The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, D.D. — Volume 06
by Jonathan Swift · English · Gutenberg #12784 · 524,480 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, D.D. — Volume 06
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: The Prose Works of Jonathan Swift, D.D. — Volume 06
Author: Jonathan Swift
Editor: Temple Scott
Release date: June 29, 2004 [eBook #12784]
Most recently updated: October 28, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12784
Credits: Etext produced by Sander van Rijnswou and PG Distributed Proofreaders.
Produced from images provided by the Million Book Project.
HTML file produced by David Widger
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PROSE WORKS OF JONATHAN SWIFT, D.D. — VOLUME 06 ***
_To be completed in 12 volumes, 3s. 6d. each_.
THE PROSE WORKS
OF
JONATHAN SWIFT, D.D.
EDITED BY
TEMPLE SCOTT
VOL. I. A TALE OF A TUB AND OTHER EARLY WORKS.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT. With a biographical introduction by
W.E.H. LECKY, M.P. With Portrait and Facsimiles.
VOL. II. THE JOURNAL TO STELLA.
Edited by FREDERICK RYLAND, M.A.
With two Portraits of Stella and a Facsimile of one of the Letters.
VOLS. III. & IV. WRITINGS ON RELIGION AND THE CHURCH.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT.
With Portraits and Facsimiles of Title-pages.
VOL. V. HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL TRACTS--ENGLISH.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT.
With Portrait and Facsimiles of Title-pages.
VOL. VI. THE DRAPIER'S LETTERS.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT.
With Portrait, Reproductions of Wood's Coinage,
and Facsimiles of Title pages.
VOL. VIII. GULLIVER'S TRAVELS.
Edited by G. RAVENSCROFT DENNIS.
With Portrait, Maps and Facsimiles.
VOL. IX. CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE "EXAMINER," "TATLER," "SPECTATOR," &c.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT.
With Portrait.
VOL. X. HISTORICAL WRITINGS.
Edited by TEMPLE SCOTT.
With Portrait.
_To be followed by:_
VOL. VII. HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL TRACTS--IRISH.
VOL. XI. LITERARY ESSAYS.
VOL. XII. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND INDEX TO COMPLETE WORKS.
* * * * *
LONDON: GEORGE BELL AND SONS.
BOHN'S STANDARD LIBRARY
* * * * *
THE PROSE WORKS OF JONATHAN SWIFT
VOL. VI
GEORGE BELL AND SONS
LONDON: YORK ST. COVENT GARDEN
CAMBRIDGE: DEIGHTON, BELL & CO.
NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN CO.
BOMBAY: A.H. WHEELER & CO.
[Illustration: Jonathan Swift from a painting in the National Gallery
of Ireland once in the possession of judge Berwick and ascribed to
Francis Bindon]
THE PROSE WORKS
OF
JONATHAN SWIFT, D.D.
EDITED BY
TEMPLE SCOTT
VOL. VI
THE DRAPIER'S LETTERS
LONDON
GEORGE BELL AND SONS
1903
CHISWICK PRESS CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO
TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON
INTRODUCTION
In 1714 Swift left England for Ireland, disappointed, distressed, and
worn out with anxiety in the service of the Harley Ministry. On his
installation as Dean of St. Patrick's he had been received in Dublin
with jeering and derision. He had even been mocked at in his walks
abroad. In 1720, however, he entered for the second time the field of
active political polemics, and began with renewed energy the series of
writings which not only placed him at the head and front of the
political writers of the day, but secured for him a place in the
affections of the people of Ireland--a place which has been kept sacred
to him even to the present time. A visitor to the city of Dublin
desirous of finding his way to St. Patrick's Cathedral need but to ask
for the Dean's Church, and he will be understood. There is only one
Dean, and he wrote the "Drapier's Letters." The joy of the people of
Dublin on the withdrawal of Wood's Patent found such permanent
expression, that it has descended as oral tradition, and what was
omitted from the records of Parliament and the proceedings of Clubs and
Associations founded in the Drapier's honour, has been embalmed in the
hearts of the people, whose love he won, and whose homage it was ever
his pride to accept.
The spirit of Swift which Grattan invoked had, even in Grattan's time,
power to stir hearts to patriotic enthusiasm. That spirit has not died
out yet, and the Irish people still find it seasonable and refreshing to
be awakened by it to a true sense of the dignity and majesty of
Ireland's place in the British Empire.
A dispassionate student of the condition of Ireland between the years
of Swift's birth and death--between, say, 1667 and 1745--could rise from
that study in no unprejudiced mood. It would be difficult for him to
avoid the conclusion that the government of Ireland by England had not
only degraded the people of the vassal nation, but had proved a disgrace
and a stigma on the ruling nation. It was a government of the masses by
the classes, for no other than selfish ends. It ended, as all such
governments must inevitably end, in impoverishing the people, in
wholesale emigration, in starvation and even death, in revolt, and in
fostering among those who remained, and among those whom circumstances
exiled, the dangerous spirit of resentment and rebellion which is the
outcome of the sense of injustice. It has also served, even to this day,
to give vitality to those associations that have from time to time
arisen in Ireland for the object of realizing that country's
self-government.
It may be argued that the people of Ireland of that time justified
Swift's petition when he prayed to be removed from "this land of slaves,
where all are fools and all are knaves"; but that is no justification
for the injustice. The injustice from which Ireland suffered was a fact.
Its existence was resented with all the indignation with which an
emotional and spiritual people will always resent material obstructions
to the free play of what they feel to be their best powers.
There were no leaders at the time who could see this, and seeing it,
enforce its truth on the dull English mind to move it to saner methods
of dealing with this people. Nor were there any who could order the
resentment into battalions of fighting men to give point to the demands
for equal rights with their English fellow-subjects.
Had Swift been an Irishman by nature as he was by birth, it might have
been otherwise; but Swift was an Irishman by accident, and only became
an Irish patriot by reason of the humanity in him which found indignant
and permanent expression against oppression. Swift's indignation
against the selfish hypocrisy of his fellow-men was the cry from the
pain which the sight of man's inhumanity to man inflicted on his
sensitive and truth-loving nature. The folly and baseness of his
fellow-creatures stung him, as he once wrote to Pope, "to perfect rage
and resentment." Turn where he would, he found either the knave as the
slave driver, or the slave as a fool, and the latter became even a
willing sacrifice. His indignation at the one was hardly greater than
his contempt for the other, and his different feelings found trenchant
expression in such writings as the "Drapier's Letters," the "Modest
Proposal," and "Gulliver's Travels."
It has been argued that the _saeva indignatio_ which lacerated his heart
was the passion of a mad man. To argue thus seems to us to misunderstand
entirely the peculiar qualities of Swift's nature. It was not the mad
man that made the passion; it was rather the passion that made the man
mad. As we understand him, it seems to us that Swift's was an eminently
majestic spirit, moved by the tenderest of human sympathies, and capable
of ennobling love--a creature born to rule and to command, but with all
the noble qualities which go to make a ruler loved. It happened that
circumstances placed him early in his career into poverty and servitude.
He extricated himself from both in time; but his liberation was due to
an assertion of his best powers, and not to a dissimulation of them. Had
he been less honest, he might have risen to a position of great power,
but it would have been at the price of those very qualities which made
him the great man he was. That assertion cost him his natural vocation,
and Swift lived on to rage in the narrow confines of a Dublin Deanery
House. He might have flourished as the greatest of English statesmen--he
became instead a monster, a master-scourger of men, pitiless to them as
they had been blind to him. But monster and master-scourger as he proved
himself, he always took the side of the oppressed as against the
oppressor. The impulse which sent him abroad collecting guineas for
"poor Harrison" was the same impulse which moved him in his study at the
Deanery to write as "M.B. Drapier." On this latter occasion, however, he
also had an opportunity to lay bare the secret springs of oppression, an
opportunity which he was not the man to let go by.
No doubt Swift was not quite disinterested in the motives which prompted
him to enter the political arena for the second time. He hated the
Walpole Ministry in power; he resented his exile in a country whose
people he despised; and he scorned the men who, while they feared him,
had yet had the power to prevent his advancement. But, allowing for
these personal incentives, there was in Swift such a large sympathy for
the degraded condition of the Irish people, such a tender solicitude for
their best welfare, and such a deep-seated zeal for their betterment,
that, in measuring to him his share in the title of patriot, we cannot
but admit that what we may call his public spirit far outweighed his
private spleen. Above all things Swift loved liberty, integrity,
sincerity and justice; and if it be that it was his love for these,
rather than his love for the country, which inspired him to patriotic
efforts, who shall say that he does not still deserve well of us. If a
patriot be a man who nobly teaches a people to become aware of its
highest functions as a nation, then was Swift a great patriot, and he
better deserves that title than many who have been accorded it.
The matter of Wood's Halfpence was a trivial one in itself; but it was
just that kind of a matter which Swift must instantly have appreciated
as the happiest for his purpose. It was a matter which appealed to the
commonest news-boy on the street, and its meaning once made plain, the
principle which gave vitality to the meaning was ready for enunciation
and was assured of intelligent acceptance. In writing the "Drapier's
Letters," he had, to use his own words, seasonably raised a spirit
among the Irish people, and that spirit he continued to refresh, until
when he told them in his Fourth Letter, "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 country rose as one man to the
appeal. Neither the suavities of Carteret nor the intrigues of Walpole
had any chance against the set opposition which met them. The question
to be settled was taken away from the consideration of ministers, and
out of the seclusion of Cabinets into the hands of the People, and
before the public eye. There was but one way in which it could be
settled--the way of the people's will--and it went that way. It does not
at all matter that Walpole finally had his way--that the King's mistress
pocketed her _douceur_, and that Wood retired satisfied with the ample
compensation allowed him. What does matter is that, for the first time
in Irish History, a spirit of national life was breathed into an almost
denationalized people. Beneath the lean and starved ribs of death Swift
planted a soul; it is for this that Irishmen will ever revere his
memory.
In the composition of the "Letters" Swift had set himself a task
peculiarly fitting to his genius. Those qualities of mind which enabled
him to enter into the habits of the lives of footmen, servants, and
lackeys found an even more congenial freedom of play here. His knowledge
of human nature was so profound that he instinctively touched the right
keys, playing on the passions of the common people with a deftness far
surpassing in effect the acquired skill of the mere master of oratory.
He ordered his arguments and framed their language, so that his readers
responded with almost passionate enthusiasm to the call he made upon
them. Allied to his gift of intellectual sympathy with his kind was a
consummate ability in expression, into which he imparted the fullest
value of the intended meaning. His thought lost nothing in its
statement. Writing as he did from the point of view of a tradesman, to
the shopkeepers, farmers, and common people of Ireland, his business was
to speak with them as if he were one of them. He had already laid bare
their grievances caused by the selfish legislation of the English
Parliament, which had ruined Irish manufactures; he had written grimly
of the iniquitous laws which had destroyed the woollen trade of the
country; he had not forgotten the condition of the people as he saw it
on his journeys from Dublin to Cork--a condition which he was later to
reveal in the most terrible of his satirical tracts--and he realized
with almost personal anguish the degradation of the people brought about
by the rapacity and selfishness of a class which governed with no
thought of ultimate consequences, and with no apparent understanding of
what justice implied. It was left for him to precipitate his private
opinion and public spirit in such form as would arouse the nation to a
sense of self-respect, if not to a pitch of resentment. The "Drapier's
Letters" was the reagent that accomplished both.
* * * * *
The editor takes this opportunity to express his thanks and obligations
to Mr. G.R. Dennis, to Mr. W. Spencer Jackson, to the late Colonel F.R.
Grant, to Mr. C. Litton Falkiner of Killiney, and to Mr. O'Donoghue of
Dublin. His acknowledgment is here also made to Mr. Strickland, of the
National Gallery of Ireland, to whose kindness and learning he is
greatly indebted.
TEMPLE SCOTT.
NEW YORK, _March_, 1903.
CONTENTS
LETTER I. TO THE SHOPKEEPERS, TRADESMEN, FARMERS, AND COMMON-PEOPLE OF
IRELAND
LETTER II. TO MR. HARDING THE PRINTER
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.
LETTER III. TO THE NOBILITY AND GENTRY OF THE KINGDOM OF IRELAND
LETTER IV. TO THE WHOLE PEOPLE OF IRELAND
SEASONABLE ADVICE TO THE GRAND JURY, CONCERNING THE BILL PREPARING
AGAINST THE PRINTER OF THE DRAPIER'S FOURTH LETTER
LETTER V. TO THE LORD CHANCELLOR MIDDLETON
LETTER VI. TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORD VISCOUNT MOLESWORTH
LETTER VII. AN HUMBLE ADDRESS TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT
APPENDIXES
I. ADDRESSES TO THE KING
II. REPORT OF THE ASSAY ON WOOD'S COINAGE, MADE BY SIR ISAAC NEWTON,
EDWARD SOUTHWELL, ESQ., AND THOMAS SCROOPE, ESQ.
III. TOM PUNSIBI'S DREAM
IV. A LETTER FROM A FRIEND TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ----
A SECOND LETTER FROM A FRIEND TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE ----
V. THE PRESENTMENT OF THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
VI. PROCLAMATION AGAINST THE DRAPIER
VII. REPORT OF THE IRISH PRIVY COUNCIL ON WOOD'S COINAGE
VIII. THE PATENTEE'S COMPUTATION OF IRELAND, IN A LETTER FROM THE
AUTHOR OF THE "WHITEHALL EVENING POST" CONCERNING THE MAKING OF COPPER
COIN
IX. DESCRIPTIONS OF THE VARIOUS SPECIMENS OF WOOD'S COINS
INDEX
PLATES.
JONATHAN SWIFT. From a painting in the National Gallery of Ireland,
ascribed to Francis Bindon
HALFPENCE AND FARTHINGS coined by William Wood, 1722 and 1723
[Illustration: _Half-pence & farthings coined by William Wood, 1722 &
1723_]
LETTER I.
TO THE SHOP-KEEPERS, TRADESMEN, FARMERS, AND COMMON-PEOPLE OF IRELAND.
NOTE
About the year 1720 it was generally acknowledged in Ireland that there
was a want there of the small change, necessary in the transaction of
petty dealings with shopkeepers and tradesmen. It has been indignantly
denied by contemporary writers that this small change meant copper
coins. They asserted that there was no lack of copper money, but that
there was a great want of small silver. Be that as it may, the report
that small change was wanting was sufficiently substantiated to the
English government to warrant it to proceed to satisfy the want. In its
dealings with Ireland, however, English governments appear to have
consistently assumed that attitude which would most likely cause
friction and arouse disturbance. In England coins for currency proceeded
from a mint established under government supervision. In Scotland such a
mint was specially provided for in the Act of Union. But in Ireland, the
government acted otherwise.
The Irish people had again and again begged that they should be
permitted to establish a mint in which coins could be issued of the same
standard and intrinsic value as those used in England. English
parliaments, however, invariably disregarded these petitions. Instead of
the mint the King gave grants or patents by which a private individual
obtained the right to mint coins for the use of the inhabitants. The
right was most often given for a handsome consideration, and held for a
term of years. In 1660 Charles II. granted such a patent to Sir Thomas
Armstrong, permitting him to coin farthings for twenty years. It
appears, however, that Armstrong never actually coined the farthings,
although he had gone to the expense of establishing a costly plant for
the purpose.
Small copper coins becoming scarce, several individuals, without
permission, issued tokens; but the practice was stopped. In 1680 Sir
William Armstrong, son of Sir Thomas, with Colonel George Legg
(afterwards Lord Dartmouth), obtained a patent for twenty-one years,
granting them the right to issue copper halfpence. Coins were actually
struck and circulated, but the patent itself was sold to John Knox in
the very year of its issue. Knox, however, had his patent specially
renewed, but his coinage was interrupted when James II. issued his
debased money during the Revolution (see Monck Mason, p. 334, and the
notes on this matter to the Drapier's Third Letter, in present edition).
Knox sold his patent to Colonel Roger Moore, who overstocked the country
with his coins to such an extent that the currency became undervalued.
When, in 1705, Moore endeavoured to obtain a renewal of his patent, his
application was refused. By 1722, owing either to Moore's bad coinage,
or to the importation of debased coins from other countries, the copper
money had degraded considerably. In a pamphlet[1] issued by George
Ewing in Dublin (1724), it is stated that in that year, W. Trench
presented a memorial to the Lords of the Treasury, complaining of the
condition of the copper coinage, and pointing out that the evil results
had been brought about by the system of grants to private individuals.
Notwithstanding this memorial, it was attempted to overcome the
difficulty by a continuance of the old methods. A new patent was issued
to an English iron merchant, William Wood by name, who, according to
Coxe, submitted proposal with many others, for the amelioration of the
grievance. Wood's proposals, say this same authority, were accepted "as
beneficial to Ireland." The letters patent bear the date July 12th,
1722, and were prepared in accordance with the King's instructions to
the Attorney and Solicitor General sent in a letter from Kensington on
June 16th, 1722. The letter commanded "that a bill should be prepared
for his royal signature, containing and importing an indenture, whereof
one part was to pass the Great Seal of Great Britain." This indenture,
notes Monck Mason,[2] between His Majesty of the one part, "and William
Wood, of Wolverhampton, in the County of Stafford, Esq.," of the other,
signifies that His Majesty
"has received information that, in his kingdom of Ireland, there was a
great want of small money for making small payments, and that retailers
and others did suffer by reason of such want."
[Footnote 1: "A Defence of the Conduct of the People of Ireland in their
unanimous refusal of Mr. Wood's Copper Money," pp. 22-23.]
[Footnote 2: "History of St. Patrick's Cathedral," note v, pp. 326-327.]
By virtue, therefore, of his prerogative royal, and in consideration of
the rents, covenants, and agreements therein expressed, His Majesty
granted to William Wood, his executors, assigns, etc., "full, free,
sole, and absolute power, privilege, licence, and authority," during
fourteen years, from the annunciation of the Blessed Virgin, 1722, to
coin halfpence and farthings of copper, to be uttered and disposed of in
Ireland, and not elsewhere. It was provided that the whole quantity
coined should not exceed 360 tons of copper, whereof 100 tons only were
to be coined in the first year, and 20 tons in each of the last
thirteen, said farthings and halfpence to be of good, pure, and
merchantable copper, and of such size and bigness, that one avoirdupois
pound weight of copper should not be converted into more farthings and
halfpence than would make thirty pence by tale; all the said farthings
and halfpence to be of equal weight in themselves, or as near thereunto
as might be, allowing a remedy not exceeding two farthings over or under
in each pound. The same "to pass and to be received as current money, by
such as shall or will, voluntarily and willingly, and not otherwise,
receive the same, within the said kingdom of Ireland, and not
elsewhere." Wood also covenanted to pay to the King's clerk or
comptroller of the coinage, £200 yearly, and £100 per annum into his
Majesty's treasury.
Most of the accounts of this transaction and its consequent agitation
in Ireland, particularly those given by Sir W. Scott and Earl Stanhope,
are taken from Coxe's "Life of Walpole." Monck Mason, however, in his
various notes appended to his life of Swift, has once and for all placed
Coxe's narrative in its true light, and exposed the specious special
pleading on behalf of his hero, Walpole. But even Coxe cannot hide the
fact that the granting of the patent and the circumstances under which
it was granted, amounted to a disgraceful job, by which an opportunity
was seized to benefit a "noble person" in England at the expense of
Ireland. The patent was really granted to the King's mistress, the
Duchess of Kendal, who sold it to William Wood for the sum of £10,000,
and (as it was reported with, probably, much truth) for a share in the
profits of the coining. The job was alluded to by Swift when he wrote:
"When late a feminine magician,
Join'd with a brazen politician,
Expos'd, to blind a nation's eyes,
A parchment of prodigious size."
Coxe endeavors to exonerate Walpole from the disgrace attached to this
business, by expatiating on Carteret's opposition to Walpole, an
opposition which went so far as to attempt to injure the financial
minister's reputation by fomenting jealousies and using the Wood patent
agitation to arouse against him the popular indignation; but this does
not explain away the fact itself. He lays some blame for the agitation
on Wood's indiscretion in flaunting his rights and publicly boasting of
what the great minister would do for him. At the same time he takes care
to censure the government for its misconduct in not consulting with the
Lord Lieutenant and his Privy Council before granting the patent. His
censure, however, is founded on the consideration that this want of
attention was injudicious and was the cause of the spread of exaggerated
rumours of the patent's evil tendency. He has nothing to say of the
rights and liberties of a people which had thereby been infringed and
ignored.
The English parliament had rarely shown much consideration for Irish
feelings or Irish rights. Its attitude towards the Irish Houses of
Legislation had been high-handed and even dictatorial; so that
constitutional struggles were not at all infrequent towards the end of
the seventeenth and during the first quarter of the eighteenth century.
The efforts of Sir Constantine Phipps towards a non-parliamentary
government,[3] and the reversal by the English House of Lords of the
decision given by the Irish House of Lords in the famous Annesley case,
had prepared the Irish people for a revolt against any further attempts
to dictate to its properly elected representatives assembled in
parliament. Moreover, the wretched material condition of the people, as
it largely had been brought about by a selfish, persecuting legislation
that practically isolated Ireland commercially in prohibiting the
exportation of its industrial products, was a danger and a menace to the
governing country. The two nations were facing each other threateningly.
When, therefore, Wood began to import his coin, suspicion was
immediately aroused.
[Footnote 3: See Lecky's "History of Ireland," vol. i., p. 446, etc.]
The masses took little notice of it at first; but the commissioners of
revenue in Dublin took action in a letter they addressed to the Right
Hon. Edward Hopkins, secretary to the Lord Lieutenant. This letter,
dated August 7th, 1722, began by expressing surprise at the patent
granted to Mr. Wood, and asked the secretary "to lay before the Lord
Lieutenant a memorial, presented by their agent to the Lords of the
Treasury, concerning this patent, and also a report of some former
Commissioners of the revenue on the like occasion, and to acquaint his
Grace, that they concurred in all the objections in those papers, and
were of opinion, that such a patent would be highly prejudicial to the
trade, and welfare of this kingdom, and more particularly to his
Majesty's revenue, which they had formerly found to have suffered very
much, by too great a quantity of such base coin."[4] No reply was
received to this letter.
[Footnote 4: "A Defence of the Conduct of the People of Ireland," etc.,
p. 6.]
Fears began to be generally felt, and the early murmurs of an agitation
to be heard when, on September 19th, 1722, the Commissioners addressed a
second letter, this time to the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's
Treasury. The letter assured their Lordships "that they had been applied
to by many persons of rank and fortune, and by the merchants and traders
in Ireland, to represent the ill effects of Mr. Wood's patent, and that
they could from former experience assure their Lordships, it would be
particularly detrimental to his Majesty's revenue. They represented that
this matter had made a great noise here, and that there did not appear
the _least want of such small species of coin for change_, and hoped
that the importance of the occasion would excuse their making this
representation of a matter that had not been referred to them."[5]
[Footnote 5: _Ibid_, pp. 6-7.]
To this letter also no reply was vouchsafed. In the meantime, Wood kept
sending in his coins, landing them at most of the ports of the kingdom.
"Then everyone that was not interested in the success of this coinage,"
writes the author of the pamphlet already quoted, "by having contracted
for a great quantity of his halfpence at a large discount, or biassed by
the hopes of immoderate gain to be made out of the ruins of their
country, expressed their apprehensions of the pernicious consequences of
this copper money; and resolved to make use of the _right they had by
law to refuse the same_".[6]
[Footnote 6: _Ibid_, p. 7.]
The Lord Lieutenant, the Duke of Grafton, had arrived in August, 1723,
and parliament sat early in September. Its first attention was paid to
the Wood patent. After the early excitement had subsided, they resolved
to appeal to the King. During the early stages of the discussion,
however, the Commons addressed the Lord Lieutenant, asking that a copy
of the patent and other papers relating to it, be laid before them. This
was on September 13th. On the following day Mr. Hopkins informed the
House that the Lord Lieutenant had no such copy, nor any papers. The
House then unanimously resolved to inquire into the matter on its own
account, and issued orders for several persons to appear before it to
give evidence, fixing the day for examination for September 16th. On
that day, however, Mr. Hopkins appeared before the members with a copy
of the patent, and informed them that the Lord Lieutenant had received
it since his last communication with them. This incident served but to
arouse further ridicule. A broadside, published at the time with the
title "A Creed of an Irish Commoner," amusingly reveals the lameness of
the excuse for this non-production of the exemplification. Coxe says
that the cause for the delay was due to the fact that the copy of the
patent had been delivered to the Lord Lieutenant's servant, instead of
to his private secretary; but this excuse is probably no more happily
founded than the one offered.
On Friday, September 20th, the House resolved itself into a committee
"to take into consideration the state of the nation, particularly in
relation to the importing and uttering of copper halfpence and farthings
in this kingdom." After three days' debate, and after examining
competent witnesses under oath, it passed resolutions to the following
effect
(1) That Wood's patent is highly prejudicial to his Majesty's revenue,
and is destructive of trade and commerce, and most dangerous to the
rights and properties of the subject.
(2) That for the purpose of obtaining the patent Wood had notoriously
misrepresented the state of the nation.
(3) That great quantities of the coin had been imported of different
impressions and of much less weight than the patent called for.
(4) That the loss to the nation by the uttering of this coin would
amount to 150 per cent.
(5) That in coining the halfpence Wood was guilty of a notorious fraud.
(6) "That it is the opinion of this Committee, that it hath been always
highly prejudicial to this kingdom to grant the power or privilege of
coining money to private persons; and that it will, at all times, be of
dangerous consequence to grant any such power to any body politic, or
corporate, or any private person or persons whatsoever."[7]
[Footnote 7: "Comm. Journals," vol. iii., pp. 317-325.]
Addresses to his Majesty in conformity with these resolutions were voted
on September 27th.
The House of Lords passed similar resolutions on September 26th, and
voted addresses embodying them on September 28th.[8]
[Footnote 8: "Lords' Journals," vol. ii., pp. 745-751.]
These Addresses received a better attention than did the letters from
the revenue commissioners. The Houses were courteously informed that
their communications would receive His Majesty's careful consideration.
Walpole kept his promise, but not before he had fought hard to maintain
the English prerogative, as he might have called it. The "secret"
history as narrated in Coxe's lively manner, throws some light on the
situation. Coxe really finds his hero's conduct not marked with "his
usual caution." The Lord Lieutenant was permitted to go to Ireland
without proper instructions; the information on which Walpole acted was
not reliable; and he did not sufficiently appreciate the influence of
Chancellor Midleton and his family. "He bitterly accused Lord Midleton
of treachery and low cunning, of having made, in his speeches,
distinction between the King and his ministers, of caballing with
Carteret, Cadogan, and Roxburgh, and of pursuing that line of conduct,
because he was of opinion the opposite party would gain the ascendency
in the cabinet. He did not believe the disturbances to be so serious as
they were represented, nor was he satisfied with the Duke of Grafton's
conduct, as being solely directed by Conolly, but declared that the part
acted by Conolly, almost excused what the Brodricks had done." Carteret
complained to the King and proved to him that Walpole's policy was a
dangerous one. The King became irritated and Walpole "ashamed." He even
became "uneasy," and it is to be supposed, took a more "cautious"
course; for he managed to conciliate the Brodricks and the powers in
Dublin. But the devil was not ill long. The cabinet crisis resulted in
the triumph of Townshend and Walpole, and the devil got well again.
Carteret must be removed and the patent promoted. But Midleton and the
Brodricks must be kept friendly. So Carteret went to Ireland as Lord
Lieutenant, Midleton remained Chancellor, and constituted a lord
justice, and St. John Brodrick was nominated a member of the Privy
Council. Still farther on his "cautious" way, Ireland must be given some
consideration; hence the Committee of the Privy Council, specially
called to inquire into the grievances complained of by the Irish Houses
of Parliament in their loyal addresses.
The Committee sat for several weeks, and the report it issued forms the
subject of Swift's animadversions in the Drapier's third letter. But the
time spent by the Committee in London was being utilized in quite a
different fashion by Swift in Ireland. "Cautious" as was Walpole, he had
not reckoned with the champion of his political opponents of Queen
Anne's days. Swift had little humour for court intrigues and cabinet
cabals. He came out into the open to fight the good fight of the people
to whom courts and cabinets should be servants and not self-seeking
masters. Whatever doubts the people of Ireland may have had about the
legal validity of their resentment towards Wood and his coins, were
quickly dissipated when they read "A Letter to the Shop Keepers,
Tradesmen, Farmers, and Common People of Ireland, concerning the Brass
Half-pence coined by Mr. Wood," and signed, "M.B. Drapier." The letter,
as Lord Orrery remarked, acted like the sound of a trumpet. At that
sound "a spirit arose among the people, that in the eastern phrase, was
_like unto a trumpet in the day of the whirlwind_. Every person of every
rank, party, and denomination was convinced, that the admission of
Wood's copper must prove fatal to the Commonwealth. The papist, the
fanatic, the Tory, the Whig, all listed themselves volunteers under the
banners of M.B. Drapier, and were all equally zealous to serve the
Common cause."
The present text of the first of the Drapier's letters is based on that
given by Sir W. Scott, carefully collated with two copies of the first
edition which differed from each other in many particulars. One belonged
to the late Colonel F. Grant, and the other is in the British Museum. It
has also been read with the collection of the Drapier's Letters issued
by the Drapier Club in 1725, with the title, "Fraud Detected"; with the
London edition of "The Hibernian Patriot" (1730), and with Faulkner's
text issued in his collected edition of Swift's Works in 1735.
[T.S.]
[Illustration:
A
*LETTER*
TO THE
_Shop-Keepers_, _Tradesmen_, _Farmers_
and _Common-People_ of
*IRELAND*,
Concerning the
*Brass Half-pence*
Coined by
**Mr. Woods,**
WITH
A _Design_ to have them _Pass_ in this
*KINGDOM*.
Wherein is shewn the Power of the said PATENT,
the Value of the HALF-PENCE, and
how far every Person may be oblig'd to take the
same in Payments, and how to behave in Case
such an Attempt shou'd be made by WOODS
or any other Person.
[Very Proper to be kept in every FAMILY.]
By M.B. _Drapier_.
DUBLIN: Printed by _J. Harding_
in _Molesworth's-Court_.
]
LETTER I.
TO THE TRADESMEN, SHOP-KEEPERS, FARMERS, AND COMMON-PEOPLE IN GENERAL OF
IRELAND.
BRETHREN, FRIENDS, COUNTRYMEN AND FELLOW-SUBJECTS,
What I intend now to say to you, is, next to your duty to God, and the
care of your salvation, of the greatest concern to yourselves, and your
children, your bread and clothing, and every common necessary of life
entirely depend upon it. Therefore I do most earnestly exhort you as
men, as Christians, as parents, and as lovers of your country, to read
this paper with the utmost attention, or get it read to you by others;
which that you may do at the less expense, I have ordered the printer to
sell it at the lowest rate.
It is a great fault among you, that when a person writes with no other
intention than to do you good, you will not be at the pains to read his
advices: One copy of this paper may serve a dozen of you, which will be
less than a farthing a-piece. It is your folly that you have no common
or general interest in your view, not even the wisest among you, neither
do you know or enquire, or care who are your friends, or who are your
enemies.
About three[9] years ago, a little book was written, to advise all
people to wear the manufactures of this our own dear country:[10] It had
no other design, said nothing against the King or Parliament, or any
man, yet the POOR PRINTER was prosecuted two years, with the utmost
violence, and even some WEAVERS themselves, for whose sake it was
written, being upon the JURY, FOUND HIM GUILTY. This would be enough to
discourage any man from endeavouring to do you good, when you will
either neglect him or fly in his face for his pains, and when he must
expect only danger to himself and loss of money, perhaps to his
ruin.[11]
[Footnote 9: In his reprint of the Drapier's Letters, issued in 1725
with the title, "Fraud Detected; or the Hibernian Patriot," Faulkner
prints "four" instead of "three"; but this, of course, is a correction
made to agree with the date of the publication of this reprint. The
"Proposal" was published in 1720. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 10: The "little book" was "A Proposal for the Universal Use of
Irish Manufactures." See vol. vii. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 11: Instead of the words "loss of money," Faulkner in the
reprint of 1725 has "to be fined and imprisoned." [T.S.]]
However I cannot but warn you once more of the manifest destruction
before your eyes, if you do not behave yourselves as you ought.
I will therefore first tell you the plain story of the fact; and then I
will lay before you how you ought to act in common prudence, and
according to the laws of your country.
The fact is thus: It having been many years since COPPER HALFPENCE OR
FARTHINGS were last coined in this kingdom, they have been for some time
very scarce,[12] and many counterfeits passed about under the name of
_raps_, several applications were made to England, that we might have
liberty to coin new ones, as in former times we did; but they did not
succeed. At last one Mr. Wood,[13] a mean ordinary man, a hardware
dealer, procured a patent[14]under his Majesty's broad seal to coin
fourscore and ten thousand pounds[15] in copper for this kingdom, which
patent however did not oblige any one here to take them, unless they
pleased. Now you must know, that the halfpence and farthings in England
pass for very little more than they are worth. And if you should beat
them to pieces, and sell them to the brazier you would not lose above a
penny in a shilling. But Mr. Wood made his halfpence of such base metal,
and so much smaller than the English ones, that the brazier would not
give you above a penny of good money for a shilling of his; so that this
sum of fourscore and ten thousand pounds in good gold and silver, must
be given for trash that will not be worth above eight or nine thousand
pounds real value. But this is not the worst, for Mr. Wood when he
pleases may by stealth send over another and another fourscore and ten
thousand pounds, and buy all our goods for eleven parts in twelve, under
the value. For example, if a hatter sells a dozen of hats for five
shillings a-piece, which amounts to three pounds, and receives the
payment in Mr. Wood's coin, he really receives only the value of five
shillings.
[Footnote 12: They had become scarce because they had been undervalued,
and therefore sent out of the country in payment of goods bought. See
Prior's "Observations on Coin," issued in 1729, where it is stated that
this scarcity had occurred only within the last twenty years. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 13: William Wood (1671-1730) was an ironmaster of
Wolverhampton. In addition to the patent for coining copper halfpence
which he obtained for Ireland, and to which full reference is made in
the introductory note to this first Drapier's Letter, Wood also obtained
a patent, in 1722, for coining halfpence, pence and twopence for the
English colonies in America. This latter patent fared no better than the
Irish one. The coins introduced in America bear the dates 1722 and 1723,
and are now much sought after by collectors. They are known as the Rosa
American coinage. A list of the poems and pamphlets on Wood, during the
excitement in Dublin, attending on the Drapier's Letters, will be found
in the bibliography of Swift's works to be given in vol. xi. of this
edition. See also Monck Mason's "History of St. Patrick's Cathedral." In
the original edition of the Letter, Wood's name is mis-spelt Woods. [T.
S.]]
[Footnote 14: See the introductory note for the manner in which this
patent was obtained. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 15: This is how the amount is named in the first edition; but
the amount in reality was £100,800 (the value of 360 tons of copper, as
stated by the patent). Sir W. Scott prints this as £108,000. Coxe, in
his "Memoirs of Sir Robert Walpole" gives the amount as £100,000. Lecky
states it as £108,000. [T.S.]]
Perhaps you will wonder how such an ordinary fellow as this Mr. Wood
could have so much interest as to get His Majesty's broad seal for so
great a sum of bad money, to be sent to this poor country, and that all
the nobility and gentry here could not obtain the same favour, and let
us make our own halfpence, as we used to do. Now I will make that matter
very plain. We are at a great distance from the King's court, and have
nobody there to solicit for us, although a great number of lords and
squires, whose estates are here, and are our countrymen, spending all
their lives and fortunes there. But this same Mr. Wood was able to
attend constantly for his own interest; he is an Englishman and had
great friends, and it seems knew very well where to give money, to
those that would speak to others that could speak to the King and could
tell a fair story. And His Majesty, and perhaps the great lord or lords
who advised him, might think it was for our country's good; and so, as
the lawyers express it, "the King was deceived in his grant," which
often happens in all reigns. And I am sure if His Majesty knew that such
a patent, if it should take effect according to the desire of Mr. Wood,
would utterly ruin this kingdom, which hath given such great proofs of
its loyalty, he would immediately recall it, and perhaps shew his
displeasure to somebody or other. But "a word to the wise is enough."
Most of you must have heard, with what anger our honourable House of
Commons received an account of this Wood's patent.[16] There were
several fine speeches made upon it, and plain proofs that it was all A
WICKED CHEAT from the bottom to the top, and several smart votes were
printed, which that same Wood had the assurance to answer likewise in
print, and in so confident a way, as if he were a better man than our
whole Parliament put together.[17]
[Footnote 16: The Irish House of Commons reported that the loss to the
country, even if the patent were carried out as required, would amount
to about 150 per cent.; and both Irish Houses of Parliament voted
addresses against the coinage, and accused the patentee of fraud and
deceit. They asserted that the terms of the patent had not been
fulfilled and "that the circulation of the halfpence would be highly
prejudicial to the revenue, destructive of the commerce, and of most
dangerous consequences to the rights and properties of the subjects."
See introductory note. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 17: Wood's indiscreet retort was published in the "Flying
Post" October 8th, 1723. Later he boasted that he would, with Walpole's
assistance, "pour the coin down the throats of the people." [T.S.]]
This Wood, as soon as his patent was passed, or soon after, sends over
a great many barrels of these halfpence, to Cork and other sea-port
towns,[18] and to get them off offered an hundred pounds in his coin for
seventy or eighty in silver. But the collectors of the King's customs
very honestly refused to take them, and so did almost everybody else.
And since the Parliament hath condemned them, and desired the King that
they might be stopped, all the kingdom do abominate them.
[Footnote 18: At Dublin, Cork, Waterford and other ports, the merchants
refused to accept the copper coins. Monck Mason notes that "in the
'Dublin Gazette,' No. 2562, we meet with resolutions by the merchants of
Cork, dated the 25th of Aug., 1724, and like resolutions by those of
Waterford, dated 22d Aug. wherein they declare, that, 'they will never
receive or utter in any payment, the halfpence or farthings coined by
William Wood; as they conceive the importing and uttering the same, to
be highly prejudicial to His Majesty's revenue, and to the trade of the
kingdom': these resolutions are declared to be conformable to those of
the Trinity Guild, of merchants, of the city of Dublin, voted at their
guild-hall, on the 18th day of the same month" (Hist. St. Patrick's, p.
346, note r). See also Appendix No. IX. [T.S.]]
But Wood is still working underhand to force his halfpence upon us, and
if he can by help of his friends in England prevail so far as to get an
order that the commissioners and collectors of the King's money shall
receive them, and that the army is to be paid with them, then he thinks
his work shall be done. And this is the difficulty you will be under in
such a case. For the common soldier when he goes to the market or
alehouse will offer this money, and if it be refused, perhaps he will
swagger and hector, and threaten to beat the butcher or alewife, or take
the goods by force, and throw them the bad halfpence. In this and the
like cases, the shopkeeper or victualler, or any other tradesman has no
more to do, than to demand ten times the price of his goods, if it is to
be paid in Wood's money; for example, twenty-pence of that money for a
quart of ale, and so in all things else, and not part with his goods
till he gets the money.
For suppose you go to an alehouse with that base money, and the landlord
gives you a quart for four of these halfpence, what must the victualler
do? His brewer will not be paid in that coin, or if the brewer should be
such a fool, the farmers will not take it from them for their bere,[19]
because they are bound by their leases to pay their rents in good and
lawful money of England, which this is not, nor of Ireland neither, and
the 'squire their landlord will never be so bewitched to take such trash
for his land, so that it must certainly stop somewhere or other, and
wherever it stops it is the same thing, and we are all undone.
[Footnote 19: Bere = barley. Cf. A.S. _baerlic_, Icelandic, _barr_,
meaning barley, the grain used for making malt for the preparation of
beer. [T.S.]]
The common weight of these halfpence is between four and five to an
ounce, suppose five, then three shillings and fourpence will weigh a
pound, and consequently twenty shillings will weigh six pound butter
weight. Now there are many hundred farmers who pay two hundred pound a
year rent. Therefore when one of these farmers comes with his
half-year's rent, which is one hundred pound, it will be at least six
hundred pound weight, which is three horse load.
If a 'squire has a mind to come to town to buy clothes and wine and
spices for himself and family, or perhaps to pass the winter here; he
must bring with him five or six horses loaden with sacks as the farmers
bring their corn; and when his lady comes in her coach to our shops, it
must be followed by a car loaden with Mr. Wood's money. And I hope we
shall have the grace to take it for no more than it is worth.
They say 'Squire Conolly[20] has sixteen thousand pounds a year, now if
he sends for his rent to town, as it is likely he does, he must have two
hundred and forty horses to bring up his half-year's rent, and two or
three great cellars in his house for stowage. But what the bankers will
do I cannot tell. For I am assured, that some great bankers keep by them
forty thousand pounds in ready cash to answer all payments, which sum,
in Mr. Wood's money, would require twelve hundred horses to carry it.
[Footnote 20: William Conolly (d. 1729) was chosen Speaker of the Irish
House of Commons on November 12th, 1715. He held this office until
October 12th, 1729. Swift elsewhere says that Wharton sold Conolly the
office of Chief Commissioner of the Irish Revenue for £3,000. Between
the years 1706 and 1729 Conolly was ten times selected for the office of
a Lord Justice of Ireland. The remark in the text as to Conolly's income
is repeated by Boulter ("Letters," vol. i., p. 334), though the Primate
writes of £17,000 a year. The reference to Conolly is of set purpose,
because Conolly had advocated the patent as against Midleton's
condemnation of it. [T.S.]]
For my own part, I am already resolved what to do; I have a pretty good
shop of Irish stuffs and silks, and instead of taking Mr. Wood's bad
copper, I intend to truck with my neighbours the butchers, and bakers,
and brewers, and the rest, goods for goods, and the little gold and
silver I have, I will keep by me like my heart's blood till better
times, or till I am just ready to starve, and then I will buy Mr. Wood's
money as my father did the brass money in K. James's time,[21] who could
buy ten pound of it with a guinea, and I hope to get as much for a
pistole, and so purchase bread from those who will be such fools as to
sell it me.
[Footnote 21: James II., during his unsuccessful campaign in Ireland,
debased the coinage in order to make his funds meet the demands of his
soldiery. Archbishop King, in his work on the "State of the Protestants
in Ireland," describes the evil effects which this proceeding had: "King
James's council used not to stick at the formalities of law or reason,
and therefore vast quantities of brass money were coined, and made
current by a proclamation, dated 18th June, 1689, under severe
penalties. The metal of which this money was made was the worst kind of
brass; old guns, and the refuse of metals were melted down to make it;
workmen rated it at threepence or a groat a pound, which being coined
into sixpences, shillings, or half-crowns, one pound weight made about
£5. And by another proclamation, dated 1690, the half-crowns were called
in, and being stamped anew, were made to pass for crowns; so that then,
three pence or four pence worth of metal made £10. There was coined in
all, from the first setting up of the mint, to the rout at the Boyne,
being about twelve months, £965,375. In this coin King James paid all
his appointments, and all that received the king's pay being generally
papists, they forced the protestants to part with the goods out of their
shops for this money, and to receive their debts in it; so that the loss
by the brass money did, in a manner, entirely fall on the protestants,
being defrauded (for I can call it no better) of about, £60,000 per
month by this stratagem, which must, in a few months, have utterly
exhausted them. When the papists had gotten most of their saleable goods
from their protestant neighbours, and yet great quantities of brass
money remained in their hands, they began to consider how many of them,
who had estates, had engaged them to protestants by judgments, statutes
staple, and mortgages; and to take this likewise from them they procured
a proclamation, dated 4 Feb. 1689, to make brass money current in all
payments whatsoever." A proclamation of William III., dated July 10th,
1690, ordered that these crown pieces of James should pass as of equal
value with one penny each. [T.S.]]
These halfpence, if they once pass, will soon be counterfeit, because it
may be cheaply done, the stuff is so base. The Dutch likewise will
probably do the same thing, and send them over to us to pay for our
goods.[22] And Mr. Wood will never be at rest but coin on: So that in
some years we shall have at least five times fourscore and ten thousand
pounds of this lumber. Now the current money of this kingdom is not
reckoned to be above four hundred thousand pounds in all, and while
there is a silver sixpence left these blood-suckers will never be quiet.
[Footnote 22: The Dutch had previously counterfeited the debased coinage
of Ireland and sent them over in payment for Irish manufactures. [T.
S.]]
When once the kingdom is reduced to such a condition, I will tell you
what must be the end: The gentlemen of estates will all turn off their
tenants for want of payment, because as I told you before, the tenants
are obliged by their leases to pay sterling which is lawful current
money of England; then they will turn their own farmers, as too many of
them do already, run all into sheep where they can, keeping only such
other cattle as are necessary, then they will be their own merchants and
send their wool and butter and hides and linen beyond sea for ready
money and wine and spices and silks. They will keep only a few miserable
cottiers.[23] The farmers must rob or beg, or leave their country. The
shopkeepers in this and every other town, must break and starve: For it
is the landed man that maintains the merchant, and shopkeeper, and
handicraftsman.
[Footnote 23: "Unlike the peasant proprietor," says Lecky, "and also
unlike the mediaeval serf, the cottier had no permanent interest in the
soil, and no security for his future position. Unlike the English
farmer, he was no capitalist, who selects land as one of the many forms
of profitable investment that are open to him. He was a man destitute of
all knowledge and of all capital, who found the land the only thing that
remained between himself and starvation. Rents in the lower grades of
tenancies were regulated by competition, but it was competition between
a half-starving population, who had no other resources except the soil,
and were therefore prepared to promise anything rather than be deprived
of it. The landlord did nothing for them. They built their own mud
hovels, planted their hedges, dug their ditches. They were half naked,
half starved, utterly destitute of all providence and of all education,
liable at any time to be turned adrift from their holdings, ground to
the dust by three great burdens--rack-rents, paid not to the landlord
but to the middleman; tithes, paid to the clergy--often the absentee
clergy--of the church to which they did not belong; and dues, paid to
their own priests" ("Hist, of Ireland," vol. i., pp. 214-215, ed. 1892).
[T.S.]]
But when the 'squire turns farmer and merchant himself, all the good
money he gets from abroad, he will hoard up or send for England, and
keep some poor tailor or weaver and the like in his own house, who will
be glad to get bread at any rate.
I should never have done if I were to tell you all the miseries that we
shall undergo if we be so foolish and wicked as to take this CURSED
COIN. It would be very hard if all Ireland should be put into one scale,
and this sorry fellow Wood into the other, that Mr. Wood should weigh
down this whole kingdom, by which England gets above a million of good
money every year clear into their pockets, and that is more than the
English do by all the world besides.
But your great comfort is, that as His Majesty's patent does not oblige
you to take this money, so the laws have not given the crown a power of
forcing the subjects to take what money the King pleases: For then by
the same reason we might be bound to take pebble-stones or cockle-shells
or stamped leather for current coin, if ever we should happen to live
under an ill prince, who might likewise by the same power make a guinea
pass for ten pounds, a shilling for twenty shillings, and so on, by
which he would in a short time get all the silver and gold of the
kingdom into his own hands, and leave us nothing but brass or leather or
what he pleased. Neither is anything reckoned more cruel or oppressive
in the French government than their common practice of calling in all
their money after they have sunk it very low, and then coining it anew
at a much higher value, which however is not the thousandth part so
wicked as this abominable project of Mr. Wood. For the French give their
subjects silver for silver and gold for gold, but this fellow will not
so much as give us good brass or copper for our gold and silver, nor
even a twelfth part of their worth.
Having said thus much, I will now go on to tell you the judgments of
some great lawyers in this matter, whom I fee'd on purpose for your
sakes, and got their opinions under their hands, that I might be sure I
went upon good grounds.
A famous law-book, called "The Mirror of Justice,"[24] discoursing of
the articles (or laws) ordained by our ancient kings declares the law to
be as follows: "It was ordained that no king of this realm should
change, impair or amend the money or make any other money than of gold
or silver without the assent of all the counties," that is, as my Lord
Coke says,[25] without the assent of Parliament.
[Footnote 24: This was an important legal treatise often quoted by Coke.
Its full title is: "The Booke called, The Mirrour of Justices: Made by
Andrew Home. With the book, called, The Diversity of Courts, And Their
Jurisdictions ... London ... 1646." The French edition was printed in
1642 with the title, "La somme appelle Mirroir des Justices: vel
speculum Justiciariorum, Factum per Andream Home." Coke quotes it from a
manuscript, as he died before it was printed. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 25: 2 Inst. 576. [ORIG. ED.]]
This book is very ancient, and of great authority for the time in which
it was wrote, and with that character is often quoted by that great
lawyer my Lord Coke.[26] By the law of England, the several metals are
divided into lawful or true metal and unlawful or false metal, the
former comprehends silver or gold; the latter all baser metals: That the
former is only to pass in payments appears by an act of Parliament[27]
made the twentieth year of Edward the First, called the "Statute
concerning the Passing of Pence," which I give you here as I got it
translated into English, for some of our laws at that time, were, as I
am told writ in Latin: "Whoever in buying or selling presumeth to refuse
an halfpenny or farthing of lawful money, bearing the stamp which it
ought to have, let him be seized on as a contemner of the King's
majesty, and cast into prison."
[Footnote 26: 2 Inst. 576-577. [ORIG. ED.]]
[Footnote 27: 2 Inst. 577. [ORIG. ED.]]
By this statute, no person is to be reckoned a contemner of the King's
majesty, and for that crime to be committed to prison; but he who
refuses to accept the King's coin made of lawful metal, by which, as I
observed before, silver and gold only are intended.
That this is the true construction of the act, appears not only from the
plain meaning of the words, but from my Lord Coke's observation upon it.
"By this act" (says he) "it appears, that no subject can be forced to
take in buying or selling or other payments, any money made but of
lawful metal; that is, of silver or gold."[28]
[Footnote 28: 2 Inst. 577. [ORIG. ED.]]
The law of England gives the King all mines of gold and silver, but not
the mines of other metals, the reason of which prerogative or power, as
it is given by my Lord Coke[29] is, because money can be made of gold
and silver, but not of other metals.
[Footnote 29: 2 Inst. 577. [ORIG. ED.]]
Pursuant to this opinion halfpence and farthings were anciently made of
silver, which is most evident from the act of Parliament of Henry the
4th. chap. 4.[30] by which it is enacted as follows: "Item, for the
great scarcity that is at present within the realm of England of
halfpence and farthings of silver, it is ordained and established that
the third part of all the money of silver plate which shall be brought
to the bullion, shall be made in halfpence and farthings." This shews
that by the word "halfpenny" and "farthing" of lawful money in that
statute concerning the passing of pence, are meant a small coin in
halfpence and farthings of silver.
[Footnote 30: Swift makes an incorrect reference here. The act was 4
Henry IV., cap. 10. [T.S.]]
This is further manifest from the statute of the ninth year of Edward
the 3d. chap. 3. which enacts, "That no sterling halfpenny or farthing
be molten for to make vessel, nor any other thing by the goldsmiths, nor
others, upon forfeiture of the money so molten" (or melted).
By another act in this King's reign[31] black money was not to be
current in England, and by an act made in the eleventh year of his reign
chap. 5. galley halfpence were not to pass, what kind of coin these were
I do not know, but I presume they were made of base metal, and that
these acts were no new laws, but farther declarations of the old laws
relating to the coin.
[Footnote 31: The act against black money was passed in Henry IV.'s
reign not Edward III.'s. The "galley halfpence" were dealt with by 9
Hen. IV., cap. 4. [T.S.]]
Thus the law stands in relation to coin, nor is there any example to the
contrary, except one in Davis's Reports,[32] who tells us that in the
time of Tyrone's rebellion Queen Elizabeth ordered money of mixed metal
to be coined in the Tower of London, and sent over hither for payment of
the army, obliging all people to receive it and commanding that all
silver money should be taken only as bullion, that is, for as much as it
weighed. Davis tells us several particulars in this matter too long here
to trouble you with, and that the privy-council of this kingdom obliged
a merchant in England to receive this mixed money for goods transmitted
hither.[33]
[Footnote 32: This refers to Sir John Davies's "Abridgement of Sir
Edward Coke's Reports," first published in 1651. Davies was
Attorney-General for Ireland and a poet. His works have been collected
and edited by Dr. A.B. Grosart in the Fuller Worthies Library. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 33: Charles I., during the Civil War, paid his forces with
debased coin struck by him. [T.S.]]
But this proceeding is rejected by all the best lawyers as contrary to
law, the Privy-council here having no such power. And besides it is to
be considered, that the Queen was then under great difficulties by a
rebellion in this kingdom assisted from Spain, and whatever is done in
great exigences and dangerous times should never be an example to
proceed by in seasons of peace and quietness.
I will now, my dear friends to save you the trouble, set before you in
short, what the law obliges you to do, and what it does not oblige you
to.
First, You are obliged to take all money in payments which is coined by
the King and is of the English standard or weight, provided it be of
gold or silver.
Secondly, You are not obliged to take any money which is not of gold or
silver, no not the halfpence, or farthings of England, or of any other
country, and it is only for convenience, or ease, that you are content
to take them, because the custom of coining silver halfpence and
farthings hath long been left off, I will suppose on account of their
being subject to be lost.
Thirdly, Much less are you obliged to take those vile halfpence of that
same Wood, by which you must lose almost eleven-pence in every shilling.
Therefore my friends, stand to it one and all, refuse this filthy trash.
It is no treason to rebel against Mr. Wood. His Majesty in his patent
obliges nobody to take these halfpence,[34] our gracious prince hath no
so ill advisers about him; or if he had, yet you see the laws have not
left it in the King's power, to force us to take any coin but what is
lawful, of right standard gold and silver, therefore you have nothing to
fear.
[Footnote 34: The words of the patent are "to pass and to be received as
current money; by such as shall or will, voluntarily and wittingly, and
not otherwise, receive the same" (the halfpence and farthings). [T.S.]]
And let me in the next place apply myself particularly to you who are
the poor sort of tradesmen, perhaps you may think you will not be so
great losers as the rich, if these halfpence should pass, because you
seldom see any silver, and your customers come to your shops or stalls
with nothing but brass, which you likewise find hard to be got, but you
may take my word, whenever this money gains footing among you, you will
be utterly undone; if you carry these halfpence to a shop for tobacco
or brandy, or any other thing you want, the shopkeeper will advance his
goods accordingly, or else he must break, and leave the key under the
door. Do you think I will sell you a yard of tenpenny stuff for twenty
of Mr. Wood's halfpence? No, not under two hundred at least, neither
will I be at the trouble of counting, but weigh them in a lump; I will
tell you one thing further, that if Mr. Wood's project should take, it
will ruin even our beggars; For when I give a beggar an halfpenny, it
will quench his thirst, or go a good way to fill his belly, but the
twelfth part of a halfpenny will do him no more service than if I should
give him three pins out of my sleeve.
In short these halfpence are like "the accursed thing, which" as the
Scripture tells us, "the children of Israel were forbidden to touch,"
they will run about like the plague and destroy every one who lays his
hands upon them. I have heard scholars talk of a man who told a king
that he had invented a way to torment people by putting them into a bull
of brass with fire under it, but the prince put the projector first into
his own brazen bull to make the experiment;[35] this very much resembles
the project of Mr. Wood, and the like of this may possibly be Mr. Wood's
fate, that the brass he contrived to torment this kingdom with, may
prove his own torment, and his destruction at last.
[Footnote 35: It is curious to find Swift so referring to Phalaris, of
whom he had heard so much in the days of the "Battle of the Books." [SIR
H. CRAIK.]]
N.B. The author of this paper is informed by persons who have made it
their business to be exact in their observations on the true value of
these halfpence, that any person may expect to get a quart of twopenny
ale for thirty-six of them.
I desire all persons may keep this paper carefully by them to refresh
their memories whenever they shall have farther notice of Mr. Wood's
halfpence, or any other the like imposture.
LETTER II.
TO MR. HARDING THE PRINTER.
NOTE.
Towards the beginning of the August of 1724, the Committee of Inquiry
had finished their report on Wood's patent. Somehow, an advance notice
of the contents of the report found its way, probably directed by
Walpole himself, into the pages of a London journal, from whence it was
reprinted in Dublin, in Harding's Newspaper on the 1st of August. The
notice stated that the Committee had recommended a reduction in the
amount of coin Wood was to issue to £40,000. It informed the public that
the report notified that Wood was willing to take goods in exchange for
his coins, if enough silver were not to be had, and he agreed to
restrict the amount of each payment to 5-1/2_d_. But a pretty broad hint
was given that a refusal to accept the compromise offered might possibly
provoke the higher powers to an assertion of the prerogative.
Walpole also had already endeavoured to calm the situation by consenting
to a minute examination of the coins themselves at the London Mint. The
Lords Commissioners had instructed Sir Isaac Newton, the Master of the
Mint, Edward Southwell, and Thomas Scroope, to make an assay of Wood's
money. The report of the assayists was issued on April 27th, 1724;[1]
and certified that the coins submitted had been tested and found to be
correct both as to weight and quality. In addition to this evidence of
good faith, Walpole had nominated Carteret in place of the Duke of
Grafton to the Lord-Lieutenancy. Carteret was a favourite with the best
men in Ireland, and a man of culture as well as ability. It was hoped
that his influence would smooth down the members of the opposition by an
acceptance of the altered measure. He was in the way in London, and he
might be of great service in Dublin; so to Dublin he went.
[Footnote 1: A full reprint of this report is given in Appendix II.]
But Walpole had not reckoned with the Drapier. In the paragraph in
Harding's sheet, Swift saw a diplomatist's move to win the game by
diplomatic methods. Compromise was the one result Swift was determined
to render impossible; and the Drapier's second letter, "To Mr. Harding
the Printer," renews the conflict with yet stronger passion and with
even more satirical force. It is evident Swift was bent now on raising a
deeper question than merely this of the acceptance or refusal of Wood's
halfpence and farthings. There was a principle here that had to be
insisted and a right to be safeguarded. Mr. Churton Collins ably
expresses Swift's attitude at this juncture when he says:[2] "Nothing
can be more certain than that it was Swift's design from the very
beginning to make the controversy with Wood the basis of far more
extensive operations. It had furnished him with the means of waking
Ireland from long lethargy into fiery life. He looked to it to furnish
him with the means of elevating her from servitude to independence, from
ignominy to honour. His only fear was lest the spirit which he had
kindled should burn itself out or be prematurely quenched. And of this
he must have felt that there was some danger, when it was announced that
England had given way much more than it was expected she would give way,
and much more than she had ever given way before."
[Footnote 2: "Jonathan Swift," pp. 179-180.]
This letter to Harding was but the preliminary leading up to the famous
fourth letter "to the whole people of Ireland." It was also an
introduction to, and preparation of the public mind for, the drastic
criticism of the Privy Council's Report, the arrival of which was
expected shortly.
The present text of this second letter is that given by Sir W. Scott,
collated with the copies of the original edition in the possession of
the late Colonel F. Grant and in the British Museum. It has also been
compared with Faulkner's issue of 1725, in "Fraud Detected."
[T.S.]
[Illustration:
A
*LETTER*
TO
Mr. _Harding_ the Printer,
Upon Occasion of a
**PARAGRAPH**
*IN HIS*
**News-Paper**
of _Aug_. 1st.
Relating to Mr. _Wood's_ Half-pence.
_By_ M.B. _Drapier_.
AUTHOR of the LETTER to the
SHOP-KEEPERS, &c.
DUBLIN: Printed by _J. Harding_
in _Molesworth's-Court_.
]
LETTER II.
TO MR. HARDING THE PRINTER.
Sir, In your Newsletter of the 1st. instant there is a paragraph dated
from London, July 25th. relating to Wood's halfpence; whereby it is
plain what I foretold in my "Letter to the Shopkeepers, &c." that this
vile fellow would never be at rest, and that the danger of our ruin
approaches nearer, and therefore the kingdom requires NEW and FRESH
WARNING; however I take that paragraph to be, in a great measure, an
imposition upon the public, at least I hope so, because I am informed
that Wood is generally his own newswriter. I cannot but observe from
that paragraph that this public enemy of ours, not satisfied to ruin us
with his trash, takes every occasion to treat this kingdom with the
utmost contempt. He represents "several of our merchants and traders
upon examination before a committee of council, agreeing that there was
the utmost necessity of copper money here, before his patent, so that
several gentlemen have been forced to tally with their workmen and give
them bits of cards sealed and subscribed with their names." What then?
If a physician prescribes to a patient a dram of physic, shall a rascal
apothecary cram him with a pound, and mix it up with poison? And is not
a landlord's hand and seal to his own labourers a better security for
five or ten shillings, than Wood's brass seven times below the real
value, can be to the kingdom, for an hundred and four thousand
pounds?[3]
[Footnote 3: Thus in original edition. £108,000 is the amount generally
given. See note on p. 15. [T.S.]]
But who are these merchants and traders of Ireland that make this report
of "the utmost necessity we are under of copper money"? They are only a
few betrayers of their country, confederates with Wood, from whom they
are to purchase a great quantity of his coin, perhaps at half value, and
vend it among us to the ruin of the public, and their own private
advantage. Are not these excellent witnesses, upon whose integrity the
fate of a kingdom must depend, who are evidences in their own cause, and
sharers in this work of iniquity?
If we could have deserved the liberty of coining for ourselves, as we
formerly did, and why we have not _is everybody's wonder as well as
mine_,[4] ten thousand pounds might have been coined here in Dublin of
only one-fifth below the intrinsic value, and this sum, with the stock
of halfpence we then had, would have been sufficient:[5] But Wood by his
emissaries, enemies to God and this kingdom, hath taken care to buy up
as many of our old halfpence as he could, and from thence the present
want of change arises; to remove which, by Mr. Wood's remedy, would be,
to cure a scratch on the finger by cutting off the arm. But supposing
there were not one farthing of change in the whole nation, I will
maintain, that five and twenty thousand pounds would be a sum fully
sufficient to answer all our occasions. I am no inconsiderable
shopkeeper in this town, I have discoursed with several of my own and
other trades, with many gentlemen both of city and country, and also
with great numbers of farmers, cottagers, and labourers, who all agree
that two shillings in change for every family would be more than
necessary in all dealings. Now by the largest computation (even before
that grievous discouragement of agriculture, which hath so much lessened
our numbers [6]) the souls in this kingdom are computed to be one
million and a half, which, allowing but six to a family, makes two
hundred and fifty thousand families, and consequently two shillings to
each family will amount only to five and twenty thousand pounds, whereas
this honest liberal hardwareman Wood would impose upon us above four
times that sum.
[Footnote 4: Time and again Ireland had petitioned the King of England
for the establishment of a mint in Dublin. Both Houses of Parliament
addressed King Charles I. in 1634, begging for a mint which should coin
money in Ireland of the same standard and values as those of England,
and allowing the profits to the government. Wentworth supported the
address; but it was refused (Carte's "Ormond," vol. i., pp. 79-80). When
Lord Cornwallis's petition for a renewal of his patent for minting coins
was presented in 1700, it was referred to a committee of the Lords
Justices. In their report the Lords Justices condemned the system in
vogue, and urged the establishment of a mint, in which the coining of
money should be in the hands of the government and in those of a
subject. No notice was taken of this advice. See Lecky's "Ireland," vol.
i., p. 448 (ed 1892) [T.S.]]
[Footnote 5: Boulter stated that £10,000 or £15,000 would have amply
fulfilled the demand ("Letters," vol. i., pp. 4, 11). [T.S.]]
[Footnote 6: It was not alone the direct discouragement of agriculture
which lessened the population. This result was also largely brought
about by the anti-Catholic legislation of Queen Anne's reign, which
"reduced the Roman Catholics to a state of depression," and caused
thousands of them to go elsewhere for the means of living. See
Crawford's "Ireland," vol. ii., pp. 264-267. [T.S.]]
Your paragraph relates further, that Sir Isaac Newton reported an assay
taken at the Tower of Wood's metal, by which it appears, that Wood had
in all respects performed his contract[7]. His contract! With whom? Was
it with the parliament or people of Ireland? Are not they to be the
purchasers? But they detest, abhor, and reject it, as corrupt,
fraudulent, mingled with dirt and trash. Upon which he grows angry, goes
to law, and will impose his goods upon us by force.
[Footnote 7: For the full text of Newton's report see Appendix, No. II.
[T.S.]]
But your Newsletter says that an assay was made of the coin. How
impudent and insupportable is this? Wood takes care to coin a dozen or
two halfpence of good metal, sends them to the Tower and they are
approved, and these must answer all that he hath already coined or shall
coin for the future. It is true indeed, that a gentleman often sends to
my shop for a pattern of stuff, I cut it fairly off, and if he likes it,
he comes or sends and compares the pattern with the whole piece, and
probably we come to a bargain. But if I were to buy an hundred sheep,
and the grazier should bring me one single wether fat and well fleeced
by way of pattern, and expect the same price round for the whole
hundred, without suffering me to see them before he was paid, or giving
me good security to restore my money for those that were lean or shorn
or scabby, I would be none of his customer. I have heard of a man who
had a mind to sell his house, and therefore carried a piece of brick in
his pocket, which he shewed as a pattern to encourage purchasers: And
this is directly the case in point with Mr. Wood's assay.[8]
[Footnote 8: Monck Mason remarks on this assay that "the assay-masters
do not report that Mr. Wood's coinage was superior to that of former
kings, but only to those specimens of such coinages as were exhibited by
Mr. Wood, which, it is admitted were much worn. Whether the money coined
in the preceding reign was good or bad is in fact nothing to the
purpose." "'What argument,'" quotes Monck Mason from the tract issued in
1724 entitled, "A Defence of the Conduct of the People of Ireland, in
their unanimous refusal of Mr. Wood's Copper Money," "'can be drawn from
the badness of our former coinages but this, that because we have
formerly been cheated by our coiners, we ought to suffer Mr. Wood to
cheat us over again? Whereas, one reason for our so vigorously opposing
Mr. Wood's coinage, is, because we have always been imposed upon in our
copper money, and we find he is treading exactly in the steps of his
predecessors, and thinks he has a right to cheat us because he can shew
a precedent for it.' In truth, there was a vast number of counterfeits
of those coins, which had been imported, chiefly from Scotland, as
appears from a proclamation prohibiting the Importation of them in 1697"
("History St. Patrick's Cathedral," p, 340, note d.) [T.S.]]
The next part of the paragraph contains Mr. Wood's voluntary proposals
for "preventing any future objections or apprehensions."
His first proposal is, that "whereas he hath already coined seventeen
thousand pounds, and has copper prepared to make it up forty thousand
pounds, he will be content to coin no more, unless the EXIGENCES OF
TRADE REQUIRE IT, though his patent empowers him to coin a far greater
quantity."
To which if I were to answer it should be thus: "Let Mr. Wood and his
crew of founders and tinkers coin on till there is not an old kettle
left in the kingdom: let them coin old leather, tobacco-pipe clay or the
dirt in the streets, and call their trumpery by what name they please
from a guinea to a farthing, we are not under any concern to know how he
and his tribe or accomplices think fit to employ themselves." But I hope
and trust, that we are all to a man fully determined to have nothing to
do with him or his ware.
The King has given him a patent to coin halfpence, but hath not obliged
us to take them, and I have already shewn in my "Letter to the
Shopkeepers, &c." that the law hath not left it in the power of the
prerogative to compel the subject to take any money, beside gold and
silver of the right sterling and standard.
Wood further proposes, (if I understand him right, for his expressions
are dubious) that "he will not coin above forty thousand pounds, unless
the exigences of trade require it." First, I observe that this sum of
forty thousand pounds is almost double to what I proved to be sufficient
for the whole kingdom, although we had not one of our old halfpence
left. Again I ask, who is to be judge when the exigences of trade
require it? Without doubt he means himself, for as to us of this poor
kingdom, who must be utterly ruined if his project should succeed, we
were never once consulted till the matter was over, and he will judge of
our exigences by his own; neither will these be ever at an end till he
and his accomplices will think they have enough: And it now appears that
he will not be content with all our gold and silver, but intends to buy
up our goods and manufactures with the same coin.
I shall not enter into examination of the prices for which he now
proposes to sell his halfpence, or what he calls his copper, by the
pound; I have said enough of it in my former letter, and it hath
likewise been considered by others. It is certain that by his own first
computation, we were to pay three shillings for what was intrinsically
worth but one,[9] although it had been of the true weight and standard
for which he pretended to have contracted; but there is so great a
difference both in weight and badness in several of his coins that some
of them have been nine in ten below the intrinsic value, and most of
them six or seven.[10]
[Footnote 9: The report of the Committee of the Privy Council which sat
on Wood's coinage, stated that copper ready for minting cost eighteen
pence per pound before it was brought into the Mint at the Tower of
London. See the Report prefixed to Letter III. and Appendix II., in
which it is also stated that Wood's copper was worth thirteen pence per
pound. [T.S.]]
[Footnote 10: Newton's assay report says that Wood's pieces were of
unequal weight. [T.S.]]
His last proposal being of a peculiar strain and nature, deserves to be
very particularly considered, both on account of the matter and the
style. It is as follows.
"Lastly, in consideration of the direful apprehensions which prevail in
Ireland, that Mr. Wood will by such coinage drain them of their gold and
silver, he proposes to take their manufactures in exchange, and that no
person be obliged to receive more than fivepence halfpenny at one
payment."
First, Observe this little impudent hardwareman turning into ridicule
"the direful apprehensions of a whole kingdom," priding himself as the
cause of them, and daring to prescribe what no King of England ever
attempted, how far a whole nation shall be obliged to take his brass
coin. And he has reason to insult; for sure there was never an example
in history, of a great kingdom kept in awe for above a year in daily
dread of utter destruction, not by a powerful invader at the head of
twenty thousand men, not by a plague or a famine, not by a tyrannical
prince (for we never had one more gracious) or a corrupt administration,
but by one single, diminutive, insignificant, mechanic.
But to go on. To remove our "direful apprehensions that he will drain us
of our gold and silver by his coinage:" This little arbitrary
mock-monarch most graciously offers to "take our manufactures in
exchange." Are our Irish understandings indeed so low in his opinion? Is
not this the very misery we complain of? That his cursed project will
put us under the necessity of selling our goods for what is equal to
nothing. How would such a proposal sound from France or Spain or any
other country we deal with, if they should offer to deal with us only
upon this condition, that we should take their money at ten times higher
than the intrinsic value? Does Mr. Wood think, for instance, that we
will sell him a stone of wool for a parcel of his counters not worth
sixpence, when we can send it to England and receive as many shillings
in gold and silver? Surely there was never heard such a compound of
impudence, villainy and folly.
His proposals conclude with perfect high treason. He promises, that no
person shall be _obliged_ to receive more than fivepence halfpenny of
his coin in one payment: By which it is plain, that he pretends to
_oblige_ every subject in this kingdom to take so much in every payment,
if it be offered; whereas his patent obliges no man, nor can the
prerogative by law claim such a power, as I have often observed; so
that here Mr. Wood takes upon him the entire legislature, and an
absolute dominion over the properties of the whole nation.
Good God! Who are this wretch's advisers? Who are his supporters,
abettors, encouragers, or sharers? Mr. Wood will _oblige_ me to take
fivepence halfpenny of his brass in every payment! And I will shoot Mr.
Wood and his deputies through the head, like highwaymen or
housebreakers, if they dare to force one farthing of their coin upon me
in the payment of an hundred pounds. It is no loss of honour to submit
to the lion, but who, with the figure of a man, can think with patience
of being devoured alive by a rat. He has laid a tax upon the people of
Ireland of seventeen shillings at least in the pound; a tax I say, not
only upon lands, but interest-money, goods, manufactures, the hire of
handicraftsmen, labourers, and servants. Shopkeepers look to yourselves.
Wood will _oblige_ and force you to take fivepence halfpenny of his
trash in every payment, and many of you receive twenty, thirty, forty
payments in a day, or else you can hardly find bread: And pray consider
how much that will amount to in a year: Twenty times fivepence halfpenny
is nine shillings and twopence, which is above an hundred and sixty
pounds a year, whereof you will be losers of at least one hundred and
forty pounds by taking your payments in his money. If any of you be
content to deal with Mr. Wood on such conditions they may. But for my
own particular, "let his money perish with him." If the famous Mr.
Hampden rather chose to go to prison, than pay a few shillings to King
Charles 1st. without authority of Parliament, I will rather choose to be
hanged than have all my substance taxed at seventeen shillings in the
pound, at the arbitrary will and pleasure of the venerable Mr. Wood.
The paragraph concludes thus. "N.B." (that is to say _nota bene_, or
_mark well_), "No evidence appeared from Ireland, or elsewhere, to prove
the mischiefs complained of, or any abuses whatsoever committed in the
execution of the said grant."
The impudence of this remark exceeds all that went before. First; the
House of Commons in Ireland, which represents the whole people of the
kingdom; and secondly the Privy-council, addressed His Majesty against
these halfpence. What could be done more to express the universal sense
and opinion of the nation? If his copper were diamonds, and the kingdom
were entirely against it, would not that be sufficient to reject it?
Must a committee of the House of Commons, and our whole Privy-council go
over to argue _pro_ and _con_ with Mr. Wood? To what end did the King
give his patent for coining of halfpence in Ireland? Was it not, because
it was represented to his sacred Majesty, that such a coinage would be
of advantage to the good of this kingdom, and of all his subjects here?
It is to the patentee's peril if his representation be false, and the
execution of his patent be fraudulent and corrupt. Is he so wicked and
foolish to think that his patent was given him to ruin a million and a
half of people, that he might be a gainer of three or four score
thousand pounds to himself? Before he was at the charge of passing a
patent, much more of raking up so much filthy dross, and stamping it
with His Majesty's "image and superscription," should he not first in
common sense, in common equity, and common manners, have consulted the
principal party concerned; that is to say, the people of the kingdom,
the House of Lords or Commons, or the Privy-council? If any foreigner
should ask us, "whose image and superscription" there is in Wood's coin,
we should be ashamed to tell him, it was Caesar's. In that great want of
copper halfpence, which he alleges we were, our city set up our Caesar's
statue[11] in excellent copper, at an expense that is equal in value to
thirty thousand pounds of his coin: And we will not receive his _image_
in worse metal.
[Footnote 11: An equestrian statue of George I. at Essex Bridge, Dublin,
[F.]]
I observe many of our people putting a melancholy case on this subject.
"It is true" say they, "we are all undone if Wood's halfpence must pass;
but what shall we do, if His Majesty puts out a proclamation commanding
us to take them?" This hath been often dinned in my ears. But I desire
my countrymen to be assured that there is nothing in it. The King never
issues out a proclamation but to enjoin what the law permits him. He
will not issue out a proclamation against law, or if such a thing
should happen by a mistake, we are no more obliged to obey it than to
run our heads into the fire. Besides, His Majesty will never command us
by a proclamation, what he does not offer to command us in the patent
itself. There he leaves it to our discretion, so that our destruction
must be entirely owing to ourselves. Therefore let no man be afraid of a
proclamation, which will never be granted; and if it should, yet upon
this occasion, will be of no force. The King's revenues here are near
four hundred thousand pounds a year, can you think his ministers will
advise him to take them in Wood's brass, which will reduce the value to
fifty thousand pounds. England gets a million sterl. by this nation,
which, if this project goes on, will be almost reduced to nothing: And
do you think those who live in England upon Irish estates will be
content to take an eighth or a tenth part, by being paid in Wood's
dross?
If Wood and his confederates were not convinced of our stupidity, they
never would have attempted so audacious an enterprise. He now sees a
spirit hath been raised against him, and he only watches till it begins
to flag, he goes about "watching" when to "devour us." He hopes we shall
be weary of contending with him, and at last out of ignorance, or fear,
or of being perfectly tired with opposition, we shall be forced to
yield. And therefore I confess it is my chief endeavour to keep up your
spirits and resentments. If I tell you there is a precipice under you,
and that if you go forwards you will certainly break your necks. If I
point to it before your eyes, must I be at the trouble of repeating it
every morning? Are our people's "hearts waxed gross"? Are "their ears
dull of hearing," and have "they closed their eyes"? I fear there are
some few vipers among us, who, for ten or twenty pounds gain, would sell
their souls and their country, though at last it would end in their own
ruin as well as ours. Be not like "the deaf adder, who refuses to hear
the voice of the charmer, charm he never so wisely."
Though my letter be directed to you, Mr. Harding, yet I intend it for
all my countrymen. I have no interest in this affair but what is common
to the public. I can live better than many others, I have some gold and
silver by me, and a shop well furnished, and shall be able to make a
shift when many of my betters are starving. But I am grieved to see the
coldness and indifference of many people, with whom I discourse. Some
are afraid of a proclamation, others shrug up their shoulders, and cry,
"What would you have us do?" Some give out, there is no danger at all.
Others are comforted that it will be a common calamity and they shall
fare no worse than their neighbours. Will a man, who hears midnight
robbers at his door, get out of bed, and raise his family for a common
defence, and shall a whole kingdom lie in a lethargy, while Mr. Wood
comes at the head of his confederates to rob them of all they have, to
ruin us and our posterity for ever? If an highwayman meets you on the
road, you give him your money to save your life, but, God be thanked,
Mr. Wood cannot touch a hair of your heads. You have all the laws of God
and man on your side. When he or his accomplices offer you his dross it
is but saying no, and you are safe. If a madman should come to my shop
with an handful of dirt raked out of the kennel, and offer it in payment
for ten yards of stuff, I would pity or laugh at him, or, if his
behaviour deserved it, kick him out of my doors. And if Mr. Wood comes
to demand any gold and silver, or commodities for which I have paid my
gold and silver, in exchange for his trash, can he deserve or expect
better treatment?
When the evil day is come (if it must come) let us mark and observe
those who presume to offer these halfpence in payment. Let their names,
and trades, and places of abode be made public, that every one may be
aware of them, as betrayers of their country, and confederates with Mr.
Wood. Let them be watched at markets and fairs, and let the first honest
discoverer give the word about, that Wood's halfpence have been offered,
and caution the poor innocent people not to receive them.
Perhaps I have been too tedious; but there would never be an end, if I
attempted to say all that this melancholy subject will bear. I will
conclude with humbly offering one proposal, which, if it were put in
practice, would blow up this destructive project at once. Let some
skilful judicious pen draw up an advertisement to the following purpose.
That "Whereas one William Wood hardware-man, now or lately sojourning
in the city of London, hath, by many misrepresentations, procured a
patent for coining an hundred and forty thousand pounds[12] in copper
halfpence for this kingdom, which is a sum five times greater than our
occasions require. And whereas it is notorious that the said Wood hath
coined his halfpence of such base metal and false weight, that they are,
at least, six parts in seven below the real value. And whereas we have
reason to apprehend, that the said Wood may, at any time hereafter,
clandestinely coin as many more halfpence as he pleases. And whereas the
said patent neither doth nor can _oblige_ His Majesty's subjects to
receive the said halfpence in any payment, but leaves it to their
voluntary choice, because, by law the subject cannot be _obliged_ to
take any money except gold or silver. And whereas, contrary to the
letter and meaning of the said patent, the said Wood hath declared that
every person shall be _obliged_ to take fivepence halfpenny of his coin
in every payment. And whereas the House of Commons and Privy-council
have severally addressed his Most Sacred Majesty, representing the ill
consequences which the said coinage may have upon this kingdom. And
lastly whereas it is universally agreed, that the whole nation to a man
(except Mr. Wood and his confederates) are in the utmost apprehensions
of the ruinous consequences, that must follow from the said coinage.
Therefore we whose names are underwritten, being persons of considerable
estates in this kingdom, and residers therein, do unanimously resolve
and declare that we will never receive, one farthing or halfpenny of the
said Wood's coining, and that we will direct all our tenants to refuse
the said coin from any person whatsoever; Of which that they may not be
ignorant, we have sent them a copy of this advertisement, to be read to
them by our stewards, receivers, &c."
[Footnote 12: In the first paragraph of this letter the sum was given as
£104,000. [T.S.]]
I could wish, that a paper of this nature might be drawn up, and signed
by two or three hundred principal gentlemen of this kingdom, and printed
copies thereof sent to their several tenants; I am deceived, if anything
could sooner defeat this execrable design of Wood and his accomplices.
This would immediately give the alarm, and set the kingdom on their
guard. This would give courage to the meanest tenant and cottager. "How
long, O Lord, righteous and true."
I must tell you in particular, Mr. Harding, that you are much to blame.
Several hundred persons have enquired at your house for my "Letter to
the Shopkeepers, &c." and you had none to sell them. Pray keep yourself
provided with that letter, and with this; you have got very well by the
former, but I did not then write for your sake, any more than I do now.
Pray advertise both in every newspaper, and let it not be _your_ fault
or _mine_, if our countrymen will not take warning. I desire you
likewise to sell them as cheap as you can.
_I am your servant_,
M.B.
_Aug._ 4, 1724.
_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._[1]
AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBER AT WHITEHALL, THE 24TH DAY
OF JULY, 1724.
In obedience to your Majesty's order of reference, upon the several
resolutions and addresses of both Houses of Parliament of Ireland,
during their late session, the late address of your Majesty's justices,
and Privy-council of that kingdom, and the petitions of the county and
city of Dublin, concerning a patent granted by your Majesty to William
Wood Esq; for the coining and uttering copper halfpence and farthings in
the kingdom of Ireland, to such persons as would voluntarily accept the
same; and upon the petition of the said William Wood, concerning the
same coinage, the Lords of the Committee have taken into their
consideration the said patent, addresses, petitions, and all matters and
papers relating thereto, and have heard and examined all such persons,
as upon due and sufficient notice, were desirous and willing to be heard
upon the subject matter under their consideration, and have agreed upon
the following Report, containing a true state of the whole matter, as it
appeared before them, with their humble opinion, to be laid before your
Majesty for your royal consideration and determination, upon a matter of
such importance.
[Footnote 1: For the story of the origin of this report see the Note
prefixed to Letter III. [T.S.]]
The several addresses to your Majesty from your subjects of Ireland,
contain in general terms the strongest representations of the great
apprehensions they were under, from the importing and uttering copper
halfpence and farthings in Ireland, by virtue of the patent granted to
Mr. Wood, which they conceived would prove highly prejudicial to your
Majesty's revenue, destructive of the trade and commerce of the kingdom,
and of dangerous consequence to the properties of the subject. They
represent, That the patent had been obtained in a clandestine and
unprecedented manner, and by notorious misrepresentations of the state
of Ireland; That if the terms of the patent had been complied with, this
coinage would have been of infinite loss to the kingdom, but that the
patentee, under colour of the powers granted to him, had imported and
endeavoured to utter great quantities of different impressions, and of
less weight, than required by the patent, and had been guilty of
notorious frauds and deceit in coining the said copper money: And they
humbly beseech your Majesty, that you would give such directions, as in
your great wisdom you should think proper, to prevent the fatal effects
of uttering any half pence or farthings by virtue of the said patent:
And the House of Commons of Ireland, in a second address upon this
subject, pray, That your Majesty would be pleased to give directions to
the several officers intrusted in the receipt of your Majesty's revenue,
That they do not on any pretence whatever, receive or utter any of the
said copper halfpence or farthings.
In answer to the addresses of the Houses of Parliament of Ireland, your
Majesty was most graciously pleased to assure them, "That if any abuses
had been committed by the patentee, you would give the necessary orders
for enquiring into and punishing those abuses; and that your Majesty
would do everything, that was in your power, for the satisfaction of
your people."
In pursuance of this your Majesty's most gracious declaration, your
Majesty was pleased to take this matter into you royal consideration;
and that you might be the better enabled effectually to answer the
expectations of your people of Ireland, your Majesty was pleased by a
letter from Lord Carteret, one of your principal secretaries of state,
dated March 10, 1723-4, to signify your pleasure to your Lord Lieutenant
of Ireland, "That he should give directions for sending over such papers
and witnesses as should be thought proper to support the objections made
against the patent, and against the patentee, in the execution of the
powers given him by the patent."
Upon the receipt of these your Majesty's orders, the Lord Lieutenant, by
his letter of the 20th of March, 1723-4, represented the great
difficulty he found himself under, to comply with these your Majesty's
orders; and by another letter of the 24th of March 1723-4, "after
consulting the principal members of both Houses, who were immediately in
your Majesty's service, and of the Privy Council," acquainted your
Majesty, "That none of them would take upon them to advise, how any
material persons or papers might be sent over on this occasion; but they
all seemed apprehensive of the ill temper any miscarriage, in a trial,
upon _scire facias_ brought against the patentee, might occasion in both
Houses, if the evidence were not laid as full before a jury, as it was
before them," and did therefore, a second time, decline sending over
any persons, papers or materials whatsoever, to support this charge
brought against your Majesty's patent and the patentee.
As this proceeding seemed very extraordinary, that in a matter that had
raised so great and universal a clamour in Ireland, no one person could
be prevailed upon to come over from Ireland, in support of the united
sense of both Houses of Parliament of Ireland; That no papers, no
materials, no evidence whatsoever of the mischiefs arising from this
patent, or of the notorious frauds and deceit committed in the execution
of it, could now be had, to give your Majesty satisfaction herein; "your
Majesty however, desirous to give your people of Ireland all possible
satisfaction, but sensible that you cannot in any case proceed against
any of the meanest of your subjects, but according to the known rules
and maxims of law and justice," repeated your orders to your Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, that by persuasion, and making proper allowances
for their expenses, new endeavours might be used to procure and send
over such witnesses as should be thought material to make good the
charge against the patent.
In answer to these orders, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland acquaints your
Majesty, by his letter of the 23d of April to one of your principal
secretaries of state, "That in order to obey your Majesty's commands as
far as possibly he could, at a meeting with my Lord Chancellor, the
Chief Judges, your Majesty's Attorney and Solicitor-General, he had
earnestly desired their advice and assistance, to enable him to send
over such witnesses as might be necessary to support the charge against
Mr. Wood's patent, and the execution of it. The result of this meeting
was such, that the Lord Lieutenant could not reap the least advantage or
assistance from it, every one being so guarded with caution, against
giving any advice or opinion in this matter of state, apprehending great
danger to themselves from meddling in it."
The Lords of the Committee think it very strange, that there should be
such great difficulty in prevailing with persons, who had already given
their evidence before the Parliament of Ireland, to come over and give
the same evidence here, and especially, that the chief difficulty should
arise, from a general apprehension of a miscarriage, in an enquiry
before your Majesty, or in a proceeding by due course of law, in a case,
where both Houses of Parliament had declared themselves so fully
convinced, and satisfied upon evidence, and examinations taken in the
most solemn manner.
At the same time that your Majesty sent your orders to the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, to send over such evidences as were thought
material to support the charge against the patent, that your Majesty
might, without any further loss of time than was absolutely necessary,
be as fully informed as was possible, and that the abuses and frauds
alleged to be committed by the patentee, in executing the powers granted
to him, might be fully and strictly enquired into, and examined, your
Majesty was pleased to order that an assay should be made of the
fineness, value, and weight of this copper money, and the goodness
thereof, compared with the former coinages of copper money for Ireland,
and the copper money coined in your Majesty's Mint in England; and it
was accordingly referred to Sir Isaac Newton, Edward Southwell, and
Thomas Scroope, Esqs. to make the said assay and trial.
By the reports made of this assay, which are hereunto annexed, it
appears,[2] "That the pix of the copper moneys coined at Bristol by Mr.
Wood for Ireland, containing the trial pieces, which was sealed and
locked up at the time of coining, was opened at your Majesty's mint at
the Tower; that the comptroller's account of the quantities of halfpence
and farthings coined, agreed with Mr. Wood's account, amounting to 59
tons, 3 hundred, 1 quarter, 11 pounds, and 4 ounces; That by the
specimens of this coinage, which had from time to time been taken from
the several parcels coined, and sealed up in papers, and put into the
pix, 60 halfpence weighed 14 ounces troy, and 18 penny-weight, which is
about a quarter of an ounce above one pound weight avoirdupois; and 30
farthings weighed 3 ounces and 3 quarters of an ounce troy, and 46
grams, which is also above the weight required by the patent. It also
appears, that both halfpence and farthings when heated red-hot spread
thin under the hammer without cracking; that the copper of which Mr.
Wood's coinage is made, is of the same goodness and value with the
copper of which the copper money is coined in your Majesty's mint for
England, and worth in the market about 13 pence per pound weight
avoirdupois; That a pound of copper wrought into bars of fillets, and
made fit for coinage, before brought into the mint at the Tower of
London, is worth 18 pence per pound, and always cost as much, and is
coined into 23 pence of copper money by tale, for England; It likewise
appears, that the halfpence and farthings coined by Mr. Wood, when
compared with the copper money coined for Ireland, in the reigns of King
Charles II. King James II. and King William and Queen Mary, considerably
exceeds them all in weight, very far exceeds them all in goodness,
fineness, and value of the copper, none of them bearing the fire so
well, not being malleable, wasting very much in the fire, and great part
of them burning into a cinder of little or no value at all; Specimens
of all which, as likewise of Mr. Wood's copper money, upon trials and
assays made by Sir Isaac Newton, Mr. Southwell, and Mr. Scroope, were
laid before this Committee for their information."
[Footnote 2: See Appendix, No. II. [T.S.]]
The Lords of the Committee beg leave upon this article of the complaint,
"That notorious frauds and deceits had been committed by the patentee,
in executing the powers granted him," to observe to your Majesty, That
this is a fact expressly charged upon the patentee, and if it had in any
manner been proved, it might have enabled your Majesty, by due course of
law, to have given the satisfaction to your people of Ireland, that has
been so much insisted upon; but as it is now above four months since
your Majesty was pleased to send over to Ireland for such evidence, as
might prove a fact alleged to be so notorious, and no evidence at all
has been as yet transmitted, nor the least expectation given of any that
may hereafter be obtained, and the trials and assays that have been
taken of the halfpence, and farthings coined by Mr. Wood proving so
unquestionably the weight, goodness and fineness of the copper money
coined, rather exceeding the conditions of the patent, than being any
way defective, the Lords of the Committee cannot advise your Majesty, by
a writ of _scire facias_, or any other manner to endeavour vacating the
said patent, when there is no probability of success in such an
undertaking.
As these trials and assays fully shew that the patentee hath acted
fairly according to the terms and conditions of his patent, so they
evidently prove, that the care and caution made use of in this patent,
by proper conditions, checks, and comptrols have effectually provided,
that the copper money coined for Ireland by virtue of this patent,
should far exceed the like coinages for Ireland, in the reigns of your
Majesty's royal predecessors.
And that your Majesty's royal predecessors have exercised this undoubted
prerogative of granting to private persons the power and privilege of
coining copper halfpence and farthings for the kingdom of Ireland, was
proved to this Committee by several precedents of such patents granted
to private persons by King Charles II. and King James II. none of which
were equally beneficial to your kingdom of Ireland, nor so well guarded
with proper covenants and conditions for the due execution of the powers
thereby granted, although the power and validity of those patents, and a
due compliance with them, was never in any one instance, till this time,
disputed or controverted.
By these former patents, the sole power of coining copper money for
Ireland, was granted to the patentees for the term of 21 years, to be
coined in such place as they should think convenient, and "such
quantities as they could conveniently issue within the term of 21
years," without any restriction of the quantity to be coined within the
whole term, or any provision of a certain quantity, only to be coined
annually to prevent the ill consequences of too great a quantity to be
poured in at once, at the will and pleasure of the patentees; no
provision was made for the goodness and fineness of the copper, no
comptroller appointed to inspect the copper in bars and fillets, before
coined, and take constant assays of the money when coined, and the power
of issuing not limited "to such as would voluntarily accept the same";
but by the patent granted to John Knox, the money coined by virtue of
the patent, "is made and declared to be the current coin of the kingdom
of Ireland," and a pound weight of copper was allowed to be coined into
2 shillings and 8 pence, and whatever quantity should be coined, a rent
of 16_l_ _per annum_ only was reserved to the crown, and 700 tons of
copper were computed to be coined within the 21 years, without any
complaint.
The term granted to Mr. Wood for coining copper money is for 14 years
only, the quantity for the whole term limited to 360 tons, 100 ton only
to be issued within one year, and 20 tons each year for the 13 remaining
years; a comptroller is appointed by the authority of the crown to
inspect, comptrol, and assay the copper, as well not coined as coined;
the copper to be fine British copper, cast into bars or fillets, which
when heated red hot would spread thin under the hammer; a pound weight
of copper to be coined into 2 shillings and sixpence, and without any
compulsion on currency enforced, to be received by such only as would
voluntarily and wilfully accept the same"; a rent of 800_l_ _per annum_
is reserved unto your Majesty,[3] and 200_l per annum_ to your Majesty's
clerk comptroller, to be paid annually by the patentee, for the full
term of the fourteen years, which for 13 years when 20 tons of copper
only are coined, is not inconsiderable; these great and essential
differences in the several patents, that have been granted for coining
copper money for the kingdom of Ireland, seemed sufficiently to justify
the care and caution that was used in granting the letters-patent to Mr.
Wood.
[Footnote 3: See the extract from the patent itself, where the amount is
given differently [T.S.]]
It has been further represented to your Majesty, That these
letters-patent were obtained by Mr. Wood in a clandestine and
unprecedent manner, and by gross misrepresentations of the state of the
kingdom of Ireland. Upon enquiring into this fact it appears, That the
petition of Mr. Wood for obtaining this coinage, was presented to your
Majesty at the time that several other petitions and applications were
made to your Majesty, for the same purpose, by sundry persons, well
acquainted and conversant with the affairs of Ireland, setting forth the
great want of small money and change in all the common and lower parts
of traffic, and business throughout the kingdom, and the terms of Mr.
Wood's petition seeming to your Majesty most reasonable, thereupon a
draught of a warrant directing a grant of such coinage to be made to Mr.
Wood, was referred to your Majesty's then Attorney and Solicitor-general
of England, to consider and report their opinion to your Majesty; Sir
Isaac Newton, as the Committee is informed was consulted in all the
steps of settling and adjusting the terms and conditions of the patent;
and after mature deliberation, your Majesty's warrant was signed,
directing an indenture in such manner as is practised in your Majesty's
mint in the Tower of London, for the coining of gold and silver moneys,
to pass the Great Seal of Great Britain, which was carried through all
the usual forms and offices without haste or precipitation, That the
Committee cannot discover the least pretence to say, this patent was
passed or obtained in a clandestine or unprecedented manner, unless it
is to be understood, that your Majesty's granting a liberty of coining
copper money for Ireland, under the Great Seal of Great Britain, without
referring the consideration thereof to the principal officers of
Ireland, is the grievance and mischief complained of. Upon this head it
must be admitted, that letters-patent under the Great Seal of Great
Britain for coining copper money for Ireland, are legal and obligatory,
a just and reasonable exercise of your Majesty's royal prerogative, and
in no manner derogatory, or invasive, of any liberties or privileges of
your subjects of Ireland. When any matter or thing is transacting that
concerns or may affect your kingdom of Ireland, if your Majesty has any
doubts concerning the same, or sees just cause for considering your
officers of Ireland, your Majesty is frequently pleased to refer such
considerations to your chief governors of Ireland, but the Lords of the
Committee hope it will not be asserted, that any legal orders or
resolutions of your Majesty can or ought to be called in question or
invalidated, because the advice or consent of your chief governors of
that kingdom was not previously had upon them: 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 your Majesty and your royal
predecessors, have been issued under the royal sign manual, without any
previous reference, or advice of your officers of Ireland, which have
always had their due force, and have been punctually complied with and
obeyed. And as it cannot be disputed but this patent might legally and
properly pass under the Great Seal of Great Britain, so their Lordships
cannot find any precedents of references to the officers of Ireland, of
what passed under the Great Seal of England; on the contrary, there are
precedents of patents passed under the Great Seal of Ireland, where in
all the previous steps the references were made to the officers of
England.
By the misrepresentation of the state of Ireland, in order to obtain
this patent, it is presumed, is meant, That the information given to
your Majesty of the great want of small money, to make small payments,
was groundless, and that there is no such want of small money: The Lords
of the Committee enquired very particularly into this article, and Mr.
Wood produced several witnesses, that directly asserted the great want
of small money for change, and the great damage that retailers and
manufactures suffered for want of such copper money. Evidence was given,
That considerable manufacturers have been obliged to give tallies, or
tokens in cards, to their workmen for want of small money, signed upon
the back, to be afterwards exchanged for larger money: That a premium
was often given to obtain small money for necessary occasions: Several
letters from Ireland to correspondents in England were read, complaining
of the want of copper money, and expressing the great demand there was
for this money.
The great want of small money was further proved by the common use of
_raps_, a counterfeit coin, of such base metal, that what passes for a
halfpenny, is not worth half a farthing, which raps appear to have
obtained a currency, out of necessity and for want of better small money
to make change with, and by the best accounts, the Lords of the
Committee have reason to believe, That there can be no doubt, that there
is a real want of small money in Ireland, which seems to be so far
admitted on all hands, that there does not appear to have been any
misrepresentation of the state of Ireland in this respect.
In the second address from the House of Commons to your Majesty, They
most humbly beseech your Majesty, that you will be graciously pleased to
give directions to the several officers intrusted with the receipt of
your Majesty's revenue, that they do not, on any pretence whatsoever,
receive or utter such halfpence or farthings, and Mr. Wood, in his
petition to your Majesty, complains, that the officers of your Majesty's
revenue had already given such orders to all the inferior officers not
to receive any of this coin.
Your Majesty, by your patent under the Great Seal of Great Britain,
wills, requires and commands your "lieutenant, deputy, or other chief
governor or governors of your kingdom of Ireland, and all other officers
and ministers of your Majesty, your heirs and successors in England,
Ireland or elsewhere, to be aiding and assisting to the said William
Wood, his executors, &c. in the execution of all or any the powers,
authorities, directions, matters or things to be executed by him or
them, or for his or their benefit and advantage, by virtue, and in
pursuance of the said indentures, in all things as becometh, &c." And if
the officers of the revenue have, upon their own authority, given any
orders, directions, significations, or intimations, to hinder or
obstruct the receiving and uttering the copper money coined and
imported, pursuant to your Majesty's letters-patent, this cannot but be
looked upon as a very extraordinary proceeding.
In another paragraph of the patent your Majesty has covenanted and
granted unto the said William Wood, his executors, &c. "That upon
performance of covenants, on his and their parts, he and they shall
peaceably, and quietly, have, hold, and enjoy all the powers,
authorities, privileges, licences, profits, advantages, and all other
matters and things thereby granted, without any let, suit, trouble,
molestation or denial of your Majesty, your heirs or successors, or of
or by any of your or their officers or ministers, or any person or
persons, &c." This being so expressly granted and covenanted by your
Majesty, and there appearing no failure, non-performance, or breach of
covenants, on the part of the patentee, the Lords of the Committee
cannot advise your Majesty to give directions to the officers of the
revenue, not to receive or utter any of the said copper halfpence or
farthings as has been desired.
Mr. Wood having been heard by his counsel, produced his several
witnesses, all the papers and precedents, which he thought material,
having been read and considered, and having as he conceived, fully
vindicated both the patent, and the execution thereof. For his further
justification, and to clear himself from the imputation of attempting to
make to himself any unreasonable profit or advantage, and to enrich
himself at the expense of the kingdom of Ireland, by endeavouring to
impose upon them, and utter a greater quantity of copper money, than the
necessary occasions of the people shall require, and can easily take
off, delivered a proposal in writing, signed by himself, which is
hereunto annexed, and Mr. Wood having by the said letters-patent,
"covenanted, granted, and promised to, and with your Majesty, your heirs
and successors, that he shall and will from time to time in the making
the said copper farthings and halfpence in England, and in transporting
the same from time to time to Ireland, and in uttering, vending,
disposing and dispersing the same there, and in all his doings and
accounts concerning the same, submit himself to the inspection,
examination, order and comptrol of your Majesty and your commissioners
of the treasury or high-treasurer for the time being;" the Lords of the
Committee are of opinion, that your Majesty upon this voluntary offer
and proposal of Mr. Wood, may give proper orders and directions for the
execution and due performance of such parts of the said proposal, as
shall be judged most for the interest and accommodation of your subjects
of Ireland: In the mean time, it not appearing to their Lordships that
Mr. Wood has done or committed any act or deed, that may tend to
invalidate, or make void his letters-patent, or to forfeit the
privileges and advantages thereby granted to him by your Majesty; It is
but just and reasonable, that your Majesty should immediately send
orders to your commissioners of the revenue, and all other your officers
in Ireland, to revoke all orders, directions, significations, or
intimations whatsoever, that may have been given by them, or any of
them, to hinder or obstruct the receiving and uttering this copper
money, and that the halfpence and farthings already coined by Mr. Wood,
amounting to about 17,000_l_. and such further quantity as shall make up
the said 17,000_l_. to 40,000_l_. "be suffered and permitted without any
let, suit, trouble, molestation, or denial of any of your Majesty's
officers or ministers whatsoever, to pass, and be received as current
money by such as shall be willing to receive the same." At the same
time, it may be advisable for your Majesty, to give the proper orders,
that Mr. Wood shall not coin, import into Ireland, utter or dispose of
any more copper halfpence or farthings, than to the amount of 40,000_l_.
according to his own proposal, without your Majesty's special licence or
authority, to be had for that purpose; and if your Majesty shall be
pleased to order, that Mr. Wood's proposal, delivered to the Lords of
the Committee, shall be transmitted to your Majesty's chief governor,
deputies, or other your ministers, or officers in Ireland, it will give
them a proper opportunity to consider, Whether, after the reduction of
360 tons of copper, being in value 100,800_l_. to 142 tons, 17 hundred,
16 pounds being in value 40,000_l_. only, anything can be done for the
further satisfaction of the people of Ireland.
LETTER III.
TO THE NOBILITY AND GENTRY OF THE KINGDOM OF IRELAND.
NOTE.
The Drapier's second letter was dated August 4th, 1724. A few days
later the English Privy Council's Report, dated 24th July, 1724, arrived
in Dublin, and on August 25th, Swift had issued his reply to it in this
third letter.
The Report itself, which is here prefixed to the third letter, was said
to have been the work of Walpole. Undoubtedly, it contains the best
arguments that could then be urged in favour of Wood and the patent, and
undoubtedly, also, it would have had the desired effect had it been
allowed to do its work uncriticised. But Swift's opposition was fatal to
Walpole's intentions. He took the report as but another attempt to foist
on the people of Ireland a decree in which they had not been consulted,
and no amount of yielding, short of complete abandonment of it, would
palliate the thing that was hateful in itself. He resented the insult.
After specific rebuttals of the various arguments urged in the report in
favour of the patent, Swift suddenly turns from the comparatively petty
and insignificant consideration as to the weight and quality of the
coins, and deals with the broad principle of justice which the granting
of the patent had ignored. Had the English Houses of Parliament and the
English Privy Council, he said, addressed the King against a similar
breach of the English people's rights, his Majesty would not have waited
to discuss the matter, nor would his ministers have dared to advise him
as they had done in this instance. "Am I a free man in England," he
exclaims, "and do I become a slave in six hours in crossing the
channel?"
The report, however, is interesting inasmuch as it assists us to
appreciate the pathetic condition of Irish affairs at the time. The very
fact that the petition of the Irish parliament could be so handled,
proves how strong had been the hold over Ireland by England, and with
what daring insistence the English ministers continued to efface the
last strongholds of Irish independence.
Monck Mason, in reviewing the report, has devoted a very elaborate note
to its details, and has fortified his criticisms with a series of
remarkable letters from the Archbishop of Dublin, which he publishes for
the first time.[1] I have embodied much of this note in the annotations
which accompany the present reprint of this letter.
[Footnote 1: "History of St. Patrick's Cathedral," pp. lxxxvi-xcv.]
The text of this third letter is based on Sir W. Scott's, collated with
the first edition and that given by Faulkner in "Fraud Detected." It has
also been read with Faulkner's text given in the fourth volume of his
edition of Swift's Works, published in 1735.
[T.S.]
[Illustration:
SOME
**Observations**
Upon a PAPER, Call'd, The
**REPORT**
OF THE
**COMMITTEE**
OF THE
Most Honourable the _Privy-Council_
IN
**ENGLAND,**
Relating to WOOD's _Half-pence_.
_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 III.
TO THE NOBILITY AND GENTRY OF THE KINGDOM OF IRELAND.
Having already written two letters to people of my own level, and
condition; and having now very pressing occasion for writing a third; I
thought I could not more properly address it than to your lordships and
worships.
The occasion is this. A printed paper was sent to me on the 18th
instant, entitled, "A Report of the Committee of the Lords of His
Majesty's Most Honourable Privy-Council in England, relating to Mr.
Wood's Halfpence and Farthings."[2] There is no mention made where the
paper was printed, but I suppose it to have been in Dublin; and I have
been told that the copy did not come over in the Gazette, but in the
London Journal, or some other print of no authority or consequence; and
for anything that legally appears to the contrary, it may be a
contrivance to fright us, or a project of some printer, who hath a mind
to make a penny by publishing something upon a subject, which now
employs all our thoughts in this kingdom. Mr. Wood in publishing this
paper would insinuate to the world, as if the Committee had a greater
concern for his credit and private emolument, than for the honour of the
Privy-council and both Houses of Parliament here, and for the quiet and
welfare of this whole kingdom; For it seems intended as a vindication of
Mr. Wood, not without several severe remarks on the Houses of Lords and
Commons of Ireland.
[Footnote 2: The full text of this report is prefixed to this third
letter of the Drapier. The report was published in the "London Journal"
about the middle of August of 1724. Neither the "Gazette" nor any other
ministerial organ printed it, which evidently gave Swift his cue to
attack it in the merciless manner he did. Monck Mason thought it "not
improbable that the minister [Walpole] adopted this method of
communication, because it served his own purpose; he dared not to stake
his credit upon such a document, which, in its published form, contains
some gross mis-statements" ("History of St. Patrick's Cathedral," note,
on p. 336). [T.S.]]
The whole is indeed written with the turn and air of a pamphlet, as if
it were a dispute between William Wood on the one part, and the Lords
Justices, Privy-council and both Houses of Parliament on the other; the
design of it being to clear and vindicate the injured reputation of
William Wood, and to charge the other side with casting rash and
groundless aspersions upon him.
But if it be really what the title imports, Mr. Wood hath treated the
Committee with great rudeness, by publishing an act of theirs in so
unbecoming a manner, without their leave, and before it was communicated
to the government and Privy-council of Ireland, to whom the Committee
advised that it should be transmitted. But with all deference be it
spoken, I do not conceive that a Report of a Committee of the Council in
England is hitherto a law in either kingdom; and until any point is
determined to be a law, it remains disputable by every subject.
This (may it please your lordships and worships) may seem a strange way
of discoursing in an illiterate shopkeeper. I have endeavoured (although
without the help of books) to improve that small portion of reason which
God hath pleased to give me, and when reason plainly appears before me,
I cannot turn away my head from it. Thus for instance, if any lawyer
should tell me that such a point were law, from which many gross
palpable absurdities must follow, I would not, I could not believe him.
If Sir Edward Coke should positively assert (which he nowhere does, but
the direct contrary) that a limited prince, could by his prerogative
oblige his subjects to take half an ounce of lead, stamped with his
image, for twenty shillings in gold, I should swear he was deceived or a
deceiver, because a power like that, would leave the whole lives and
fortunes of the people entirely at the mercy of the monarch: Yet this,
in effect, is what Wood hath advanced in some of his papers, and what
suspicious people may possibly apprehend from some passages in that
which is called the "Report."
That paper mentions "such persons to have been examined, who were
desirous and willing to be heard upon that subject." I am told, they
were four in all, Coleby, Brown, Mr. Finley the banker, and one more
whose name I know not. The first of these was tried for robbing the
Treasury in Ireland, and although he was acquitted for want of legal
proof, yet every person in the Court believed him to be guilty. The
second was tried for a rape, and stands recorded in the votes of the
House of Commons, for endeavouring by perjury and subornation, to take
away the life of John Bingham, Esq.[3]
[Footnote 3: Referring to these persons who were examined by the
Committee, Monck Mason quotes from two letters from Archbishop King to
Edward Southwell, Esq. King was one of the council, and Southwell
secretary of state at the time. The first of these letters remarks:
"Could a greater contempt be put upon a nation, than to see such a
little fellow as Wood favoured and supported against them, and such
profligates as Brown and Coleby believed before a whole parliament,
government, and private council." From the second letter, written on
August 15th, 1724, Monck Mason gives the following extracts:
"--When I returned to Dublin I met with resolutions concerning our
halfpence, founded chiefly on the testimony of two infamous persons,
John Brown and Coleby: as to the first of these, you will find his
character in the votes of the house of commons, last parliament.
Tuesday, the 5th of November.
"'Resolved, that it appears to this Committee, that a wicked conspiracy
was maliciously contrived and carried on against John Bingham, to take
away his life and fortune.
"'Resolved, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the said John
Brown, of Rabens, Esq. and his accomplices, were the chief promoters and
advisers of the said conspiracy.
"'Resolved, that it is the opinion of this Committee, that the said John
Brown is a person not fit to serve his majesty, in any office or
employment, civil or military, whatsoever.
"'Resolved, that the said John Brown has, in the course of his
examination, grossly prevaricated with this Committee.
"'To all which resolutions, the question being severally put, the house
did agree, _nemine contradicente_.
"'Ordered, that the said John Brown be, for his said prevarication,
taken into the custody of the serjeant at arms attending this house.
"'Ordered, that his majesty's attorney-general do present the said John
Brown, for conniving and maliciously carrying on the said conspiracy to
take away the life of the said John Bingham, and others.'
"As to Coleby, he was turned out of the treasury for robbing it of a
considerable sum of money. I was present at his trial at the
King's-bench, and the evidence was such as convinced every one, in his
conscience, that he was guilty; but, the proofs being presumptive, and
not direct, the jury acquitted him; on which the judge (Pine, if I
remember right) observed the happiness of English subjects, that, though
everybody was convinced of a man's guilt, yet, if the evidence did not
come up to the strict requisites of the law, he would escape" ("History
of St. Patrick's Cathedral," pp. xciv-xcv.) [T.S.]]
But since I have gone so far as to mention particular persons, it may be
some satisfaction to know who is this Wood himself, that has the honour
to have a whole kingdom at his mercy, for almost two years together. I
find he is in the patent entitled _Esq_; although he were understood to
be only a hardware-man, and so I have been bold to call him in my former
letters; however a '_squire_ he is, not only by virtue of his patent,
but by having been a collector in Shropshire, where pretending to have
been robbed, and suing the county, he was cast, and for the infamy of
the fact, lost his employment.
I have heard another story of this 'Squire Wood from a very honourable
lady, that one Hamilton told her. He (Hamilton) was sent for six years
ago by Sir Isaac Newton to try the coinage of four men, who then
solicited a patent for coining halfpence for Ireland; their names were
Wood, Coster, Elliston, and Parker. Parker made the fairest offer, and
Wood the worst, for his coin were three halfpence in a pound less value
than the other. By which it is plain with what intentions he solicited
this patent, but not so plain how he obtained it.
It is alleged in the said paper, called the "Report," that upon repeated
orders from a secretary of state, for sending over such papers and
witnesses, as should be thought proper to support the objections made
against the patent (by both Houses of Parliament) the Lord Lieutenant
represented "the great difficulty he found himself in to comply with
these orders. That none of the principal members of both Houses, who
were in the King's service or council, would take upon them to advise
how any material person or papers might be sent over on this occasion,
&c." And this is often repeated and represented as "a proceeding that
seems very extraordinary, and that in a matter which had raised so great
a clamour in Ireland, no one person could be prevailed upon to come over
from Ireland in support of the united sense of both Houses of Parliament
in Ireland, especially that the chief difficulty should arise from a
general apprehension of a miscarriage, in an enquiry before His
Majesty, or in a proceeding by due course of law, in a case where both
Houses of Parliament had declared themselves so fully convinced, and
satisfied upon evidence, and examinations taken in the most solemn
manner."[4]
[Footnote 4: Commenting on this Monck Mason has the following note. This
learned biographer's remarks are specially important inasmuch as he has
fortified them with letters from Archbishop King, unpublished at the
time he wrote: "But this [referring to the extract from the Report given
by Swift] will not appear so strange or inexplicable after perusing the
following letter from Archbishop King ... to Edward Southwell, Esq. ...;
this important state paper may, therefore, be considered as an official
communication of the sentiments of the Irish Privy Council upon this
matter.
"Letter from William King, Archbishop of Dublin, to Edward Southwell,
Esq., dated the 23d March, 1723.
"'I have not had any occasion of late to trouble you with my letters;
but yesternight I came to the knowledge of an affair which gave me some
uneasiness, and, I believe, will do so to the whole kingdom, when it
becomes public. My lord lieutenant sent for several lords and commoners
of the privy council, and communicated to them a letter from my Lord
Carteret, writ by his majesty's command, in which was repeated the
answer given to the addresses of the lords and commons, about one
William Wood's farthings and halfpence; and his grace is required to
send over witnesses and evidences against the patentee or patent: this
has surprised most people, because we were borne in hand that that
affair was dead, and that we should never hear any more of it.
"'His grace's design was, to be advised by what means and methods he
might effectually comply with his majesty's commands; and, by what I
could perceive, it was the sense of all, that it was not possible, in
the present situation of affairs, to answer his majesty's expectations
or those of the kingdom; and that, for these reasons:
"'1st, because this is a controversy between the parliament of Ireland
and William Wood, and, the parliament being now prorogued, nobody either
would, or durst, take on them to meddle in a business attacked by the
parliament, or pretend to manage a cause which so deeply concerned the
parliament, and the whole nation, without express orders. If this letter
had come whilst the parliament was sitting, and had been communicated to
the houses, they could have appointed certain persons to have acted for
them, and raised a fund to support them, as has been done formerly in
this kingdom on several occasions; but, for any, without such authority,
to make himself a party for the legislature and people of Ireland, would
be a bold undertaking, and, perhaps, dangerous; for, if such undertaker
or undertakers should fail in producing all evidences that may be had,
or any of the papers necessary to make the case evident, they must
expect to be severely handled the next parliament for their
officiousness, and bear the blame of the miscarriage of the cause: for
these reasons, as it seemed to me, the privy councillors were unwilling
to engage at all in the business, or to meddle with it.
"'But, 2dly, the thing seemed impracticable; because it would signify
nothing to send over the copies of the papers that were laid before the
parliament, if the design is, as it seems to be, to bring the patent to
a legal trial; for such copies we were told by lawyers, could not be
produced in any court as evidence; and, as to the originals, they are in
the possession of the houses, and (as was conceived) could not be taken
from the proper officers with whom they were trusted, but by the like
order.
"'And, as to the witnesses, it was a query whether my lord lieutenant by
his own power could send them; and, if he have such power, yet it will
not be possible to come at the witnesses, for several in each house
vouched several facts on their own knowledge, to whom the houses gave
credit; my lord lieutenant can neither be apprised of the persons nor of
the particulars which the members testified; whereas, if the parliament
was sitting, those members would appear, and make good their assertions.
"'There were several sorts of farthings and halfpence produced to the
houses, differing in weight, and there was likewise a difference in the
stamp. These were sent over by William Wood to his correspondents here,
and by them produced. But can it be proved, on a legal trial, that these
particular halfpence were coined by him? It is easy for him to say, that
they are counterfeited, as (if I remember right) he has already affirmed
in the public prints, in his answer to the address of the commons.
"'But, 3dly, it was not on the illegality of the patent, nor chiefly on
the abuse of it the patentee (which was not so much as mentioned by the
lords), that the parliament insisted, but on the unavoidable mischief
and destruction it would bring on the kingdom, and on its being obtained
by most false and notorious misinformation of his majesty; it being
suggested, as appears by the preamble, that the kingdom wanted such
halfpence and farthings: now, if the king be misinformed, the lawyers
tell us, that the grant is void. And, that his majesty was deceived in
this grant by a false representation, it was said, needed no further
proof than the patent itself.--William Wood by it was empowered to coin
360 tons of copper into halfpence and farthings, which would have made
£90,000, about the fifth part of all the current cash of Ireland; for
that is not reckoned, by those who suppose it most, to be £500,000. Now,
the current cash of England is reckoned above twenty millions; in
proportion, therefore, if Ireland wants £90,000 England will want four
millions. It is easy to imagine what would be said to a man that would
propose to his majesty such a coinage; and it is agreed, that the people
of England would not be more alarmed by such a patent, than the people
of Ireland are, by the prospect of turning the fifth part of their
current coin into brass.
"'This, so far as I can remember, is a brief of what passed in the
meeting before my lord lieutenant'" ("History of St. Patrick's
Cathedral," pp. lxxxvii-lxxxviii). [T.S.]]
How shall I, a poor ignorant shopkeeper, utterly unskilled in law, be
able to answer so weighty an objection. I will try what can be done by
plain reason, unassisted by art, cunning or eloquence.
In my humble opinion, the committee of council, hath already prejudged
the whole case, by calling the united sense of both Houses of
Parliament in Ireland an "universal clamour." Here the addresses of the
Lords and Commons of Ireland against a ruinous destructive project of an
"obscure, single undertaker," is called a "clamour." I desire to know
how such a style would be resented in England from a committee of
council there to a Parliament, and how many impeachments would follow
upon it. But supposing the appellation to be proper, I never heard of a
wise minister who despised the universal clamour of a people, and if
that clamour can be quieted by disappointing the fraudulent practice of
a single person, the purchase is not exorbitant.
But in answer to this objection. First it is manifest, that if this
coinage had been in Ireland, with such limitations as have been formerly
specified in other patents, and granted to persons of this kingdom, or
even of England, able to give sufficient security, few or no
inconveniencies could have happened, which might not have been
immediately remedied. As to Mr. Knox's patent mentioned in the Report,
security was given into the exchequer, that the patentee should at any
time receive his halfpence back, and pay gold or silver in exchange for
them. And Mr. Moor (to whom I suppose that patent was made over) was in
1694 forced to leave off coining, before the end of that year, by the
great crowds of people continually offering to return his coinage upon
him. In 1698 he coined again, and was forced to give over for the same
reason. This entirely alters the case; for there is no such condition in
Wood's patent, which condition was worth a hundred times all other
limitations whatsoever.[5]
[Footnote 5: It will serve to elucidate this paragraph if an account be
given of the various coinage patents issued for Ireland. Monck Mason
gives an account in a long note to his biography of Swift; but as he has
obtained it from the very ably written tract, "A Defence of the Conduct
of the People of Ireland," etc., I have gone to that pamphlet for the
present _résumé_. I quote from pp. 21-24 of the Dublin edition, issued
in 1724 and printed by George Ewing:
"K. Charles 2d. 1660 granted a patent for coining only farthings for the
kingdom of Ireland to Coll. Armstrong: But I do not find he ever made
any use of it.[A] For all our copper and brass money to the year 1680
was issued by private persons, who obtained particular licences, _on
giving security to change their half-pence and farthings for gold and
silver_; but some of their securities failing, others pretending the
half-pence which were tendered to be changed were counterfeits, the
public always suffered. Col. Armstrong's son, finding great profit was
made by coining half-pence in Ireland, by virtue of particular licences
recallable at pleasure, solicited and obtained a patent in the name of
George Legg afterwards Lord Dartmouth, for coining half-pence for
Ireland from 1680, for 21 years, _he giving security to exchange them
for gold or silver on demand_.[B] In pursuance of this he coined
considerable quantities of half-pence for four years; but in 1685 [John]
Knox, with the consent of Armstrong, got the remaining part of this term
granted by patent in his own name, he giving security as above, and got
his half-pence declared the current coin of Ireland, notwithstanding two
Acts of Parliament had enacted that they should not be received in the
revenue. Knox was interrupted in his coinage in 1689, by King James's
taking it into his own hands, to coin his famous brass money, of which
he coined no less than £965,375, three penny worth of metal passing for
£10 _ster_. In this money creditors were obliged to receive their debts,
and by this cruel stratagem Ireland lost about £60,000 per month. This
not only made our gold and silver, but even our half-pence to disappear;
which obliged King William to coin pewter half-pence for the use of his
army....
[Footnote A: Monck Mason, quoting Simon "On Irish Coins" (Append., No.
LXV), says: "Sir Thomas [Armstrong] was never admitted to make use of
this grant, nor could he obtain allowance of the chief governor of
Ireland, to issue them as royal coin among the subjects of that
kingdom."]
[Footnote B: "A proclamation was issued by the lord lieutenant,
declaring these half-pence to be the current coin of the kingdom, but it
provided that none should be enforced to take more than five shillings
in the payment of one hundred pounds, and so proportionately in all
greater and lesser sums.... This patent was granted, by and with, the
advice of James, Duke of Ormond" (Monck Mason, "History of St.
Patrick's," p. 334, note y).]
"After the Revolution, Col. Roger Moore being possessed of Knox's
patent, commenced his coinage in Dublin, and at first kept several
offices for changing his half-pence for gold or silver. He soon
overstocked the kingdom so with copper money, that persons were obliged
to receive large sums in it; for the officers of the crown were
industrious dispensers of it, for which he allowed them a premium. It
was common at that time for one to compound for 1/4 copper, and the
collectors paid nothing else. The country being thus overcharged with a
base coin, everyone tendered it to Col. Moore to be changed. This he
refused, on pretence they were counterfeits.... On this he quitted
coining in 1698, but left us in a miserable condition, which is lively
represented in a Memorial presented by Will. Trench, Esq. to the Lords
of the Treasury, on Mr. Wood's obtaining his patent, and which our
Commissioners referred to.... Col. Moore finding the sweet of such a
patent, applied to King William for a renewal of it; but his petition
being referred to the government of Ireland, the affair was fairly
represented to the king, whereby his designs were frustrated.
"In the reign of the late Queen, application was made by Robert Baird
and William Harnill, Trustees for the garrison which defended
Londonderry, for a patent to coin base money for Ireland ... their
petition was rejected.... Since this time there have been many
applications made for such patents." [T.S.]]
Put the case, that the two Houses of Lords and Commons of England, and
the Privy-council there should address His Majesty to recall a patent,
from whence they apprehend the most ruinous consequences to the whole
kingdom: And to make it stronger if possible, that the whole nation,
almost to a man, should thereupon discover the "most dismal
apprehensions" (as Mr. Wood styles them) would His Majesty debate half
an hour what he had to do? Would any minister dare advise him against
recalling such a patent? Or would the matter be referred to the
Privy-Council or to Westminster-hall, the two Houses of Parliament
plaintiffs, and William Wood defendant? And is there even the smallest
difference between the two cases?
Were not the people of Ireland born as free as those of England? How
have they forfeited their freedom? Is not their Parliament as fair a
representative of the people as that of England? And hath not their
Privy-council as great or a greater share in the administration of
public affairs? Are they not subjects of the same King? Does not the
same sun shine on them? And have they not the same God for their
protector? Am I a freeman in England, and do I become a slave in six
hours by crossing the Channel? No wonder then, if the boldest persons
were cautious to interpose in a matter already determined by the whole
voice of the nation, or to presume to represent the representatives of
the kingdom, and were justly apprehensive of meeting such a treatment as
they would deserve at the next session. It would seem very extraordinary
if an inferior court in England, should take a matter out of the hands
of the high court of Parliament, during a prorogation, and decide it
against the opinion of both Houses.
It happens however, that, although no persons were so bold, as to go
over as evidences, to prove the truth of the objections made against
this patent by the high court of Parliament here, yet these objections
stand good, notwithstanding the answers made by Wood and his Council.
The Report says, that "upon an assay made of the fineness, weight and
value of this copper, it exceeded in every article." This is possible
enough in the pieces upon which the assay was made; but Wood must have
failed very much in point of dexterity, if he had not taken care to
provide a sufficient quantity of such halfpence as would bear the trial;
which he was well able to do, although "they were taken out of several
parcels." Since it is now plain, that the bias of favour hath been
wholly on his side.[6]
[Footnote 6: The report of the assayers as abstracted by the Lords of
the Committee in their report is not accurately stated. Monck Mason
notes that the abstract omits the following passage: "But although the
copper was very good, and the money, one piece with another, was full
weight, yet the single pieces were not so equally coined in the weight
as they should have been." Nor is it shown that the coins assayed were
of the same kind as those sent into Ireland. The Committee's report
fails to see the question that must arise when it is noted that while in
England a pound of copper was made into twenty-three pence, yet for
Ireland Wood was permitted to make it into thirty pence, in spite of the
statement that the copper used in England was worth fivepence a pound
more than that used by Wood. [T.S.]]
But what need is there of disputing, when we have positive demonstration
of Wood's fraudulent practices in this point? I have seen a large
quantity of these halfpence weighed by a very skilful person, which were
of four different kinds, three of them considerably under weight. I have
now before me an exact computation of the difference of weight between
these four sorts, by which it appears that the fourth sort, or the
lightest, differs from the first to a degree, that, in the coinage of
three hundred and sixty tons of copper, the patentee will be a gainer,
only by that difference, of twenty-four thousand four hundred and
ninety-four pounds, and in the whole, the public will be a loser of
eighty-two thousand one hundred and sixty-eight pounds, sixteen
shillings, even supposing the metal in point of goodness to answer
Wood's contract and the assay that hath been made; which it infallibly
doth not. For this point hath likewise been enquired into by very
experienced men, who, upon several trials in many of these halfpence,
have found them to be at least one fourth part below the real value (not
including the raps or counterfeits that he or his accomplices have
already made of his own coin, and scattered about). Now the coinage of
three hundred and sixty ton of copper coined by the weight of the fourth
or lightest sort of his halfpence will amount to one hundred twenty-two
thousand four hundred eighty-eight pounds, sixteen shillings, and if we
subtract a fourth part of the real value by the base mixture in the
metal, we must add to the public loss one fourth part to be subtracted
from the intrinsic value of the copper, which in three hundred and sixty
tons amounts to ten thousand and eighty pounds, and this added to the
former sum of eighty-two thousand one hundred sixty-eight pounds,
sixteen shillings, will make in all, ninety-two thousand two hundred
forty-eight pounds loss to the public; besides the raps or counterfeits
that he may at any time hereafter think fit to coin. Nor do I know
whether he reckons the dross exclusive or inclusive with his three
hundred and sixty ton of copper; which however will make a considerable
difference in the account.
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, £200 yearly, and £100 per
annum into his Majesty's exchequer, and not as Walpole's report has it,
£800 and £200. [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 £100. 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 £40,000, what was to prevent him
coining £200,000? 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.
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/12784