A. D. 1779. 



645 



' way of a dired export or import trade, excepting in a few trifling in- 

 ' fiances. Some of the reflraints refpedting Ireland in the reign of 



* Charles II were fuppofed to have originated in a diflike or jealoufy of 

 ' the growing power of the then duke of Ormond, who, from his great 

 ' cflate and poflt;ffions in Ireland, was fuppofed to have a perfonal in- 



/ terefl in the profperity of that kingdom. So far, indeed, was this 

 ' fpirit carried, whether from perfonal enmity to the duke of Ormond, 



* from narrow prejudices, or a blind policy, that the parHament of Eng- 



* land pafled a law to prohibit the importation of Irifh lean cattle *.' 



The minifler proceeding in his hiftorical narrative, obferved, that in 

 the year 1692 f the parliament of England recommended to the king a 

 kind of compact between the two kingdoms, whereby England fhould 

 exclufively enjoy the woollen manufadure, and Ireland fhould exclufive- 

 ly enjoy that of linen. Ireland accepted the terms, and in confequence 

 of the compad abflained from the woollen manufadure, and even, by a 

 temporary ad, laid a duty equal to a prohibition on the exportation of 

 wool and all kinds of woollen goods If.. England however did not ab- 

 flain from the linen manufadure, but carried it on to fully as great an 



* So the profperity of a grent nation was ap- 

 partT.lly the fport of private rekntiiunt, or, what 

 is'falfely called, politics. The law againlV import- 

 ing lean cattle miift, however, have been a real be- 

 i.tfit to the Irifh, unlefs the enemies of Ormond 

 could at the fame time have deprived them of their 

 excellent pallurcs for feeding and fattening their 

 cattle, and of fait for curing llie fielti of thtm. It 

 turned out in faft alfo a benefit in another way, as 

 it roufed their attention to other articles of com- 

 merce ; for, as wc are told by the biographer of 

 Ormond, 



' The Irldi till then had no commerce but with 



< this kingdom, and fearce entertained a thought of 

 ' trafficking with other countries. They fupplied 

 « us with their native commodities, which made 

 • work cheap, and carried off our artificial ones to 

 » a value which exceeded that of their own ; fo that 

 ' they were rather impoveriflied than improved by 

 « the traffiek. The linglifli were undoubtedly the 

 ' gainers by this mutual trade, from which they 

 ' now fo wantonly cut thenifelves ofl by foi bidding 

 ' the principal part of it, and rendering liie reft im- 

 ' practicable. They foon felt the confeijuence of 

 ' this unhappy ftep : the Iiiih, forced by their nc- 

 ' ceflitiis to be indullrious, fct themfelves to im- 

 ' prove tiicir own nianufaiJtures, and carried their 

 ' trade to foreign parts, trom whence they brought 

 ' thofe commodities wiileh tliey ufcd to take trom 

 ' liiiglaiid. In this com. try tlic price of meat rofe 

 « coiifiderably as foon aslheaCt palfed, even befoie 



' the end of this fcfTio-i of parliament (which broke 

 ' up on Feb. 9) the price of labour and rate of 



< wages were thereby enhanced ; and the wool of 

 ' Ireland, wiiich never before had any vent but in 

 « England, being now carried abroad, fcrei^ntrs 



' were thereby enabled to fct up wooileir manufac- 

 ' tures, and by the chcapncfs of labour in their 

 « countr)-, underfell us in that mod beneficial 

 ' branch of our commerce. The Englilh have 

 ' fincc fufficiently felt themifchiefs of this procted- 

 « ing ; which were in truth obvious enough to be 

 ' forefecn at that time by a man of common under- 

 ' /landing, but it will puzzle llie wifell to find a 

 ' remedy to remove them, now they liave adlually 

 ' happened. It would be well, if any experience 

 ' could make them wifer, and difpofe them to treat 

 • Ireland better.' ICarlc's I.ife of Ormomie, y.\\,p. 

 337. See alfo the following pages for the com- 

 mencement and progrefs of fome of the manufac- 

 tures of Ireland. — And fee LjrJ She(fulJ'i Ohfcrwi- 

 liins on ihe trade of Ireland, p. 149, third ed.'\ 

 ■j- The date ought to be 169S. 

 X The Irifli parliament impofed an adJitioitjl 

 duty of 20 per cent ad valorem on the exportation 

 of broad cloths, and 10 percent on ferges, baize, 

 kerfeys, and other new drapery, frizes only excepted 

 (and to thtm alfo it was aftcnvaids extended) 

 which was in cflert a prohibition. The corrfe- 

 cpreirces wctc, that the woolUn manufadure of Ire- 

 land for ixportatlon was entirely dedroycd ; fevcial 

 ihoufand manufacturers left the kinr;dom ; fomc of 

 t!re fuulherir and wellein dillriias were almoft de- 

 l)opulated ; arrd the whole kingdom was rciluced 

 to the utmoll poverty aird dillrefs. [J.urnj/j aj^ 

 the Irijh boufe of commons, 1772,/*. 40c, «W 1774, 

 /». 362.] Such were the fVuits of baiiilhing a rra- 

 tural manufacture of native materials, and forcibly 

 iirtioducing a manufacture from foreign nialcfra!», 

 the fiipply of whieh muft depend uporr the plealurc 

 of rival, or perhaps lioHne, nutiorii. 



