FORCED RESTRICTIONS. • 105 



payment in 1656 for " two ounces of tobacco, one 

 shilling." 



The expense of the custom was one fertile source of 

 objection to the " fragrant weed." We have heard the 

 satirists declare it ruined the smaller gentry, and grave 

 elders occasionally " put out the pipes " of fast young 

 heirs by testamentary legislation. Thus the will of Peter 

 Campbell, a Derbyshire gentleman in 1016, bequeathed 

 all his household goods to his eldest son Roger ; but if 

 at any time his brothers or sisters " fynd him takeing 

 of tobacco," he shall forfeit all, " or their full valew." 

 Now, as he had five brothers and three sisters, he must 

 have been well watched.* 



The " rigidly righteous " were in those days as 

 bitterly tyrannical on tobacco, as they still continue to 

 be on any other practice that does not accord with their 

 particular idiosyncracies. They prophesied as we have 

 seen in the course of our researches, all sorts of evil 

 and ruin to those who used tobacco. But there were 

 not wanting some few who saw the ruin of England in 

 the habit. In the Parliament of 1620 the member for 

 Pontefract, Sir Edwin Sandys, summed up the evil 

 thus : — 



" There was wont to come out of Spain a great mass 

 of money, to the value of £100,000 per annum, for our 

 cloths and other merchandises ; and now we have 

 from thence for all our cloths and merchandises, no- 

 thing but tobacco : nay that will not pay for all the 



* Gent's Mag., April, 1769. 



