Charles, by letter dated 23rd March, 1667, in answer to the representations made by the Duke of Ormond, gave directions "that all restraints upon the exportation of commodities of the growth and manufacture of Ireland, to foreign parts, should be taken off, and that this should be by a proclamation of the Lord Lieutenant and Council." Permission was also given to retaliate on the Scotch for the prohibition of the import of our cattle, in accordance with which a proclamation was issued, "notifying the allowance of a free trade to all foreign countries, either in war or peace with his Majesty, and prohibiting the importation of linen and other commodities from Scotland, as a great hindrance to the manufactures of this kingdom."* But while Orinond thus encouraged one branch of national industry, he did not endeavour to crush another. Though the minister of Charles, he forgot not that he had a country; and while in the linen factory of Chapel Izod we have a memorial of his worth, we have equal ones in the woollen factories of Clonmel, Carrick, and Kilkenny. In thus consulting the national weal, Ormond raised against himself a host of powerful enemies; and "some of the restraints respecting Ireland, in this reign, were supposed to have originated in a dislike or jealousy of the growing power of the Duke of Ormond, who, from his great estate and possessions in Ireland, was very naturally supposed to have a personal interest in the welfare of that kingdom."+ The Duke conducted his administration on the principle, that it was the duty of the Chief Governor to increase the trade-improve the manufactures-extend the commerceencourage the industry-and direct the energies of the people towards the development of the resources of the country which he governed. The principle might be right, and just, and good; but he forgot that the nation he applied it to was Ireland, and he himself but the deputed of England. However he sought to improve the condition of the country, around which clung all the fond recollections of his childhood, and to alleviate the pangs which a series of wrongs had inflicted; and for this was his loyalty to the crown of England called in question. Pretexts for impeachment were in vain longer in the government of Ireland, he being an "That it was unfit Ormond should be continued His friends sought to extenuate the crime by urging, that to be born in Ireland was no personal fault of his. Their reasoning was plausible, but it was not in accordance with the spirit of English rule, and the Duke of Ormond, when found guilty of being an Irishman, was incapacitated for office. There have been found those who, while they objected to the act, acquiesced in the principle. They argued (and with truth) that he was not an Irishman by birth, having come to Ireland at the age of three; but that even were he born in Ireland, he had done so many services to Charles that he ought to have been accounted “ equal to an Englishman." The council of trade which he established, was composed of some of the most influential men of the day, including members of the government, lawyers, and merchants; they held weekly meetings, appointed committees, and drew up reports and suggestions on the state of the several trades and manufactures. Concerning these suggestions we are told that "The Duke of Ormonde leaving the government before a parliament met, or those suggestions for forming acts of state, were put in practice; as the council of trade was their nursery, so the council table became their sepulchre, where they remain in their urn to this day, and are not likely to have a resurrection; for before the Duke's removal, most of the Privy Council and other principal ministers of state, seemed exceeding fond of all "For 'tis treason to love her, and death to proposals tending to the improvement of the trade defend." and manufacture of the nation." Carte, vol. ii, 345. † Ibid, 385, 407. Laurence's Interest of Ireland, Introduction. Such was the administration of Ormond, and such was the example he set. How few of his successors have profited by it requires not to be told by us. Let it be borne in mind that at the period of which we are writing, we were rapidly extending both our woollen and linen manufactures, and that in both of these undertakings we received not only the encouragement of our parliament and Viceroy, but even the toleration of England. We must not however, suppose that the progressive increase of our commercial relations escaped the jealous watch which England ever had on our advancement. That it was not so, the many and varied attempts which she made to crush our rising spirit too well prove. But as the space to which we are limited prevents our entering more at length into this subject, we would strongly recommend such of our readers as would desire information on these matters (and we trust they are many) to peruse that invaluable manual of anti-Irish legislation, "Hints to Hardinge," from the able pen of M. Staunton, Esq. It contains in a few pages a mass of information, such as the ordinary reader could otherwise never arrive at, which, from its importance entitles it to become the hand-book of every Irishman who loves his country in sincerity and truth. That our parliament did not relax its exertions for the advancement of the linen trade, appears from their journals. On the 22nd November, 1695, we find the heads of a bill for this purpose brought into the house by Colonel Hamilton of Tullamore. It included "The linen, sail-canvas, cordage and other manufactures of hemp and flax in this kingdom." It received the approbation of the house, and that it might become a law, it was sent to the Lords Justices to be transmitted to England. But thence it never returned.* In the following year a bill was passed in England, entitled, "An act for the encouraging the linen manufacture of Ireland, and bringing flax and hemp into this kingdom (England)," whereby it was enacted that hemp, flax, and linen, and its thread and yarn, might be freely imported into England by the natives of England and Ireland, custom free, being the growth and manufacture of Ireland."+ But the preamble to the act shews for whose benefit this encouragement was given. It says, "That great sums were annually sent abroad Com. Jour. vol. ii. p. 120. † Engiish Acts, 7th, 8th Wm. III. c. xxxix. from England for the purchase of these commodities, and that this might in a great measure be prevented by being supplied from Ireland.” We thus minutely mention the various statutary encouragements given to our linen trade prior to the period of its history, at which we have now arrived, for the purpose of showing that in all those bills and proclamations, whether emanating from the parliament of Ireland or England, there was no stipulation made, nor agreement of any sort entered into, on condition whereof this encouragement was given; on the contrary, in the last named act, it is distinctly stated that the object of the English parliament in giving a preference to Irish grown linens and hemp, was to prevent great sums of money being "continually carried out of England."* We now come to an examination of the most important era in the history of this trade,-one which is equally remarkable for the unconstitutional power arrogated by the English parliament, as for the obsequious acquiescence of the Irish. But while we reprobate the weakness our parliament exhibited by their submission to the dictation of that of England, is there not some extenuation to be found in the peculiar circumstances of the time in which it occurred. The wars of 1688 had ended; an act of indemnity had been just passed; commerce and trade began to revive, and again was peace and industry established among the people. This was the critical juncture of which England availed herself, to deprive us of a portion of our trade, which, when the hour of our strength arrived, she was no longer able to retain. Though we have in a recent number + reviewed the manner in which she accomplished this, it will be necessary to refer to such of the details connected with it, as may serve to elucidate the subject immediately under consideration. It would appear that by the act of 1696, admitting Irish hemp and linens into England, custom free, the English economists expected to turn the attention of the Irish to the growth and export of hemp, for the purpose, as its title says, of "encouraging the making of sailcloth in this kingdom (England)." That this was their hope, is pretty evident from the manner in which they complained two years subsequently, of our neglect of what they say would be "so profitable to England," though in truth we did not neglect the growth of flax and hemp; but not choosing to be mere "hewers of wood, and drawers of water" for England, we preferred employing our own hands on the raw material, to exporting it for the "further encouragement of English made sail-cloth." Finding that the bait of '96 did not "go down," another stratagem was devised, by which they hoped to accomplish their design. This was to enter into a compact with Ireland, that she should turn her at tention solely to the linen and hempen manufacture, while England should turn hers solely to the woollen. The first proposition to this effect was an address from the English House of Lords to the reigning monarch in 1698, from which we quote the following passage : The Commons of Ireland having thus accepted the terms proposed by these the bill of the Lords Justices for the enseveral addresses and speeches, received couragement of the linen and hempen ma*** "And on the other hand, if they turn nufactures; and in pursuance of their comtheir industry and skill to the settling and im- pact, they appointed a committee on the proving the linen manufacture, for which gener- 1st day of November, 1698, to take into conally the lands of that kingdom are very proper; they shall receive all countenance, favour, and sideration the heads of a bill for laying a protection from your royal influence, for the ma- duty on the export of woollen manufactures. nagement and promoting of the said linen manu- The committee it would appear, did not prefacture to all the advantage and profit that king-pare the "suicidal act" with sufficient dis dom can be capable of.* This was quickly followed by a similar one from the Commons to the same effect; they held out the same offers of encouragement, and on the same conditions. patch, and on the 2nd of December, the Lords Justices send a "written speech" recommending a bill for the purpose,—the reception of which was put from the speaker's chair,-the house was divided, and the numbers were seventy-four for the reception of the bill, while thirty-four voted against it "taking it into consideration."§ Even then was there a remnant in the land who bowed not the knee to Baal. The purport of this bill was to lay a heavy duty on all woollens exported from Ireland, frizes exIcepted. "We cannot without trouble observe that Ireland which is so proper for the linen manufacture, the establishment and growth of which there, would be so enriching to themselves, and so profitable to England, should of late apply itself to the woollen manufacture, to the great prejudice of the trade of this kingdom, and so unwillingly promote the linen trade, which would benefit both them and us." They then humbly implore his Majesty to secure the trade of England by "discouraging the woollen manufacture, and encouraging the linen manufactures in Ireland, to which we shall always be ready to give our utmost assistance."† His majesty's answer was, "I shall do all that in me lies to encourage the linen manufacture there." The proposal was formally made to our parliament in the same year by the Lords Justices, who, in the speech from the throne say, "Amongst these bills there is one for the encouragement of the linen and hempen manufactures. At our first meeting we recommended you that matter, and we have now endeavoured to render that bill practicable and useful for that effect, and as such, we now recommend it to you. The settlement of this manufacture will be found more advantageous to this kingdom than the woollen, which, being the staple of England, can never be encouraged here, whereas the linen and hempen * 9th June, 1698. † 30th June, 1698. 66 The history of this session, as connected with our subject, is short. The bill framed by those, the object of whose rule was, that we might be made profitable to England, passed both houses with tolerable rapidity, whereas the bill for the encouragement of the linen and hempen manufactures which they so urgently recommended" in the early part of the session, still remained "in committee." On the 26th day of January the Lords Justices summoned the Commons, and having affixed the royal assent to the bill prohibiting the export of our woollens,their object,-the object of that country whose servants they were,-was accomplished, and in that very day, nay, in that very hour was our parliament prorogued; and Com. Jour. vol. ii. p. 241. 1st Oct. 1698.-Com. Jour: vol. ii. p. 243. Ibid, vol. ii. p. 280. Com. Jour. vol. ii. p. 287. thus ended all the promises of encourage- | herself affect to interpret them when usurping ment.* Parliament was prorogued to a more the power of making her laws, binding upon convenient season: but though William Ireland, irrespective of the wishes of her wielded the sceptre for full three years after, own parliament, she prohibited the export of that convenient season never came. our woollens under a penalty of £500, by 10th William III. chap x.* In reference to these transactions, Anderson says, "The first step that Ireland took in consequence of this compact, was to lay an export duty upon wool and woollens of all kinds, equal to a prohibition, and when that act expired, for it was but a temporary one, by way of experiment, the British Parliament, without consulting that of Ireland, by the 10th and 11th of William III. passed a similar act, and made it perpetual." The fact is, the English parliament did not wait for the expiration of the term during which the 10th William, chap. v. imposed a duty on our woollens which would extend to the 25th day of March, 1702, but introduced their bill during the very next year, whereby, to use the words of the parliamentary committee of 1772, "Ireland hath been still further restrained in the woollen manufacture than was even desired in 1698, having been deprived of the export of frize.§ These are the facts connected with this celebrated compact. In adducing evidence concerning it, we have endeavoured to give the truth, the unvarnished, and the entire truth. At this distant period it is impossible to shew the under currents, the intrigues, and political maneuvering, whereby the Irish parliament were induced to accept the proposal made by the Lords and Commons of England. That their acceptance of it was not unanimous we have already shewn that a large majority however, were induced to accede to the terms is evident. But whether from a conviction of the necessity they were placed under, or from what has too often proved more powerful," court persuasion," does not appear. But whatever may have impelled them to it, accepted it was; and a compact was fully established between the two nations that Ireland should en joy all the benefits of the linen trade, and England all the benefits of the woollen,-each to the exclusion of the other. That such is the proper interpretation of these several addresses and speeches, is too evident to admit of any question. In this manner are they understood by all those who have written on the subject; and thus did England * Com. Jour. vol. ii. 306-7. Hist. Com. vol. v. p. 383. Statutes, vol. 3. p. 472. Com. Jour. vol. xv. p. 426. Before we proceed to enquire into the manner in which England fulfilled her part of the engagement, we will quote the opinions as to the nature and terms of this compact, which have been expressed by authorities whose competency to form a correct judgment on the matter cannot be denied. Arthur Young, an Englishman, who is so well known as the author of "The Tour in Ireland in 1777," thus writes: "The memoirs of the time as well as the ex pressions in the above transactions, evidently prove that it was understood by both kingdoms to be a sort of compact, that if Ireland gave up her woollen under every encouragement. manufacture, that of linen should be left to her mean internal encouragement or regulation, for They could not they had nothing to do with either. It could simply mean, as the purport of the words evidently show, that they would enter into no measures which should set up a linen manufacture to rival the Irish, that woollens should be considered and encouraged as the staple of England, and linens as that of Ireland; it must mean this or it means nothing. That the Irish understood it so cannot be doubted for a moment; for what did they in consequence? They were in possession of a flourishing woollen manufacture which they actually put down and crippled by prohibiting exportation. Let me ask those who assert there was no compact, why they did this? It was their either reward or promise of reward? own act. Did they cut their own throats without Common sense tells us they did this under a perfect conviction that they should receive ample encouragement from England in their linen trade.† The late Lord Oriel, in a paper written, of this subject, says, after detailing the answer of the Irish parliament to the Lords. Justices, "In pursuance of this answer, they evinced that temperament most effectually by passing au act for laying prohibitory duties on the export of their own woollen manufacture,-thus accepting the national compact, and fully performing their part of the agreement; and by that performance giving an incontrovertible claim to Ireland upon England for a perpetual encouragement of the linen manufacture to all the advantage that Ireland should at any time be capable of."‡ Such was the compact, and thus did Ireland fulfil the terms of her agreement to the very letter. The combined effects of these crippling prohibitions, and England's forgetfulness of which was broken, and with warning voice declare to future generations that until we were "hindered from earning our Own livelihoods" we needed not a poor-house. her plighted honour were most disastrous to Ireland. In the language of our parliament in their address to the throne,-" We were hindered from earning our own livelihoods, and from maintaining our own manufactures; Another century of the same blighting and our poor had thereby become very nu- policy has since rolled by; how many merous." Notwithstanding this represen-poor-houses have we now? they are many, tation of the distress caused by the completion of our part of the treaty, England moved not in the fulfilment of hers; and our Commons appointed a committee to prepare another address to the throne, praying that her Majesty,— May interpose with the parliament of England, that this kingdom may have leave to export their manufactures of linen from this kingdom into the western plantations, which her Majesty's poor subjects of this kingdom have great reason to hope for from the encouragement given them by several addresses made by the Lords and Commons of England to his late Majesty in 1698, in which they promise to give all the encouragement that in them lay to promote the said manufacture to the greatest advantage this kingdom is capable of."t very many, but there are of poor to fill them " enough and to spare." The commercial jealousy which then left our thousands unemployed has since left tens of thousands idle and "in want of bread." Irishmen, 'tis for you, not for party that we write; to you then we would address ourselves. If you be men, if the love of party is ever to pass away, and that of father-land to reign supreme in its stead; let this fact take strong hold upon your memories; tell it round the hearth and on the hill side, till every village, every hamlet, every cottage has reechoed the sound thereof; nor let the pregnant truth die upon your lips till each true born of Erin has been taught to know and to feel, that "being hindered from maintaining our In accordance with the directions thus given to the committee, an address was pre-own manufactures" it was necessary to tax pared and agreed to by the house on the 23d day of November, 1703, praying,— "That her Majesty's subjects of this kingdom have liberty of exporting linen cloth to the plan tations, and that they receive such further encouragement as had been assured to her subjects of this kingdom, if they should turn their industry to the improvement of the linen manufacture."‡ the community for the support of those who once constituted its wealth. While on this topic we may mention that not only did our parliament endeavour to meet the existing want by thus providing a place of refuge for the destitute; they also aimed at staying its progress, as will appear by the following extract from their In the following year the English Com-journal :mons passed a bill, granting us permission. to export our white and brown linens to the colonies, for a limited time, being the first law which was enacted for the encouragement of the linen manufacture of Ireland since the compact had been entered into. While England was thus tardy in assuming even the semblance of good faith, poverty had stricken root wide and deep through our land and by order of the house,— "Mr. Recorder presented heads of a bill for erecting a work-house in the city of Dublin for employing and maintaining the poor thereof."§ This was the memorable occasion on which Ireland's first poor-house was projected; and were the period marked by this fact alone, it should be accounted an important era in our wrongful history. When the night of oppression is past, it shall remain an evidence of the plighted faith * Address to Anne, 20th October, 1703. + Com. Jour. vol. ii. p. 361. Ibid, vol. ii. p. 384.. § Ibid, vol. ii. p. 343. "Resolved, nem. con.-that by reason of the great decay of trade, and discouragement of exportation of the manufactures of this kingdom, many tradesmen are reduced to extreme want and beggary. Resolved, nem. con.—that it will greatly conduce to the relief of the said poor, and to the good of this kingdom, that the inhabitants thereof should use none other than the and in the furniture of their houses:-Memoranmanufactures of this kingdom, in their apparel, dum-that the members of this house did unanimously engage their honours to each other that they will conform to the said resolution."*. March 1st, 1703. Neither were these the resolutions of ephemeral excitement; our Commons felt perhaps, that they had betrayed the trust committed to their charge, by a false step which, in their then powerless condition, they were unable to retrace; and, as a sort of retributive measure, which, if not effectual, at least shewed the disposition to make amends; they adopted those resolutions, and renewed them again on the 15th of June, 1705.† Com. Jour. vol. ii. p. 407. † Ibid, vol. ii. p. 481. |