"I am your, etc.

"MISOXULOS."]


I must beg leave to caution your lordships and worships in one
particular. Wood hath graciously promised to load us at present only
with forty thousand pounds of his coin, till the exigences of the
kingdom require the rest. I entreat you will never suffer Mr. Wood to be
a judge of your exigences. While there is one piece of silver or gold
remaining in the kingdom he will call it an exigency, he will double his
present _quantum_ by stealth as soon as he can, and will have the
remainder still to the good. He will pour his own raps[22]and
counterfeits upon us: France and Holland will do the same; nor will our
own coiners at home be behind them: To confirm which I have now in my
pocket a rap or counterfeit halfpenny in imitation of his, but so ill
performed, that in my conscience I believe it is not of his coining.

[Footnote 22: The word Rap is probably a contraction of "raparee," and
was the name given to the tokens that passed current in Ireland for
copper coins of small value. Generally it referred to debased coins;
hence it may be allied to "raparee," who might be considered as a
debased citizen. The raparees were so called from the rapary or
half-pike they carried. [T.S.]]

I must now desire your lordships and worships that you will give great
allowance for this long undigested paper, I find myself to have gone
into several repetitions, which were the effects of haste, while new
thoughts fell in to add something to what I had said before. I think I
may affirm that I have fully answered every paragraph in the Report,
which although it be not unartfully drawn, and is perfectly in the
spirit of a pleader who can find the most plausible topics in behalf of
his client, yet there was no great skill required to detect the many
mistakes contained in it, which however are by no means to be charged
upon the right honourable Committee, but upon the most false impudent
and fraudulent representations of Wood and his accomplices. I desire one
particular may dwell upon your minds, although I have mentioned it more
than once; That after all the weight laid upon precedents there is not
one produced in the whole Report, of a patent for coining copper in
England to pass in Ireland, and only two patents referred to (for indeed
there were no more) which were both passed in Ireland, by references to
the King's Council here, both less advantageous to the coiner than this
of Wood, and in both securities given to receive the coin at every call,
and give gold and silver in lieu of it. This demonstrates the most
flagrant falsehood and impudence of Wood, by which he would endeavour to
make the right honourable Committee his instruments, (for his own
illegal and exorbitant gain,) to ruin a kingdom, which hath deserved
quite different treatment.

I am very sensible that such a work as I have undertaken might have
worthily employed a much better pen. But when a house is attempted to be
robbed it often happens that the weakest in the family runs first to
stop the door. All the assistance I had were some informations from an
eminent person,[23] whereof I am afraid I have spoiled a few by
endeavouring to make them of a piece with my own productions, and the
rest I was not able to manage: I was in the case of David who could not
move in the armour of Saul, and therefore I rather chose to attack this
"uncircumcised Philistine (Wood I mean) with a sling and a stone." And I
may say for Wood's honour as well as my own, that he resembles Goliath
in many circumstances, very applicable to the present purpose; For
Goliath had "a helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a
coat of mail, and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of
brass, and he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass
between his shoulders." In short he was like Mr. Wood, all over brass;
And "he defied the armies of the living God." Goliath's condition of
combat were likewise the same with those of Wood. "If he prevail against
us, then shall we be his servants:" But if it happens that I prevail
over him, I renounce the other part of the condition, he shall never be
a servant of mine, for I do not think him fit to be trusted in any
honest man's shop.

[Footnote 23: Mr. Robert Lindsay, a Dublin lawyer, assisted Swift on the
legal points raised in the Drapier's letters. This is the Mr. Lindsay,
counsellor-at-law, to whom Swift submitted a case concerning a Mr.
Gorman (see Scott's edit., vol. xix., p. 294). Mr. Lindsay is supposed
to be the author of two letters addressed to Chief Justice Whitshed on
the matter of his conduct towards the grand jury which discharged
Harding the printer (see Scott's edit., vol. vi., p. 467). [T.S.]]

I will conclude with my humble desire and request which I made in my
second letter; That your lordships and worships would please to order a
declaration to be drawn up expressing, in the strongest terms, your firm
resolutions never to receive or utter any of Wood's halfpence or
farthings, and forbidding your tenants to receive them. That the said
declaration may be signed by as many persons as possible who have
estates in this kingdom, and be sent down to your several tenants
aforesaid.[24]

[Footnote 24: A Declaration, pursuant to this request, was signed soon
after by the most considerable persons of the kingdom, which was
universally spread and of great use. [F.]

"The humble petition of the lord-mayor, sheriffs, commons, and citizens
of the city of Dublin, in Common Council assembled," was issued as a
broadside on 8th September, 1724. See also Appendix IX. [T.S.]]

And if the dread of Wood's halfpence should continue till next
quarter-sessions (which I hope it will not) the gentlemen of every
county will then have a fair opportunity of declaring against them with
unanimity and zeal.

I am with the greatest respect,
  (May it please your lordships and worships)
                  Your most dutiful
                        and obedient servant,
                                            M.B.

Aug. 25, 1724.



LETTER IV.

A LETTER TO THE WHOLE PEOPLE OF IRELAND.


NOTE

The country was now in a very fever of excitement. Everywhere meetings
were held for the purpose of expressing indignation against the
imposition, and addresses from brewers, butchers, flying stationers, and
townspeople generally, were sent in embodying the public protest against
Wood and his coins. Swift fed the flame by publishing songs and ballads
well fitted for the street singers, and appealing to the understandings
of those who he well knew would effectively carry his message to the
very hearths of the poorest labourers. Courtier and student, tradesman
and freeman, thief and prostitute, beggar and loafer, all were alike
carried by an indignation which launched them on a maelstrom of
enthusiasm. So general became the outcry that, in Coxe's words, "the
lords justices refused to issue the orders for the circulation of the
coin.... People of all descriptions and parties flocked in crowds to the
bankers to demand their money, and drew their notes with an express
condition to be paid in gold and silver. The publishers of the most
treasonable pamphlets escaped with impunity, provided Wood and his
patent were introduced into the work. The grand juries could scarcely be
induced to find any bill against such delinquents; no witnesses in the
prosecution were safe in their persons; and no juries were inclined, or
if inclined could venture, to find them guilty."

In such a state of public feeling Swift assumed an entirely new
attitude. He promulgated his "Letter to the Whole People of Ireland"--a
letter which openly struck at the very root of the whole evil, and laid
bare to the public eye the most secret spring of its righteous
indignation. It was not Wood nor his coins, it was the freedom of the
people of Ireland and their just rights and privileges that were being
fought for. He wrote them the letter "to refresh and continue that
spirit so seasonably raised among" them, and in order that they should
plainly understand "that by the laws of God, of NATURE, of NATIONS, and
of your COUNTRY, you ARE, and OUGHT to be as FREE a people as your
brethren in England." The King's prerogative had been held threateningly
over them. What was the King's prerogative? he asked in effect. It was
but the right he enjoyed within the bounds of the law as made by the
people in parliament assembled. The law limits him with his subjects.
Such prerogative he respected and would take up arms to protect against
any who should rebel. But "all government without the consent of the
governed, is the very definition of slavery." The condition of the Irish
nation was such that it was to be expected eleven armed men should
overcome a single man in his shirt; but even if those in power exercise
then power to cramp liberty, a man on the rack may still have "the
liberty of roaring as loud as he thought fit." And the men on the rack
roared to a tune that Walpole had never before heard.

The letter appeared on the 13th October, 1724.[1] The Duke of Grafton
had been recalled and Carteret had taken up the reins of government. For
reasons, either personal or politic, he took Walpole's side. Coxe goes
into considerations on this attitude of Carteret's, but they hardly
concern us here. Suffice it that the Lord Lieutenant joined forces with
the party in the Irish Privy Council, among whom were Midleton and St.
John Brodrick, and on October 27th issued a proclamation offering a
reward of ВЈ300[2] for the discovery of the author of this "wicked and
malicious pamphlet" which highly reflected on his Majesty and his
ministers, and which tended "to alienate the affections of his good
subjects of England and Ireland from each other."

[Footnote 1: Not on October 23rd as the earlier editors print it, and as
Monck Mason, Scott and Mr. Churton Collins repeat.]

[Footnote 2: See Appendix, No. VI.]

The author's name was not made public, nor was it likely to be. There is
no doubt that it was generally known who the author was. In that general
knowledge lies the whole pith of the Biblical quotation circulated
abroad on the heels of the proclamation: "And the people said unto Saul,
shall _Jonathan_ die, who had wrought this great salvation in Israel?
God forbid: as the Lord liveth there shall not one hair of his head fall
to the ground, for he hath wrought with God this day: So the people
rescued _Jonathan_ that he died not."

Swift remained very much alive. Harding, for printing the obnoxious
letter, had been arrested and imprisoned, and the Crown proceeded with
his prosecution. In such circumstances Swift was not likely to remain
idle. On the 26th October he addressed a letter to Lord Chancellor
Midleton in defence of the Drapier's writings, and practically
acknowledged himself to be the author.[3] It was not actually printed
until 1735, but there is no doubt that Midleton received it at the time
it was written. What effect it had on the ultimate issue is not known;
but Midleton's conduct justifies the confidence Swift placed in him. The
Grand Jury of the Michaelmas term of 1724 sat to consider the bill
against Harding. On the 11th of November Swift addressed to them his
"Seasonable Advice." The bill was thrown out. Whitshed, the Chief
Justice, consistently with his action on a previous occasion (see vol.
vii.), angrily remonstrated with the jury, demanded of them their
reasons for such a decision, and finally dissolved them. This
unconstitutional, and even disgraceful conduct, however, served but to
accentuate the resentment of the people against Wood and the patent, and
the Crown fared no better by a second Grand Jury. The second jury
accompanied its rejection of the bill by a presentment against the
patent,[4] and the defeat of the "prerogative" became assured. Every
where the Drapier was acclaimed the saviour of his country. Any person
who could scribble a doggerel or indite a tract rushed into print, and
now Whitshed was harnessed to Wood in a pillory of contemptuous
ridicule. Indeed, so bitter was the outcry against the Lord Chief
Justice, that it is said to have hastened his death. The cities of
Dublin, Cork and Waterford passed resolutions declaring the uttering of
Wood's halfpence to be highly prejudicial to his Majesty's revenue and
to the trades of the kingdom. The Drapier was now the patriot, and the
whole nation responded to his appeal to assist him in its own defence.

[Footnote 3: The highly wrought up story about Swift's butler, narrated
by Sheridan, Deane Swift and Scott, is nothing but a sample of
eighteenth century "sensationalism." Swift never bothered himself about
what his servants would say with regard to the authorship of the
Letters. Certainly this letter to Midleton proves that he was not at all
afraid of the consequences of discovery.]

[Footnote 4: See Appendix V.]

The text of the present reprint is based on that given by Sir Walter
Scott, collated with the original edition and with that reprinted in
"Fraud Detected" (1725). Faulkner's text of 1735 has also been
consulted.

[T.S.]



[Illustration:
             A

          **LETTER**

           TO THE
       **WHOLE People**
             OF

         **IRELAND**.


   _By_ M.B. _Drapier_.

AUTHOR of the LETTER to the
    _SHOP-KEEPERS_, &c.

         _DUBLIN:_

   Printed by _John Harding_ in
_Molesworth's-Court_ in _Fishamble Street_.
]



LETTER IV.

A LETTER TO THE WHOLE PEOPLE OF IRELAND.


MY DEAR COUNTRYMEN,

Having already written three letters upon so disagreeable a subject as
Mr. Wood and his halfpence; I conceived my task was at an end: But I
find, that cordials must be frequently applied to weak constitutions,
political as well as natural. A people long used to hardships, lose by
degrees the very notions of liberty, they look upon themselves as
creatures at mercy, and that all impositions laid on them by a stronger
hand, are, in the phrase of the Report, legal and obligatory. Hence
proceeds that poverty and lowness of spirit, to which a kingdom may be
subject as well as a particular person. And when Esau came fainting from
the field at the point to die, it is no wonder that he sold his
birthright for a mess of pottage.

I thought I had sufficiently shewn to all who could want instruction, by
what methods they might safely proceed, whenever this coin should be
offered to them; and I believe there hath not been for many ages an
example of any kingdom so firmly united in a point of great importance,
as this of ours is at present, against that detestable fraud. But
however, it so happens that some weak people begin to be alarmed anew,
by rumours industriously spread. Wood prescribes to the newsmongers in
London what they are to write. In one of their papers published here by
some obscure printer (and probably with no good design) we are told,
that "the Papists in Ireland have entered into an association against
his coin," although it be notoriously known, that they never once
offered to stir in the matter; so that the two Houses of Parliament, the
Privy-council, the great number of corporations, the lord mayor and
aldermen of Dublin, the grand juries, and principal gentlemen of
several counties are stigmatized in a lump under the name of "Papists."

This impostor and his crew do likewise give out, that, by refusing to
receive his dross for sterling, we "dispute the King's prerogative, are
grown ripe for rebellion, and ready to shake off the dependency of
Ireland upon the crown of England." To countenance which reports he hath
published a paragraph in another newspaper, to let us know that "the
Lord Lieutenant is ordered to come over immediately to settle his
halfpence."

I entreat you, my dear countrymen, not to be under the least concern
upon these and the like rumours, which are no more than the last howls
of a dog dissected alive, as I hope he hath sufficiently been. These
calumnies are the only reserve that is left him. For surely our
continued and (almost) unexampled loyalty will never be called in
question for not suffering ourselves to be robbed of all that we have,
by one obscure ironmonger.

As to disputing the King's prerogative, give me leave to explain to
those who are ignorant, what the meaning of that word _prerogative_ is.

The Kings of these realms enjoy several powers, wherein the laws have
not interposed: So they can make war and peace without the consent of
Parliament; and this is a very great prerogative. But if the Parliament
doth not approve of the war, the King must bear the charge of it out of
his own purse, and this is as great a check on the crown. So the King
hath a prerogative to coin money without consent of Parliament. But he
cannot compel the subject to take that money except it be sterling, gold
or silver; because herein he is limited by law. Some princes have indeed
extended their prerogative further than the law allowed them; wherein
however, the lawyers of succeeding ages, as fond as they are of
precedents, have never dared to justify them. But to say the truth, it
is only of late times that prerogative hath been fixed and ascertained.
For whoever reads the histories of England, will find that some former
Kings, and these none of the worst, have upon several occasions ventured
to control the laws with very little ceremony or scruple, even later
than the days of Queen Elizabeth. In her reign that pernicious counsel
of sending base money hither, very narrowly failed of losing the
kingdom, being complained of by the lord-deputy, the council, and the
whole body of the English here:[5] So that soon after her death it was
recalled by her successor, and lawful money paid in exchange.

[Footnote 5: See Moryson's "Itinerary" (Pt. ii., pp. 90, 196 and 262),
where an account is given which fully bears out Swift.[T.S.]]

Having thus given you some notion of what is meant by the King's
"prerogative," as far as a tradesman can be thought capable of
explaining it, I will only add the opinion of the great Lord Bacon: That
"as God governs the world by the settled laws of nature, which he hath
made, and never transcends those laws but upon high important occasions;
so among earthly princes, those are the wisest and the best, who govern
by the known laws of the country, and seldomest make use of their
prerogative."[6]

[Footnote 6: The words in inverted commas appear to be a reminiscence
rather than a quotation. I have not traced the sentence, as it stands,
in Bacon; but the regular government of the world by the laws of nature,
as contrasted with the exceptional disturbance of these laws, is
enunciated in Bacon's "Confession of Faith," while the dangers of a
strained prerogative are urged in the "Essay on Empire." Bacon certainly
gives no support to Swift's limits of the prerogative as regards
coinage. [CRAIK.]]

Now, here you may see that the vile accusation of Wood and his
accomplices, charging us with "disputing the King's prerogative" by
refusing his brass, can have no place, because compelling the subject to
take any coin which is not sterling is no part of the King's
prerogative, and I am very confident if it were so, we should be the
last of his people to dispute it, as well from that inviolable loyalty
we have always paid to His Majesty, as from the treatment we might in
such a case justly expect from some who seem to think, we have neither
common sense nor common senses. But God be thanked, the best of them are
only our fellow-subjects, and not our masters. One great merit I am sure
we have, which those of English birth can have no pretence to, that our
ancestors reduced this kingdom to the obedience of England, for which we
have been rewarded with a worse climate, the privilege of being governed
by laws to which we do not consent, a ruined trade, a House of Peers
without jurisdiction, almost an incapacity for all employments; and the
dread of Wood's halfpence.

But we are so far from disputing the King's prerogative in coining, that
we own he has power to give a patent to any man for setting his royal
image and superscription upon whatever materials he pleases, and liberty
to the patentee to offer them in any country from England to Japan, only
attended with one small limitation, That nobody alive is obliged to take
them.

Upon these considerations I was ever against all recourse to England for
a remedy against the present impending evil, especially when I observed
that the addresses of both Houses, after long expectance, produced
nothing but a REPORT altogether in favour of Wood, upon which I made
some observations in a former letter, and might at least have made as
many more. For it is a paper of as singular a nature as I ever beheld.

But I mistake; for before this Report was made, His Majesty's most
gracious answer to the House of Lords was sent over and printed, wherein
there are these words, "granting the patent for coining halfpence and
farthings AGREEABLE TO THE PRACTICE OF HIS ROYAL PREDECESSORS, &c." That
King Charles 2d. and King James 2d. (AND THEY ONLY) did grant patents
for this purpose is indisputable, and I have shewn it at large. Their
patents were passed under the great seal of Ireland by references to
Ireland, the copper to be coined in Ireland, the patentee was bound on
demand to receive his coin back in Ireland, and pay silver and gold in
return. Wood's patent was made under the great seal of England, the
brass coined in England, not the least reference made to Ireland, the
sum immense, and the patentee under no obligation to receive it again
and give good money for it: This I only mention, because in my private
thoughts I have sometimes made a query, whether the penner of those
words in His Majesty's most gracious answer, "agreeable to the practice
of his royal predecessors," had maturely considered the several
circumstances, which, in my poor opinion seem to make a difference.

Let me now say something concerning the other great cause of some
people's fear, as Wood has taught the London newswriter to express it.
That "his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant is coming over to settle Wood's
halfpence."

We know very well that the Lords Lieutenants for several years past have
not thought this kingdom worthy the honour of their residence, longer
than was absolutely necessary for the King's business, which
consequently wanted no speed in the dispatch; and therefore it naturally
fell into most men's thoughts, that a new governor coming at an unusual
time must portend some unusual business to be done, especially if the
common report be true, that the Parliament prorogued to I know not when,
is by a new summons (revoking that prorogation) to assemble soon after
his arrival: For which extraordinary proceeding the lawyers on t'other
side the water have by great good fortune found two precedents.

All this being granted, it can never enter into my head that so little a
creature as Wood could find credit enough with the King and his
ministers to have the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland sent hither in a hurry
upon his errand.

For let us take the whole matter nakedly as it lies before us, without
the refinements of some people, with which we have nothing to do. Here
is a patent granted under the great seal of England, upon false
suggestions, to one William Wood for coining copper halfpence for
Ireland: The Parliament here, upon apprehensions of the worst
consequences from the said patent, address the King to have it recalled;
this is refused, and a committee of the Privy-council report to His
Majesty, that Wood has performed the conditions of his patent. He then
is left to do the best he can with his halfpence; no man being obliged
to receive them; the people here, being likewise left to themselves,
unite as one man, resolving they will have nothing to do with his ware.
By this plain account of the fact it is manifest, that the King and his
ministry are wholly out of the case, and the matter is left to be
disputed between him and us. Will any man therefore attempt to persuade
me, that a Lord Lieutenant is to be dispatched over in great haste
before the ordinary time, and a Parliament summoned by anticipating a
prorogation, merely to put an hundred thousand pounds into the pocket of
a sharper, by the ruin of a most loyal kingdom.

But supposing all this to be true. By what arguments could a Lord
Lieutenant prevail on the same Parliament which addressed with so much
zeal and earnestness against this evil, to pass it into a law? I am sure
their opinion of Wood and his project is not mended since the last
prorogation; and supposing those methods should be used which detractors
tell us have been sometimes put in practice for gaining votes. It is
well known that in this kingdom there are few employments to be given,
and if there were more, it is as well known to whose share they must
fall.

But because great numbers of you are altogether ignorant in the affairs
of your country, I will tell you some reasons why there are so few
employments to be disposed of in this kingdom. All considerable offices
for life here are possessed by those to whom the reversions were
granted, and these have been generally followers of the chief governors,
or persons who had interest in the Court of England. So the Lord
Berkeley of Stratton[7] holds that great office of master of the rolls,
the Lord Palmerstown[8] is first remembrancer worth near 2000_l. per
ann._ One Dodington[9] secretary to the Earl of Pembroke,[10] begged the
reversion of clerk of the pells worth 2500_l._ a year, which he now
enjoys by the death of the Lord Newtown. Mr. Southwell is secretary of
state,[11] and the Earl of Burlington[12] lord high treasurer of Ireland
by inheritance. These are only a few among many others which I have been
told of, but cannot remember. Nay the reversion of several employments
during pleasure are granted the same way. This among many others is a
circumstance whereby the kingdom of Ireland is distinguished from all
other nations upon earth, and makes it so difficult an affair to get
into a civil employ, that Mr. Addison was forced to purchase an old
obscure place, called keeper of the records of Bermingham's Tower of ten
pounds a year, and to get a salary of 400_l._ annexed to it,[13] though
all the records there are not worth half-a-crown, either for curiosity
or use. And we lately saw a favourite secretary descend to be master of
the revels, which by his credit and extortion he hath made pretty
considerable.[14] I say nothing of the under-treasurership worth about
8000_l_. a year, nor the commissioners of the revenue, four of whom
generally live in England; For I think none of these are granted in
reversion. But the test is, that I have known upon occasion some of
these absent officers as keen against the interest of Ireland as if they
had never been indebted to her for a single groat.

[Footnote 7: Berkeley was one of the Junta in Harley's administration of
1710-1714. He had married Sir John Temple's daughter. His connection
with a person so disliked by Swift may account for his inclusion here.
[T.S.]]

[Footnote 8: This was Henry Temple, first Viscount Palmerston, with whom
Swift later had an unpleasant correspondence. Palmerston could not have
been more than seven years old when he was appointed (September 21st,
1680), with Luke King, chief remembrancer of the Court of Exchequer in
Ireland, for their joint lives. King died in 1716, but the grant was
renewed to Palmerston and his son Henry for life. He was raised to the
peerage as Baron Temple of Mount Temple, and Viscount Palmerston of
Palmerston, in March, 1722-1723. Sir Charles Hanbury Williams called him
"Little Broadbottom Palmerston." He died in 1757. [T.S.] ]

[Footnote 9: George Bubb (1691-1762) was Chief Secretary during
Wharton's Lord lieutenancy in 1709. He took the name of Doddington on
the death of his uncle in 1720. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 10: Thomas Herbert, eighth Earl of Pembroke (1656-1733), had
preceded the Earl of Wharton as Lord lieutenant of Ireland. He bears a
high character in history and on four successive coronations, namely,
those of William and Mary, Anne, George I. and George II., he acted as
sword carrier. Although a Tory, even Macaulay acknowledges Pembroke's
high breeding and liberality. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 11: This is the Edward Southwell to whom Archbishop King wrote
the letters quoted from Monck Mason in previous notes. He was the son of
Sir Robert Southwell, the diplomatist and friend of Sir William Temple,
to whom Swift bore a letter of introduction from the latter, soliciting
the office of amanuensis. In June, 1720, Edward Southwell had his salary
as secretary increased by ВЈ300; and in July of the same year the office
was granted to him and his son for life. The Southwell family first came
to Ireland in the reign of James I., at the time of the plantation of
Munster. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 12: Richard Boyle, third Earl of Burlington (or Bridlington of
Yorks), and fourth Earl of Cork (1695-1753), was appointed Lord
High-Treasurer of Ireland in August, 1715. His great-grandfather, the
first Earl of Cork, had held the same office in 1631. The
Lord-lieutenancy of the West Riding of Yorkshire, and the office of
Custos Rotulorum of the North and West Ridings, seem also to have been
inheritances of this family. The third Earl had a taste for
architecture, and spent enormous sums of money in the reconstruction of
Burlington House, a building that was freely satirized by Hogarth and
Lord Hervey. His taste, however, seems to have run to the ornamental
rather than the useful, and its gratification involved him in such
serious financial difficulties, that he was compelled to sell some of
his Irish estates. Swift notes that "My Lord Burlington is now selling
in one article ВЈ9,000 a year in Ireland for ВЈ200,000 which must pay his
debts" (Scott's edit. 1814, vol. xix., p. 129). [T.S.]]

[Footnote 13: This post was found for Addison on his appointment in 1709
as secretary to the Earl of Wharton, Lord-lieutenant of Ireland.
Tickell, in his preface to his edition of Addison's works, says the post
was granted to Addison as a mark of Queen Anne's special favour.
Bermingham's Tower was that part of Dublin Castle in which the records
were kept. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 14: Mr. Hopkins, secretary to the Duke of Grafton. The
exactions made by this gentleman upon the players, in his capacity of
Master of the Revels, are the subject of two satirical poems. [S.]

This may have been John Hopkins, the second son of the Bishop of
Londonderry, who was the author of "Amasia," dedicated to the Duchess of
Grafton. [T.S.]]

I confess, I have been sometimes tempted to wish that this project of
Wood might succeed, because I reflected with some pleasure what a jolly
crew it would bring over among us of lords and squires, and pensioners
of both sexes, and officers civil and military, where we should live
together as merry and sociable as beggars, only with this one abatement,
that we should neither have meat to feed, nor manufactures to clothe us,
unless we could be content to prance about in coats of mail, or eat
brass as ostriches do iron.

I return from this digression to that which gave me the occasion of
making it: And I believe you are now convinced, that if the Parliament
of Ireland were as temptable as any other assembly within a mile of
Christendom (which God forbid) yet the managers must of necessity fail
for want of tools to work with. But I will yet go one step further, by
supposing that a hundred new employments were erected on purpose to
gratify compilers; yet still an insuperable difficulty would remain; for
it happens, I know not how, that money is neither Whig nor Tory, neither
of town nor country party, and it is not improbable, that a gentleman
would rather choose to live upon his own estate which brings him gold
and silver, than with the addition of an employment, when his rents and
salary must both be paid in Wood's brass, at above eighty _per cent._
discount.

For these and many other reasons, I am confident you need not be under
the least apprehensions from the sudden expectation of the Lord
Lieutenant,[15] while we continue in our present hearty disposition; to
alter which there is no suitable temptation can possibly be offered:
And if, as I have often asserted from the best authority, the law hath
not left a power in the crown to force any money except sterling upon
the subject, much less can the crown devolve such a power upon another.

[Footnote 15: Lord Carteret, afterwards Earl Granville. See note to "A
Vindication of Lord Carteret," in vol. vii. of present edition of
Swift's works. [T.S.]]

This I speak with the utmost respect to the person and dignity of his
Excellency the Lord Carteret, whose character hath been given me by a
gentleman that hath known him from his first appearance in the world:
That gentleman describes him as a young nobleman of great
accomplishments, excellent learning, regular in his life, and of much
spirit and vivacity. He hath since, as I have heard, been employed
abroad, was principal secretary of state, and is now about the 37th year
of his age appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. From such a governor
this kingdom may reasonably hope for as much prosperity as, under so
many discouragements, it can be capable of receiving.[16]

[Footnote 16: Carteret was an old friend of Swift. On the Earl's
appointment to the Lord-lieutenancy, in April, 1724, Swift wrote him a
letter on the matter of Wood's halfpence, in which he took the liberty
of "an old humble servant, and one who always loved and esteemed" him,
to make known to him the apprehensions the people were under concerning
Mr. Wood's patent. "Neither is it doubted," he wrote, "that when your
excellency shall be thoroughly informed, your justice and compassion for
an injured people, will force you to employ your credit for their
relief." Swift waited for more than a month, and on receiving no reply,
sent a second letter, which Sir Henry Craik justly calls, "a masterpiece
of its kind." It was as follows:

"June 9, 1724.

"MY LORD,

"It is above a month since I took the boldness of writing to your
excellency, upon a subject wherein the welfare of this kingdom is highly
concerned.

"I writ at the desire of several considerable persons here, who could
not be ignorant that I had the honour of being well known to you.

"I could have wished your excellency had condescended so far, as to let
one of your under clerks have signified to me that a letter was
received.

"I have been long out of the world; but have not forgotten what used to
pass among those I lived with while I was in it: and I can say, that
during the experience of many years, and many changes in affairs, your
excellency, and one more, who is not worthy to be compared to you, are
the only great persons that ever refused to answer a letter from me,
without regard to business, party, or greatness; and if I had not a
peculiar esteem for your personal qualities, I should think myself to be
acting a very inferior part in making this complaint.

"I never was so humble, as to be vain upon my acquaintance with men in
power, and always rather chose to avoid it when I was not called.
Neither were their power or titles sufficient, without merit, to make me
cultivate them; of which I have witnesses enough left, after all the
havoc made among them, by accidents of time, or by changes of persons,
measures, and opinions.

"I know not how your conception of yourself may alter, by every new high
station; but mine must continue the same, or alter for the worse.

"I often told a great minister, whom you well know, that I valued him
for being the same man through all the progress of power and place. I
expected the like in your lordship; and still hope that I shall be the
only person who will ever find it otherwise.

"I pray God to direct your excellency in all your good undertakings, and
especially in your government of this kingdom.

"I shall trouble you no more; but remain, with great respect, my Lord,

"Your excellency's most obedient,

"and most humble servant,

"JON. SWIFT."

This letter brought an immediate reply from Carteret, who confessed
himself in the wrong for his silence, and trusted he had not forfeited
Swift's friendship by it. With regard to Mr. Wood's patent, he said that
the matter was under examination, "and till that is over I am not
informed sufficiently to make any other judgment of the matter, than
that which I am naturally led to make, by the general aversion which
appears to it in the whole nation." Swift replied in a charming vein,
and elegantly put his scolding down to the testiness of old age. His
excellency had humbled him. "Therefore, I fortel that you, who could so
easily conquer so captious a person, and of so little consequence, will
quickly subdue this whole kingdom to love and reverence you" (Scott's
ed. 1824, vol. xvi., pp. 430-435). [T.S.]]

It is true indeed, that within the memory of man, there have been
governors of so much dexterity, as to carry points of terrible
consequence to this kingdom, by their power with _those who were in
office_, and by their arts in managing or deluding others with oaths,
affability, and even with dinners. If Wood's brass had in those times
been upon the anvil, it is obvious enough to conceive what methods would
have been taken. Depending persons would have been told in plain terms,
that it was a "service expected from them, under pain of the public
business being put into more complying hands." Others would be allured
by promises. To the country gentleman, besides good words, burgundy and
closeting. It would perhaps have been hinted how "kindly it would be
taken to comply with a royal patent, though it were not compulsory,"
that if any inconveniences ensued, it might be made up with other
"graces or favours hereafter." That "gentlemen ought to consider whether
it were prudent or safe to disgust England:" They would be desired to
"think of some good bills for encouraging of trade, and setting the poor
to work, some further acts against Popery and for uniting Protestants."
There would be solemn engagements that we should "never be troubled with
above forty thousand pounds in his coin, and all of the best and
weightiest sort, for which we should only give our manufactures in
exchange, and keep our gold and silver at home." Perhaps a "seasonable
report of some invasion would have been spread in the most proper
juncture," which is a great smoother of rubs in public proceedings; and
we should have been told that "this was no time to create differences
when the kingdom was in danger."

These, I say, and the like methods would in corrupt times have been
taken to let in this deluge of brass among us; and I am confident would
even then have not succeeded, much less under the administration of so
excellent a person as the Lord Carteret, and in a country where the
people of all ranks, parties and denominations are convinced to a man,
that the utter undoing of themselves and their posterity for ever will
be dated from the admission of that execrable coin; that if it once
enters, it can be no more confined to a small or moderate quantity, than
the plague can be confined to a few families, and that no equivalent can
be given by any earthly power, any more than a dead carcass can be
recovered to life by a cordial.

There is one comfortable circumstance in this universal opposition to
Mr. Wood, that the people sent over hither from England to fill up our
vacancies ecclesiastical, civil and military, are all on our side:
Money, the great divider of the world, hath by a strange revolution,
been the great uniter of a most divided people. Who would leave a
hundred pounds a year in England (a country of freedom) to be paid a
thousand in Ireland out of Wood's exchequer. The gentleman they have
lately made primate[17] would never quit his seat in an English House of
Lords, and his preferments at Oxford and Bristol, worth twelve hundred
pounds a year, for four times the denomination here, but not half the
value; therefore I expect to hear he will be as good an Irishman, upon
this article, as any of his brethren, or even of us who have had the
misfortune to be born in this island. For those, who, in the common
phrase, do not "come hither to learn the language," would never change a
better country for a worse, to receive brass instead of gold.

[Footnote 17: Hugh Boulter (1672-1742) was appointed Archbishop of
Armagh, August 31st, 1724. He had been a fellow of Magdalen College,
Oxford, and had served the King as chaplain in Hanover, in 1719. In this
latter year he was promoted to the Bishopric of Bristol, and the Deanery
of Christ Church, Oxford. His appointment as Primate of Ireland, was in
accordance with Walpole's plan for governing Ireland from England.
Walpole had no love for Carteret, and no faith in his power or
willingness to aid him in his policy. Indeed, Carteret was sent to
Ireland to be got out of the way. He was governor nominally; the real
governor being Walpole in the person of the new Primate. What were
Boulter's instructions may be gathered from the manner in which he
carried out his purpose. Of a strong character and of untiring energy,
Boulter set about his work in a fashion which showed that Walpole had
chosen well. Nothing of any importance that transpired in Ireland, no
fact of any interest about the individuals in office, no movement of any
suspected or suspicious person escaped his vigilance. His letters
testify to an unabating zeal for the English government of Irish affairs
by Englishmen in the English interest. His perseverance knew no
obstacles; he continued against all difficulties in his dogged and yet
able manner to establish some order out of the chaos of Ireland's
condition. But his government was the outcome of a profound conviction
that only in the interest of England should Ireland be governed. If
Ireland could be made prosperous and contented, so much more good would
accrue to England. But that prosperity and that contentment had nothing
whatever to do with safeguarding Irish institutions, or recognizing the
rights of the Irish people. If he gave way to popular opinion at all, it
was because it was either expedient or beneficial to the English
interest. If he urged, as he did, the founding of Protestant Charter
schools, it was because this would strengthen the English power. To
preserve that he obtained the enactment of a statute which excluded
Roman Catholics from the legal profession and the offices of legal
administration; and another act of his making actually disfranchised
them altogether. Boulter was also a member of the Irish Privy Council,
and Lord Justice of Ireland. The latter office he held under the
vice-regencies of Carteret, Dorset and Devonshire. His secretary,
Ambrose Philips, had been connected with him, in earlier years, in
contributing to a periodical entitled, "The Free Thinker," which
appeared in 1718. Philips, in 1769, supervised the publication of
Boulter's "Letters," which were published at Oxford. [T.S.]]

Another slander spread by Wood and his emissaries is, that by opposing
him we discover an inclination to "shake off our dependence upon the
crown of England." Pray observe how important a person is this same
William Wood, and how the public weal of two kingdoms is involved in
his private interest. First, all those who refuse to take his coin are
Papists; for he tells us that "none but Papists are associated against
him;" Secondly, they "dispute the King's prerogative;" Thirdly, "they
are ripe for rebellion," and Fourthly, they are going to "shake off
their dependence upon the crown of England;" That is to say, "they are
going to choose another king;" For there can be no other meaning in this
expression, however some may pretend to strain it.

And this gives me an opportunity of explaining, to those who are
ignorant, another point, which hath often swelled in my breast. Those
who come over hither to us from England, and some weak people among
ourselves, whenever in discourse we make mention of liberty and
property, shake their heads, and tell us, that Ireland is a "depending
kingdom," as if they would seem, by this phrase, to intend that the
people of Ireland is in some state of slavery or dependence different
from those of England; Whereas a "depending kingdom" is a modern term of
art, unknown, as I have heard, to all ancient civilians, and writers
upon government; and Ireland is on the contrary called in some statutes
an "imperial crown," as held only from God; which is as high a style as
any kingdom is capable of receiving. Therefore by this expression, a
"depending kingdom," there is no more understood than that by a statute
made here in the 33d year of Henry 8th. "The King and his successors are
to be kings imperial of this realm as united and knit to the imperial
crown of England." I have looked over all the English and Irish statutes
without finding any law that makes Ireland depend upon England, any more
than England does upon Ireland. We have indeed obliged ourselves to have
the same king with them, and consequently they are obliged to have the
same king with us. For the law was made by our own Parliament, and our
ancestors then were not such fools (whatever they were in the preceding
reign) to bring themselves under I know not what dependence, which is
now talked of without any ground of law, reason or common sense.[18]

[Footnote 18: This was the passage selected by the government upon which
to found its prosecution. As Sir Walter Scott points out, it "contains
the pith and essence of the whole controversy." [T.S.]]

Let whoever think otherwise, I M.B. Drapier, desire to be excepted,[19]
for I declare, next under God, I _depend_ only on the King my sovereign,
and on the laws of my own country; and I am so far from _depending_ upon
the people of England, that if they should ever rebel against my
sovereign (which God forbid) I would be ready at the first command from
His Majesty to take arms against them, as some of _my_ countrymen did
against _theirs_ at Preston. And if such a rebellion should prove so
successful as to fix the Pretender on the throne of England, I would
venture to transgress that statute so far as to lose every drop of my
blood to hinder him from being King of Ireland.[20]

[Footnote 19: For a humorous story which accounts for Swift's use of the
words "desire to be excepted," see the Drapier's sixth letter. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 20: Great offence was taken at this paragraph. Swift refers to
it again in his sixth letter. Sir Henry Craik, in his "Life of Jonathan
Swift" (vol. ii., p. 74), has an acute note on this paragraph, and the
one already alluded to in the sixth letter. I take the liberty of
transcribing it: "The manoeuvre by which Swift managed to associate a
suspicion of Jacobitism with his opponents, is one peculiarly
characteristic; and so is the skill with which, in the next letter, he
meets the objections to this paragraph, by half offering an extent of
submission that might equally be embarrassing--a submission even to
Jacobitism, if Jacobitism were to become strong enough. He does not
commit himself, however: he fears a 'spiteful interpretation.' In short,
he places the English Cabinet on the horns of a dilemma. 'Am I to resist
Jacobitism? Then what becomes of your doctrine of Ireland's dependency?'
or, 'Am I to become a Jacobite, if England bids me? Then what becomes of
your Protestant succession? Must even that give way to your desire to
tyrannize?'" [T.S.]]

'Tis true indeed, that within the memory of man, the Parliaments of
England have sometimes assumed the power of binding this kingdom by laws
enacted there,[21] wherein they were at first openly opposed (as far as
truth, reason and justice are capable of opposing) by the famous Mr.
Molineux,[22] an English gentleman born here, as well as by several of
the greatest patriots, and best Whigs in England; but the love and
torrent of power prevailed. Indeed the arguments on both sides were
invincible. For in reason, all government without the consent of the
governed is the very definition of slavery: But in fact, eleven men well
armed will certainly subdue one single man in his shirt. But I have
done. For those who have used power to cramp liberty have gone so far as
to resent even the liberty of complaining, although a man upon the rack
was never known to be refused the liberty of roaring as loud as he
thought fit.

[Footnote 21: Particularly in the reign of William III., when this
doctrine of English supremacy was assumed, in order to discredit the
authority of the Irish Parliament summoned by James II. [S.]

See note on Poyning's Law, p. 77. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 22: See note on p. 167. [T.S.]]

And as we are apt to sink too much under unreasonable fears, so we are
too soon inclined to be raised by groundless hopes (according to the
nature of all consumptive bodies like ours) thus, it hath been given
about for several days past, that somebody in England empowered a second
somebody to write to a third somebody here to assure us, that we "should
no more be troubled with those halfpence." And this is reported to have
been done by the same person, who was said to have sworn some months
ago, that he would "ram them down our throats" (though I doubt they
would stick in our stomachs) but whichever of these reports is true or
false, it is no concern of ours. For in this point we have nothing to do
with English ministers, and I should be sorry it lay in their power to
redress this grievance or to enforce it: For the "Report of the
Committee" hath given me a surfeit. The remedy is wholly in your own
hands, and therefore I have digressed a little in order to refresh and
continue that spirit so seasonably raised amongst you, and to let you
see that by the laws of GOD, of NATURE, of NATIONS, and of your own
COUNTRY, you ARE and OUGHT to be as FREE a people as your brethren in
England.

If the pamphlets published at London by Wood and his journeymen in
defence of his cause, were reprinted here, and that our countrymen could
be persuaded to read them, they would convince you of his wicked design
more than all I shall ever be able to say. In short I make him a perfect
saint in comparison of what he appears to be from the writings of those
whom he hires to justify his project. But he is so far master of the
field (let others guess the reason) that no London printer dare publish
any paper written in favour of Ireland, and here nobody hath yet been so
bold as to publish anything in favour of him.