622 A. D. 1778. 



famous ad, and placed, with refpe(n: to commercial liberty, almoft in the 

 fituation of foreigners. The commercial diftrelles luffered by Ireland from 

 thofe reftriftions, it was now aflerted, had rendered that country incap- 

 able of fupporting the great expenfes attached to the government of it, 

 and called aloud for relief. On the firfl; introduction of a propolal in 

 parliament for the relief of Ireland (April 2'') the motion, which was 

 made by adminiftration, had the uncommon good fortune to be alfo 

 cordially fupportcd by the principal members, and the greateft number, 

 of the oppofition, as a meafure, not only of juftice, but alfo of prudence 

 and real policy. It was obferved, that the reftrictions upon the com- 

 merce and manufactures of Ireland, which originated in a great degree 

 from a zeal for promoting the profperity of the favourite woollen ma- 

 nuf\6ture of England, had produced efFeds diametrically oppofite to the 

 intentions of thofe who planned them, and driven the Irifli into a ne- 

 ceffity of exporting their wool, in a manner too open to be called clan- 

 defline *, to the rivals of England, who bought it up with the greateft 

 avidity at a higher price than was given by the Englifli manufadurers, 

 and were, notwithftanding, enabled, principally by the cheapnefs of 

 their living, to underfell us in foreign markets. The bufinefs being 

 thus brought into parliament, the further confideration of it was pofl- 

 poned till after the Eafter holidays, when, from fuch an harmonious 

 commencement, it might have been expected to go fmoothly through 

 the parliamentary forms: but the event was very different. 



During the recefs a ftrong oppofition was induflrioufly formed againft 

 the Irifh bills ; and mofl of the commercial and manufaduring com- 

 munities in Great Britain, forgetting that reciprocity and competition 

 ferve to animate, inftead of injuring, commerce and manufadtures, efpe- 

 cially thofe intended for foreign confumption, were fomehow made to 

 apprehend, that whatever fliould be granted to the Irifh muft be taken 

 from them, and were thereupon ftlrred up to petition ftrenuoufly againft 

 any indulgence to Ireland, which, they alleged, would be enabled by 

 the low price of labour, and the low rate of taxes f , to underfell and ruin 

 the Britifh manufadurers. In the midft of this buftle and alarm, which 

 infeded almoft all ranks of people to a degree that pofterity would, per- 



* Similar caufes produce fimilar effcfts. Doc- orlylq/'each on an average to the revenue, while 



tor Aiulerfon was informed in the year 1784, that thofe of Britain paid a^2 each; and tiience the Irilli 



they had begun to fmuggh" wool to France from toi'.!d afford to work, fo much cheaper than Britifli 



the Weftern iflanda of Scotland : and lie obfci ves, workmen. If as great a proportion of the people 



that all the fmuggling trade now carried on iu Brit- were employed in profitable labour as of the people 



ain is believed to owe its foundation to the fmugg- ot Britain, that argument might have its full weight; 



ling of wool. He moreover afcribes tlie degencr. but it needs noL be dtmonflrated, that the payment 



•ated quality of our wool, and feveial otiier bad con- oficymay be a greater hardfliip upon one man, 



fequences, to the fevere laws againft the export- than that of £z is upon another : and it was well 



ationofwool. \_^nderfon's PreJ'enlJlate of the Heb- obferved by Mr. Burke upon this occafion, that 



rides (Wcjlern illands),p. 121.] « taxes muft follow wealth, not precede it.' 



f It was Uiged that the people of Ireland paid 



