of buying where we
make our markets for selling; though we might have the commodities we
want much cheaper there, than we can have them in England, viz. all East
India and Turkey goods, with many others: nor is it to be expected that
any nation will trade with us with their silver only, when we will not
exchange commodities with them.

"'Except, therefore, England designs entirely to ruin Ireland, a kingdom
by which it is demonstrable that she gains yearly thirteen or fourteen
hundred thousand pounds, she ought to think of giving us some relief'"
("History of St. Patrick's," pp. xciii-xciv). [T.S.]]

[Footnote 16: See note on p. 14. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 17: Another hint at the Duchess of Kendal and her connection
with the patent. [T.S.]]

Upon Wood's complaint that the officers of the King's revenue here had
already given orders to all the inferior officers not to receive any
of his coin, the Report says, That "this cannot but be looked upon as a
very extraordinary proceeding," and being contrary to the powers given
in the patent, the Committee say, They "cannot advise His Majesty to
give directions to the officers of the revenue here, not to receive or
utter any of the said coin as has been desired in the addresses of both
Houses," but on the contrary, they "think it both just and reasonable
that the King should immediately give orders to the commissioners of the
revenue, &c. to revoke all orders, &c. that may have been given by them
to hinder or obstruct the receiving the said coin." And accordingly, we
are told, such orders are arrived.[18]. Now this was a cast of Wood's
politics; for his information was wholly false and groundless, which he
knew very well; and that the commissioners of the revenue here were
all, except one, sent us from England, and love their employments too
well to have taken such a step: But Wood was wise enough to consider,
that such orders of revocation would be an open declaration of the crown
in his favour, would put the government here under a difficulty, would
make a noise, and possibly create some terror in the poor people of
Ireland. And one great point he hath gained, that although any orders of
revocation will be needless, yet a new order is to be sent, and perhaps
already here, to the commissioners of the revenue, and all the King's
officers in Ireland, that Wood's "halfpence be suffered and permitted,
without any let, suit, trouble, molestation or denial of any of the
King's officers or ministers whatsoever, to pass and be received as
current money by such as shall be willing to receive them." In this
order there is no exception, and therefore, as far as I can judge, it
includes all officers both civil and military, from the Lord High
Chancellor to a justice of peace, and from the general to an ensign: So
that Wood's project is not likely to fail for want of managers enough.
For my own part, as things stand, I have but little regret to find
myself out of the number, and therefore I shall continue in all humility
to exhort and warn my fellow-subjects never to receive or utter this
coin, which will reduce the kingdom to beggary by much quicker and
larger steps than have hitherto been taken.[19]

[Footnote 18: Archbishop King's letter, quoted by Monck Mason, explains
why it was that the revenue officers refused to receive Wood's coins. It
seems the officers had been advised by lawyers that, in the event of
their taking the coins, it might be quite likely they would be compelled
to make them good, should such a demand be made of them. Precedents
could easily be cited by those taking action, since all previous patents
issued to private individuals for coining money, required of the
patentee to take them back and pay for them with gold or silver. [T.
S.]]

[Footnote 19: The suggestion thus made by the Lords of the Committee,
although coupled with the reduction in the amount of money Wood was to
be permitted to introduce, did not do any good. Archbishop King argued
rightly that this was treating the people of Ireland as if they were
fools and children. If Wood could coin ВЈ40,000, what was to prevent him
coining ВЈ200,000? The suggestion indeed irritated the people almost as
much as did the patent itself. [T.S.]]

But it is needless to argue any longer. The matter is come to an issue.
His Majesty pursuant to the law, hath left the field open between Wood
and the kingdom of Ireland. Wood hath liberty to offer his coin, and we
have law, reason, liberty and necessity to refuse it. A knavish jockey
may ride an old foundered jade about the market, but none are obliged to
buy it. I hope the words "voluntary" and "willing to receive it" will be
understood, and applied in their true natural meaning, as commonly
understood by Protestants. For if a fierce captain comes to my shop to
buy six yards of scarlet cloth, followed by a porter laden with a sack
of Wood's coin upon his shoulders, if we are agreed about the price, and
my scarlet lies ready cut upon the counter, if he then gives me the word
of command, to receive my money in Wood's coin, and calls me a
"disaffected Jacobite dog" for refusing it (although I am as loyal a
subject as himself, and without hire) and thereupon seizes my cloth,
leaving me the price in his odious copper, and bids me take my remedy:
In this case, I shall hardly be brought to think that I am left to my
own will. I shall therefore on such occasions, first order the porter
aforesaid to go off with his pack, and then see the money in silver and
gold in my possession before I cut or measure my cloth. But if a common
soldier drinks his pot first, and then offers payment in Wood's
halfpence, the landlady may be under some difficulty; For if she
complains to his captain or ensign, they are likewise officers, included
in this general order for encouraging these halfpence to pass as current
money. If she goes to a justice of peace, he is also an officer, to whom
this general order is directed. I do therefore advise her to follow my
practice, which I have already begun, and be paid for her goods before
she parts with them. However I should have been content, for some
reasons, that the military gentlemen had been excepted by name, because
I have heard it said, that their discipline is best confined within
their own district.

His Majesty in the conclusion of his answer to the address of the House
of Lords against Wood's coin, is pleased to say that "he will do
everything in his power for the satisfaction of his people." It should
seem therefore, that the recalling the patent is not to be understood as
a thing in his power. But however since the law does not oblige us to
receive this coin, and consequently the patent leaves it to our
voluntary choice, there is nothing remaining to preserve us from rain
but that the whole kingdom should continue in a firm determinate
resolution never to receive or utter this fatal coin:[20]

[Footnote 20: So ready was the response to this suggestion of Swift's,
that it was found necessary for tradesmen to take precautions to have it
publicly known that they were in no way connected with Wood and his
money, The following is a copy of an advertisement which illustrates
this:

"Whereas several persons in this kingdom suspect that John Molyneux of
Meath Street, ironmonger, and his brother Daniel Molyneux, of Essex
Street, ironmonger, are interested in the patent obtained by William
Wood for coining of halfpence and farthings for this kingdom.

"Now we the said John Molyneux and Daniel Molyneux, in order to satisfy
the public, do hereby declare, that we are in no way concerned with the
said Wood in relation to his said patent; And that we never were
possessed of any of the said halfpence or farthings, except one
halfpence and one farthing, which I the said John Molyneux received in a
post-letter, and which I immediately afterwards delivered to one of the
Lords-Justices of Ireland.

"And we do further declare, that we will not directly or indirectly, be
anyways concerned with the said Wood's halfpence or farthings; but on
the contrary, act to the great advantage and satisfaction of this
kingdom, as good, loving and faithful subjects ought to do. And we do
further declare, that to the best of our knowledge, the said William
Wood is not in this kingdom.

"Given under our hands in Dublin this 22d. day of August 1724.

"JOHN MOLYNEUX

"DAN. MOLYNEUX."


Another ran as follows:


"ADVERTISEMENT.

"Whereas, I, Thomas Handy, of Meath Street, Dublin, did receive by the
last packet, from a person in London, to whom I am an entire stranger,
bills of lading for eleven casks of Wood's halfpence, shipped at
Bristol, and consigned to me by the said person on his own proper
account, of which I had not the least notice until I received the said
bills of lading.

"Now I, the said Thomas Handy, being highly sensible of the duty and
regard which every honest man owes to his country and to his
fellow-subjects, do hereby declare, that I will not be concerned,
directly or indirectly, in entering, landing, importing, receiving, or
uttering any of the said Wood's halfpence, for that I am fully
convinced, as well from the addresses of both Houses of Parliament, as
otherwise, that the importing and uttering the said halfpence will be
destructive to this nation, and prejudicial to his Majesty's revenue.

"And of this my resolution I gave notice by letter to the person who
sent me the bills of lading, the very day I received them, and have sent
back the said bills to him.

"THO. HANDY.

"Dublin, 29th. August, 1724." [T.S.]]

After which, let the officers to whom these orders are directed, (I
would willingly except the military) come with their exhortations,
their arguments and their eloquence, to persuade us to find our interest
in our undoing. Let Wood and his accomplices travel about the country
with cart-loads of their ware, and see who will take it off their hands,
there will be no fear of his being robbed, for a highwayman would scorn
to touch it.

I am only in pain how the commissioners of the revenue will proceed in
this juncture; because I am told they are obliged by act of Parliament
to take nothing but gold and silver in payment for His Majesty's
customs, and I think they cannot justly offer this coinage of Mr. Wood
to others, unless they will be content to receive it themselves.

The sum of the whole is this. The "Committee advises the King to send
immediate orders to all his officers here, that Wood's coin be suffered
and permitted without any let, suit, trouble, &c. to pass and be
received as current money by such as shall be willing to receive the
same." It is probable, that the first willing receivers may be those who
must receive it whether they will or no, at least under the penalty of
losing an office. But the landed undepending men, the merchants, the
shopkeepers and bulk of the people, I hope, and am almost confident,
will never receive it. What must the consequence be? The owners will
sell it for as much as they can get. Wood's halfpence will come to be
offered for six a penny (yet then he will be a sufficient gainer) and
the necessary receivers will be losers of two-thirds in their salaries
or pay.

This puts me in mind of a passage I was told many years ago in England.
At a quarter-sessions in Leicester, the justices had wisely decreed, to
take off a halfpenny in a quart from the price of ale. One of them, who
came in after the thing was determined, being informed of what had
passed, said thus: "Gentlemen; you have made an order, that ale should
be sold in our country for three halfpence a quart: I desire you will
now make another to appoint who must drink it, for _by G-- I will
not_."[21]

[Footnote 21: The following broadside, ascribed to Swift, but written
probably by Sheridan, further amusingly illustrates the point Swift
makes. The broadside was printed by John Harding:

"Another Letter to Mr. Harding the printer, upon occasion of the Report
of the Committee of the Lords of His Majesty's Most Honourable
Privy-Council, in relation to Mr. Wood's halfpence and farthings, etc.,
lately published.

"Mr. Harding,--Although this letter also is directed to you, yet you
know that it is intended for the benefit of the whole kingdom, and
therefore I pray make it public, and take care to disperse it.

"The design of it is only to desire all people to take notice, That
whatever apprehensions some persons seem to be under on account of the
above-mentioned report concerning Mr. Wood's halfpence and farthings,
yet the utmost advice which the right honourable Committee have thought
fit to give His Majesty, is, That a certain sum of the said halfpence
and farthings may be received as current money by such as shall be
willing to receive the same. And if we are willing to ruin ourselves and
our country, I think we are not to be pitied.

"Upon this occasion I would only tell my countrymen a short story.

"A certain King of Great Britain who spoke broad Scotch, and being
himself a man of wit, loved both to hear and speak things that were
humorous, had once a petition preferred to him, in which the petitioner,
having set forth his own merits, most humbly prayed His Majesty to grant
him letters-patent for receiving a shilling from every one of his
subjects who should be willing to give so much to him. 'In gude troth,'
said the King, 'a very reasonable petition. Let every man give thee twa
shillings gin he be willing so to do, and thou shalt have full liberty
to receive it.' 'But,' says the petitioner, 'I desire that this clause
may be inserted in my patent, That every man who refuses to give me a
shilling, should appear at Westminster Hall to shew cause why he so
refuses.' 'This also,' says the King, 'shall be granted thee, but always
with this proviso, that the man be willing to come.'