Chapter 15

[48]See Swift's "Directions to Servants." [T. S.][49]By Acts 18 Charles II c. 2, and 32 Charles II c. 2, enacted in 1665 and 1680, the importation into England from Ireland of all cattle, sheep, swine, beef, pork, bacon, mutton, cheese and butter, was absolutely prohibited. The land of Ireland being largely pasture land and England being the chief and nearest market, these laws practically destroyed the farming industry. The pernicious acts were passed on complaint from English land proprietors that the competition from Irish cattle had lowered their rents in England. "In this manner," says Lecky, "the chief source of Irish prosperity was annihilated at a single blow." [T. S.][50]The original Navigation Act treated Ireland on an equal footing with England. The act, however, was succeeded in 1663 by that of 15 Charles II c. 7, in which it was declared that no European articles, with few exceptions, could be imported into the colonies unless they had been loaded in English-built vessels at English ports. Nor could goods be brought from English colonies except to English ports. By the Acts 22 and 23 of Charles II. c. 26 the exclusion of Ireland was confirmed, and the Acts 7 and 8 of Will. III. c. 22, passed in 1696, actually prohibited any goods whatever from being imported to Ireland direct from the English colonies. These are the reasons for Swift's remark that Ireland's ports were of no more use to Ireland's people "than a beautiful prospect to a man shut up in a dungeon."[T. S.][51]See note on page 137 of vol. vi of this edition. "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.][52]Lecky quotes from the MSS. in the British Museum, from a series of letters written by Bishop Nicholson, on his journey to Derry, to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The quotation illustrates the truth of Swift's remark. "Never did I behold," writes Nicholson, "even in Picardy, Westphalia, or Scotland, such dismal marks of hunger and want as appeared in the countenances of the poor creatures I met with on the road." In the "Intelligencer" (No. VI, 1728) Sheridan wrote: "The poor are sunk to the lowest degrees of misery and poverty—their houses dunghills, their victuals the blood of their cattle, or the herbs of the field." Of the condition of the country thirty years later, the most terrible of pictures is given by Burdy in his "Life of Skelton": "In 1757 a remarkable dearth prevailed in Ireland.... Mr. Skelton went out into the country to discover the real state of his poor, and travelled from cottage to cottage, over mountains, rocks, and heath.... In one cabin he found the people eating boiled prushia [a weed with a yellow flower that grows in cornfields] by itself for their breakfast, and tasted this sorry food, which seemed nauseous to him. Next morning he gave orders to have prushia gathered and boiled for his own breakfast, that he might live on the same sort of food with the poor. He ate this for one or two days; but at last his stomach turning against it, he set off immediately for Ballyshannon to buy oatmeal for them.... One day, when he was travelling in this manner through the country, he came to a lonely cottage in the mountains, where he found a poor woman lying in child-bed with a number of children about her. All she had, in her weak, helpless condition to keep herself and her children alive, was blood and sorrel boiled up together. The blood, her husband, who was a herdsman, took from the cattle of others under his care, for he had none of his own. This was a usual sort of food in that country in times of scarcity, for they bled the cows for that purpose, and thus the same cow often afforded both milk and blood.... They were obliged, when the carriers were bringing the meal to Pettigo, to guard it with their clubs, as the people of the adjacent parishes strove to take it by force, in which they sometimes succeeded, hunger making them desperate." (Burdy's Life of Skelton. "Works," vol. i, pp. lxxx-lxxxii.) [T. S.][53]See on this subject the agitation against Wood's halfpence in the volume dealing with "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.][54]Faulkner and Scott print this word "irony," but the original edition has it as printed in the text. [T. S.][55]The original edition has this as "Island." Scott and the previous editors print it as in the text. Iceland is, no doubt, referred to. [T. S.][56]Bishop Nicholson, quoted by Lecky, speaks of the miserable hovels in which the people lived, and the almost complete absence of clothing. [T. S.][57]Hely Hutchinson, in his "Commercial Restraints of Ireland" (Dublin, 1779; new edit. 1888) points out that the scheme proposed by the government, and partly executed, by directing a commission under the great seal for receiving voluntary subscriptions in order to establish a bank, was a scheme to circulate paper without money. This and Wood's halfpence seem to have been the nearest approach made at the time for supplying what Swift here calls "the running cash of the nation." [T. S.][58]England.[59]Scotland and Ireland.[60]The Irish Sea.[61]The Roman Wall.[62]The Scottish Highlanders. [T. S][63]Charles I, who was delivered by the Scotch into the hands of the Parliamentary party. [T. S][64]See note to "A Short View of the State of Ireland." [T. S.][65]The King of England. [T. S.][66]The Lord-Lieutenant. [T. S.][67]The English Government filled all the important posts in Ireland with individuals sent over from England. See "Boulter's Letters" on this subject of the English rule. [T. S.][68]See notes to "A Short View of the State of Ireland," on the Navigation Acts and the acts against the exportation of cattle. [T. S.][69]The laws against woollen manufacture. [T. S.][70]Absentees and place-holders. [T. S.][71]The spirit of opposition and enmity to England, declared by the Scottish Act of Security, according to Swift's view of the relations between the countries, left no alternative but an union or a war. [S.][72]The Act of Union between England and Scotland. [T. S.][73]The reference here is to the linen manufactories of Ireland which were being encouraged by England. [T. S.][74]Swift here refers to the sentiment, largely predominant in Scotland, for the return of the Stuarts. [T. S.][75]Alliances with France. [T. S.][76]Alluding to the 33rd Henry VIII, providing that the King and his successors should be kings imperial of both kingdoms, on which the enemies of Irish independence founded their arguments against it. [S.] Scott cannot be correct in this note. The allusion is surely to the enactments known as Poyning's Law. See vol. vi., p. 77 (note) of this edition of Swift's works. [T. S.][77]Disturbances excited by the Scottish colonists in Ulster. [S.][78]The subjugation of Scotland by Cromwell. [S.][79]That is to say, to interpret Poyning's law in the spirit in which it was enacted, and give to Ireland the right to make its own laws. [T. S.][80]Free trade and the repeal of the Navigation Act. [T. S.][81]Office-holders should not be absentees. [T. S.][82]That the land laws of Ireland shall be free from interference by England, and the produce of the land free to be exported to any place. [T. S.][83]The laws prohibiting the importation of live cattle into England, and the restrictions as to the woollen industry, were the ruin of those who held land for grazing purposes. [T. S.][84]The Act of 10 and 11 William III., cap. 10, was the final blow to the woollen industry of Ireland. It was enacted in 1699, and prohibited the exportation of Irish wool to any other country. In the fifth letter of Hely Hutchinson's "Commercial Restraints of Ireland" (1779) will be found a full account of the passing of this Act and its consequences. [T. S.][85]Edward Waters and John Harding, the printers of Swift's pamphlets. See volume on "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.][86]The text here given is that of the original manuscript in the Forster Collection at South Kensington, collated with that given by Deane Swift in vol. viii. of the 4to edition of 1765. [T. S.][87]The letter was written in reply to a letter received from Messrs. Truman and Layfield. [T. S.][88]Dr. William King, Archbishop of Dublin. [T. S.][89]Swift betrays here a lamentable knowledge of the geography of this part of America. Penn, however, may have known no better. [T. S.][90]William Burnet, at this time the Governor of Massachusetts, was the son of Swift's old enemy, Bishop Burnet. [T. S.][91]Burnet quarrelled with the Assembly of Massachusetts and New Hampshire because they would not allow him a fixed salary. The Assembly attempted to give him instead a fee on ships leaving Boston, but the English Government refused to allow this. [T. S.][92]The original MS. on which this text is based does not contain the passage here given in brackets. [T. S.][93]Swift is here supported by Arthur Dobbs, who in his "Essays on Trade," pt. ii. (1731) gives as one of the conditions prejudicial to trade, the luxury of living and extravagance in food, dress, furniture, and equipage by the Irish well-to-do. He describes it "as one of the principal sources of our national evils." His remedy was a tax on expensive dress, and rich equipage and furniture. [T. S.][94]The text of this tract is based on that given by Deane Swift in the eighth volume of his edition of Swift's works published in quarto in 1765. [T. S.][95]This refers to Whitshed. [T. S.][96]The Fourth. See vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.][97]Some ten years after Swift wrote the above, the roads of Ireland were thought to be so good as to attract Whitefield's attention. Lecky quotes Arthur Young, who found Irish roads superior to those of England. (Lecky's "Ireland," vol. i., p. 330, 1892 ed.) [T. S.][98]Lecky (vol. i., pp. 333-335, 1892 edit.) gives a detailed account of the destruction of the fine woods in Ireland which occurred during the forty years that followed the Revolution. The melancholy sight of the denuded land drew the attention of a Parliamentary Commission appointed to inquire into the matter. The Act of 10 Will. III. 2, c. 12 ordered the planting of a certain number of trees in every county, "but," remarks Lecky, "it was insufficient to counteract the destruction which was due to the cupidity or the fears of the new proprietors." [T. S.][99]Swift always distinguished between the Irish "barbarians" and the Irish who were in reality English settlers in Ireland. Swift, for once, is in accord with the desires of the English Government, who wished to eradicate the Irish language. His friend the Archbishop of Dublin and his own college, that of Trinity, were in favour of keeping the language alive. (See Lecky's "Ireland," vol. i., pp. 331-332.) [T. S.][100]See Swift's "Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures." [T. S.][101]See Swift's "Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures." [T. S.][102]The text here given is that of Scott read by the "Miscellaneous Pieces" of 1789. The "Observations" were written, probably, in 1729. [T. S.][103]Monck Mason has an elaborate note on this subject ("Hist. of St. Patrick's Cathedral," pp. 320-321, ed. 1819), which is well worth reprinting here, since it is an excellent statement of facts, and is fully borne out by Hely Hutchinson's account in his "Commercial Restraints of Ireland," to which reference has already been made:"In the year 1698 a bill was introduced into the English Parliament, grounded upon complaints, that the woollen manufacture in Ireland prejudiced the staple trade of England; the matter terminated at last in an address to the King, wherein the commons 'implored his majesty's protection and favour on this matter, and that he would make it his royal care, and enjoin all those whom he employed in Ireland, to use their utmost diligence, to hinder the exportation of wool from Ireland (except it be imported into England), and for the discouraging the woollen manufacture, and increasing the linen manufacture of Ireland.' Accordingly, on the 16th July, the King wrote a letter of instructions to the Earl of Galway, in which the following passage appears: 'The chief thing that must be tried to be prevented, is, that the Irish parliament takes no notice of what has passed in this here, and that you make effectual laws for the linen manufacture, and discourage as far as possible the woollen.'—The Earl of Galway and the other justices convened the parliament on the 27th of September; in their speech, they recommended a bill for the encouragement of the manufactures of linen and hemp, 'which,' say they, 'will be found more advantageous to this kingdom than the woollen manufacture, which, being the settled trade of England from whence all foreign markets are supplied, can never be encouraged here.' The house of commons so far concurred with the lords justices' sentiments as to say, in their address of thanks, that they would heartily endeavour to establish the linen manufacture, and to render the same useful to England, and 'we hope,' they add, 'to find such a temperament, with respect to the woollen trade here, that the same may not be injurious to England' ('Cont. Rapin's Hist.,' p. 376). 'And they did,' says Mr. Smith, 'so far come into a temperament in this case, as, hoping it would be accepted by way of compromise, to lay a high duty of ... upon all their woollen manufacture exported; under which, had England acquiesced, I am persuaded it would have been better for the kingdom in general. But the false notion of a possible monopoly, made the English deaf to all other terms of accommodation; by which means they lost the horse rather than quit the stable' ('Memoirs of Wool,' vol. ii., p. 30). The duties imposed by the Irish parliament, at this time, upon the export of manufactured wool, was four shillings on the value of twenty shillings of the old drapery, and two shillings upon the like value of the new, except friezes. But this concurrence of the people of Ireland seemed rather to heighten the jealousy between the two nations, by making the people of England imagine the manufactures of Ireland were arrived at a dangerous pitch of improvement, since they could be supposed capable of bearing so extravagant a duty: accordingly, in the next following year, the English parliament passed an Act (10-11 William III: cap. 10), that no person should export from Ireland wool or woollen goods, except to England or Wales, under high penalties, such goods to be shipped only from certain ports in Ireland, and to certain ports in England: But this was not the whole grievance; the old duties upon the import of those commodities, whether raw or manufactured, into Great Britain, were left in the same state as before, which amounted nearly to a prohibition; thus did the English, although they had not themselves any occasion for those commodities, prohibit, nevertheless, their being sent to any other nation."The discouragement of the woollen manufacture of Ireland, affected particularly the English settlers there, for the linen was entirely in the hands of the Scotch, who were established in Ulster, and the Irish natives had no share in either. It is stated in a pamphlet, entitled, 'A Discourse concerning Ireland, etc. in answer to the Exon and Barnstaple petitions,' printed 1697-8, that there were then, in the city and suburbs of Dublin, 12,000 English families, and throughout the nation, 50,000, who were bred to trades connected with the manufacture of wool, 'who could no more get their bread in the linen manufacture, than a London taylor by shoe-making.'"Mr. Walter Scott says ('Life of Swift,' p. 278) that the Irish woollen manufacture produced an annual million, but this is not the fact; Mr. Dobbs in his 'Essay on the Trade of Ireland,' informs us, from the custom-house books, that in the year 1697 (which immediately preceded the year in which the address above-mentioned was transmitted to the king) the total value of Irish woollen exports, of all sorts, was only £23,614 9s.6d., and in 1687, when they were at the highest, they did not exceed £70,521 14s.0d.It moreover appears, that the greater part of these exports were of a sort which did not interfere with the trade of England, £56,415 16s.0d.was in friezes, and £2,520 18s.0d.coarse stockings, the rest consisted in serges and other stuffs of the new drapery, which affected not the trade of England generally, but only the particular interests of Exeter and its neighbourhood, and a very few other inconsiderable towns."But, whatever injury was intended, little prejudice was done to Ireland, except what followed immediately after the passing of this Act. It appears from Mr. Dobbs's pamphlet, that, a few years after, four times the quantity of woollen goods were shipped in each year, clandestinely, than had ever been exported, legally, before: moreover, the Irish vastly increased their manufactures for home consumption, and learned to make fine cloth from Spanish wool: it was only to England itself that any disadvantage redounded; many manufacturers who were unsettled by this measure, passed over to Germany, Spain, and to Rouen and other parts of France, 'from these beginnings they have, in many branches, so much improved the woollen manufactures of France, as to vie with the English in foreign markets.—Upon the whole, those nations may be justly said to have deprived Britain of millions since that time, instead of the thousands Ireland might possibly have made.'—What Mr. Dobbs has here asserted, relative to the removal of the manufacturers, has been confirmed by another tract, 'Letter from a Clothier a Member of Parliament,' printed in 1731, which informs us that, for some years after, the English seemed to engross all the woollen trade, 'but this appearance of benefit abated, as the foreign factories, raised on the ruin of the Irish, acquired strength': he shows too, that the importation of unmanufactured wool from Ireland to England had been gradually decreasing since that time, which was probably on account of the increase of the illicit trade to foreign parts, towards the encouragement of which the duties, or legal transportation, served to act as a bounty of 36 per cent. 'So true it is, that England can never fall into measures for unreasonably cramping the industry of the people of Ireland, without doing herself the greatest prejudice.'" (Note g, pp. 320-321).[T. S.][104]The causes for absenteeism are thus noted by Lecky ("Hist. of Ireland," p. 213, vol. i., ed. 1892): "The very large part of the confiscated land was given to Englishmen who had property and duties in England, and habitually lived there. Much of it also came into the market, and as there was very little capital in Ireland, and as Catholics were forbidden to purchase land, this also passed largely into the hands of English speculators. Besides, the level of civilization was much higher in England than in Ireland. The position of a Protestant landlord, living in the midst of a degraded population, differing from him in religion and race, had but little attraction, the political situation of the country closed to an Irish gentleman nearly every avenue of honourable ambition, and owing to a long series of very evident causes, the sentiment of public duty was deplorably low. The economical condition was not checked by any considerable movement in the opposite direction, for after the suppression of the Irish manufactures but few Englishmen, except those who obtained Irish offices, came to Ireland."The amount of the rent obtained in Ireland that was spent in England is estimated elsewhere by Swift to have been at least one-third. In 1729, Prior assessed the amount at £627,000. In the Supplement to his "List of Absentees," Prior gives eight further "articles" by which money was "yearly drawn out of the Kingdom." See the "Supplement," pp. 242-245 in Thone's "Collection of Tracts," Dublin, 1861. [T. S.][105]John Erskine, Earl of Mar, has elsewhere been characterized by Swift as "crooked; he seemed to me to be a gentleman of good sense and good nature." The great rebellion of 1715, for which Mar was responsible, was stirred up by him in favour of the Pretender, and succeeded so far as to bring the Chevalier to Scotland. The Duke of Argyll, however, fought his forces, and though the victory remained undecided, Mar was compelled to seek safety in France. The rebellion caused so much disturbance in every part of the British Isles that Ireland suffered greatly from bad trade. [T. S.][106]Joshua, Lord Allen. See note on p. 175. [T. S.][107]See page 60 of vol. iii. of the present edition. [T. S.][108]Chief Justice Whitshed. [T. S.][109]See page 14. [T. S.][110]Edward Waters. [T. S.][111]See pages 96, 235-6, of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.][112]The person here intimated, Joshua, Lord Allen (whom Swift elsewhere satirizes under the name of Traulus), was born in 1685. He is said to have been a weak and dissipated man; and some particulars are recorded by tradition concerning his marriage with Miss Du Pass (whose father was clerk of the secretary of state's office in James the Second's reign, and died in India in 1699), which do very little honour either to his heart or understanding.It is reported, that being trepanned into a marriage with this lady, by a stratagem of the celebrated Lionel, Duke of Dorset, Lord Allen refused, for some time, to acknowledge her as his wife. But the lady, after living some time in close retirement, caused an advertisement to be inserted in the papers, stating the death of a brother in the East Indies, by which Miss Margaret Du Pass had succeeded to a large fortune. Accordingly, she put on mourning, and assumed an equipage conforming to her supposed change of fortune. Lord Allen's affairs being much deranged, he became now as anxious to prove the marriage with the wealthy heiress, as he had formerly been to disown the unportioned damsel; and succeeded, after such opposition as the lady judged necessary to give colour to the farce. Before the deceit was discovered, Lady Allen, by her good sense and talents, had obtained such ascendance over her husband, that they ever afterwards lived in great harmony.Lord Allen was, at the time of giving offence to Swift, a privy-counsellor; and distinguished himself, according to Lodge, in the House of Peers, by his excellent speeches for the benefit of his country. He died at Stillorgan, 1742. [S.]Swift did not allow Lord Allen to rest with this "advertisement." In the poem entitled "Traulus," Allen is gibbetted in some lively rhymes. He calls him a "motley fruit of mongrel seed," and traces his descent from the mother's side (she was the sister of the Earl of Kildare) as well as the father's (who was the son of Sir Joshua Allen, Lord Mayor of Dublin in 1673):"Who could give the looby such airs?Were they masons, were they butchers?This was dexterous at the trowel,That was bred to kill a cow well:Hence the greasy clumsy mienIn his dress and figure seen;Hence the mean and sordid soul,Like his body rank and foul;Hence that wild suspicious peep,Like a rogue that steals a sheep;Hence he learnt the butcher's guile,How to cut your throat and smile;Like a butcher doomed for lifeIn his mouth to wear a knife;Hence he draws his daily foodFrom his tenants' vital blood."[T. S.][113]See note on page 66 of vol. vi. of present edition. The patent to Lord Dartmouth, granting him the right to coin copper coins, provided that he should give security to redeem these coins for gold or silver on demand. John Knox obtained this patent and Colonel Moore acquired it from Knox after the Revolution. [T. S.][114]Of ten pence in every two shillings. [F.][115]But M'Culla hath still 30l.per cent. by the scheme, if they be returned. [F.][116]Faulkner's edition adds here: "For the benefit of defrauding the crown never occurreth to the public, but is wholly turned to the advantage of those whom the crown employeth." [T. S.][117]See page 89 of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.][118]1: Faulkner's edition adds here: "it being a matter wholly out of my trade." [T. S.][119]See "A Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures," p. 19. [T. S.][120]See Swift's letter to Archbishop King on the weavers, p. 137. [T. S.][121]Edward Waters. [T. S.][122]See note prefixed to pamphlet on p. 15. [T. S.][123]See notes on pp. 6, 7, 8 and 73 of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.][124]See Appendix V. in vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.][125]See page 81. [T. S.][126]Nathaniel Mist was the publisher of the "Weekly Journal," for which Defoe wrote many important papers. The greater part of his career as a printer was spent in trials and imprisonments for the "libels" which appeared in his journal. This was largely due to the fact that his weekly newspaper became the recognized organ of Jacobites and "High-fliers." From 1716 to 1728 he was a pretty busy man with the government, and finally was compelled to go to France to escape from prosecution. In France he joined Wharton, but his "Journal" still continued to be issued until September 21st of the year 1728, which was the date of the last issue. On the 28th of the same month, however, appeared its continuation under the title, "Fog's Weekly Journal," and this was carried on by Mist's friends. Mist died in 1737. [T. S.][127]See notes on pp. 158-159. [T. S.][128]"Observations on the Precedent List: Together with a View of the Trade of Ireland, and the Great Benefits which accrue to England thereby; with some hints for the further improvement of the same." Dublin, second edition, 1729. Reprinted in Thom's "Tracts and Treatises of Ireland," 1861, vol. ii. [T. S][129]A reference to Alberoni's expedition in aid of the Jacobites made several years before Swift wrote. [T. S.][130]Sir W. Petty gives the population of Ireland as about one million, two hundred thousand ("Pol. Arithmetic," 1699). [T. S.][131]This is probably a Swiftian plausibility to give an air of truth to his remarks. Certain parts of America were at that time reputed to be inhabited by cannibals. [T. S.][132]This anecdote is taken from the Description of the Island of Formosa by that very extraordinary impostor George Psalmanazar, who for some time passed himself for a native of that distant country. He afterwards published a retractation of his figments, with many expressions of contrition, but containing certain very natural indications of dislike to those who had detected him. The passage referred to in the text is as follows: "We also eat human flesh, which I am now convinced is a very barbarous custom, though we feed only upon our open enemies, slain or made captive in the field, or else upon malefactors legally executed; the flesh of the latter is our greatest dainty, and is four times dearer than other rare and delicious meat. We buy it of the executioner, for the bodies of all public capital offenders are his fees. As soon as the criminal is dead, he cuts the body in pieces, squeezes out the blood, and makes his house a shambles for the flesh of men and women, where all people that can afford it come and buy. I remember, about ten years ago, a tall, well-complexioned, pretty fat virgin, about nineteen years of age, and tire-woman to the queen, was found guilty of high treason, for designing to poison the king; and accordingly she was condemned to suffer the most cruel death that could be invented, and her sentence was, to be nailed to a cross, and kept alive as long as possible. The sentence was put in execution; when she fainted with the cruel torment, the hangman gave her strong liquors, &c. to revive her; the sixth day she died. Her long sufferings, youth, and good constitution, made her flesh so tender, delicious, and valuable, that the executioner sold it for above eight tallies; for there was such thronging to this inhuman market, that men of great fashion thought themselves fortunate if they could purchase a pound or two of it." Lond. 1705, p. 112. [S.][133]The English government had been making concessions to the Dissenters, and, of course, Swift satirically alludes here to the arguments used by the government in the steps they had taken. But the truth of the matter, Swift hints, was, that those who desired to abolish the test were more anxious for their pockets than their consciences. [T. S.][134]The inhabitants of a district of Brazil supposed to be savages, making the name synonymous with savage ignorance. [T. S.][135]"Remove me from this land of slaves,Where all are fools, and all are knaves,Where every fool and knave is bought,Yet kindly sells himself for nought."(From Swift's note-book, written while detained at Holyhead in September, 1727.) [T. S.]

[48]See Swift's "Directions to Servants." [T. S.]

[49]By Acts 18 Charles II c. 2, and 32 Charles II c. 2, enacted in 1665 and 1680, the importation into England from Ireland of all cattle, sheep, swine, beef, pork, bacon, mutton, cheese and butter, was absolutely prohibited. The land of Ireland being largely pasture land and England being the chief and nearest market, these laws practically destroyed the farming industry. The pernicious acts were passed on complaint from English land proprietors that the competition from Irish cattle had lowered their rents in England. "In this manner," says Lecky, "the chief source of Irish prosperity was annihilated at a single blow." [T. S.]

[50]The original Navigation Act treated Ireland on an equal footing with England. The act, however, was succeeded in 1663 by that of 15 Charles II c. 7, in which it was declared that no European articles, with few exceptions, could be imported into the colonies unless they had been loaded in English-built vessels at English ports. Nor could goods be brought from English colonies except to English ports. By the Acts 22 and 23 of Charles II. c. 26 the exclusion of Ireland was confirmed, and the Acts 7 and 8 of Will. III. c. 22, passed in 1696, actually prohibited any goods whatever from being imported to Ireland direct from the English colonies. These are the reasons for Swift's remark that Ireland's ports were of no more use to Ireland's people "than a beautiful prospect to a man shut up in a dungeon."[T. S.]

[51]See note on page 137 of vol. vi of this edition. "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.]

[52]Lecky quotes from the MSS. in the British Museum, from a series of letters written by Bishop Nicholson, on his journey to Derry, to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The quotation illustrates the truth of Swift's remark. "Never did I behold," writes Nicholson, "even in Picardy, Westphalia, or Scotland, such dismal marks of hunger and want as appeared in the countenances of the poor creatures I met with on the road." In the "Intelligencer" (No. VI, 1728) Sheridan wrote: "The poor are sunk to the lowest degrees of misery and poverty—their houses dunghills, their victuals the blood of their cattle, or the herbs of the field." Of the condition of the country thirty years later, the most terrible of pictures is given by Burdy in his "Life of Skelton": "In 1757 a remarkable dearth prevailed in Ireland.... Mr. Skelton went out into the country to discover the real state of his poor, and travelled from cottage to cottage, over mountains, rocks, and heath.... In one cabin he found the people eating boiled prushia [a weed with a yellow flower that grows in cornfields] by itself for their breakfast, and tasted this sorry food, which seemed nauseous to him. Next morning he gave orders to have prushia gathered and boiled for his own breakfast, that he might live on the same sort of food with the poor. He ate this for one or two days; but at last his stomach turning against it, he set off immediately for Ballyshannon to buy oatmeal for them.... One day, when he was travelling in this manner through the country, he came to a lonely cottage in the mountains, where he found a poor woman lying in child-bed with a number of children about her. All she had, in her weak, helpless condition to keep herself and her children alive, was blood and sorrel boiled up together. The blood, her husband, who was a herdsman, took from the cattle of others under his care, for he had none of his own. This was a usual sort of food in that country in times of scarcity, for they bled the cows for that purpose, and thus the same cow often afforded both milk and blood.... They were obliged, when the carriers were bringing the meal to Pettigo, to guard it with their clubs, as the people of the adjacent parishes strove to take it by force, in which they sometimes succeeded, hunger making them desperate." (Burdy's Life of Skelton. "Works," vol. i, pp. lxxx-lxxxii.) [T. S.]

[53]See on this subject the agitation against Wood's halfpence in the volume dealing with "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.]

[54]Faulkner and Scott print this word "irony," but the original edition has it as printed in the text. [T. S.]

[55]The original edition has this as "Island." Scott and the previous editors print it as in the text. Iceland is, no doubt, referred to. [T. S.]

[56]Bishop Nicholson, quoted by Lecky, speaks of the miserable hovels in which the people lived, and the almost complete absence of clothing. [T. S.]

[57]Hely Hutchinson, in his "Commercial Restraints of Ireland" (Dublin, 1779; new edit. 1888) points out that the scheme proposed by the government, and partly executed, by directing a commission under the great seal for receiving voluntary subscriptions in order to establish a bank, was a scheme to circulate paper without money. This and Wood's halfpence seem to have been the nearest approach made at the time for supplying what Swift here calls "the running cash of the nation." [T. S.]

[58]England.

[59]Scotland and Ireland.

[60]The Irish Sea.

[61]The Roman Wall.

[62]The Scottish Highlanders. [T. S]

[63]Charles I, who was delivered by the Scotch into the hands of the Parliamentary party. [T. S]

[64]See note to "A Short View of the State of Ireland." [T. S.]

[65]The King of England. [T. S.]

[66]The Lord-Lieutenant. [T. S.]

[67]The English Government filled all the important posts in Ireland with individuals sent over from England. See "Boulter's Letters" on this subject of the English rule. [T. S.]

[68]See notes to "A Short View of the State of Ireland," on the Navigation Acts and the acts against the exportation of cattle. [T. S.]

[69]The laws against woollen manufacture. [T. S.]

[70]Absentees and place-holders. [T. S.]

[71]The spirit of opposition and enmity to England, declared by the Scottish Act of Security, according to Swift's view of the relations between the countries, left no alternative but an union or a war. [S.]

[72]The Act of Union between England and Scotland. [T. S.]

[73]The reference here is to the linen manufactories of Ireland which were being encouraged by England. [T. S.]

[74]Swift here refers to the sentiment, largely predominant in Scotland, for the return of the Stuarts. [T. S.]

[75]Alliances with France. [T. S.]

[76]Alluding to the 33rd Henry VIII, providing that the King and his successors should be kings imperial of both kingdoms, on which the enemies of Irish independence founded their arguments against it. [S.] Scott cannot be correct in this note. The allusion is surely to the enactments known as Poyning's Law. See vol. vi., p. 77 (note) of this edition of Swift's works. [T. S.]

[77]Disturbances excited by the Scottish colonists in Ulster. [S.]

[78]The subjugation of Scotland by Cromwell. [S.]

[79]That is to say, to interpret Poyning's law in the spirit in which it was enacted, and give to Ireland the right to make its own laws. [T. S.]

[80]Free trade and the repeal of the Navigation Act. [T. S.]

[81]Office-holders should not be absentees. [T. S.]

[82]That the land laws of Ireland shall be free from interference by England, and the produce of the land free to be exported to any place. [T. S.]

[83]The laws prohibiting the importation of live cattle into England, and the restrictions as to the woollen industry, were the ruin of those who held land for grazing purposes. [T. S.]

[84]The Act of 10 and 11 William III., cap. 10, was the final blow to the woollen industry of Ireland. It was enacted in 1699, and prohibited the exportation of Irish wool to any other country. In the fifth letter of Hely Hutchinson's "Commercial Restraints of Ireland" (1779) will be found a full account of the passing of this Act and its consequences. [T. S.]

[85]Edward Waters and John Harding, the printers of Swift's pamphlets. See volume on "The Drapier's Letters." [T. S.]

[86]The text here given is that of the original manuscript in the Forster Collection at South Kensington, collated with that given by Deane Swift in vol. viii. of the 4to edition of 1765. [T. S.]

[87]The letter was written in reply to a letter received from Messrs. Truman and Layfield. [T. S.]

[88]Dr. William King, Archbishop of Dublin. [T. S.]

[89]Swift betrays here a lamentable knowledge of the geography of this part of America. Penn, however, may have known no better. [T. S.]

[90]William Burnet, at this time the Governor of Massachusetts, was the son of Swift's old enemy, Bishop Burnet. [T. S.]

[91]Burnet quarrelled with the Assembly of Massachusetts and New Hampshire because they would not allow him a fixed salary. The Assembly attempted to give him instead a fee on ships leaving Boston, but the English Government refused to allow this. [T. S.]

[92]The original MS. on which this text is based does not contain the passage here given in brackets. [T. S.]

[93]Swift is here supported by Arthur Dobbs, who in his "Essays on Trade," pt. ii. (1731) gives as one of the conditions prejudicial to trade, the luxury of living and extravagance in food, dress, furniture, and equipage by the Irish well-to-do. He describes it "as one of the principal sources of our national evils." His remedy was a tax on expensive dress, and rich equipage and furniture. [T. S.]

[94]The text of this tract is based on that given by Deane Swift in the eighth volume of his edition of Swift's works published in quarto in 1765. [T. S.]

[95]This refers to Whitshed. [T. S.]

[96]The Fourth. See vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.]

[97]Some ten years after Swift wrote the above, the roads of Ireland were thought to be so good as to attract Whitefield's attention. Lecky quotes Arthur Young, who found Irish roads superior to those of England. (Lecky's "Ireland," vol. i., p. 330, 1892 ed.) [T. S.]

[98]Lecky (vol. i., pp. 333-335, 1892 edit.) gives a detailed account of the destruction of the fine woods in Ireland which occurred during the forty years that followed the Revolution. The melancholy sight of the denuded land drew the attention of a Parliamentary Commission appointed to inquire into the matter. The Act of 10 Will. III. 2, c. 12 ordered the planting of a certain number of trees in every county, "but," remarks Lecky, "it was insufficient to counteract the destruction which was due to the cupidity or the fears of the new proprietors." [T. S.]

[99]Swift always distinguished between the Irish "barbarians" and the Irish who were in reality English settlers in Ireland. Swift, for once, is in accord with the desires of the English Government, who wished to eradicate the Irish language. His friend the Archbishop of Dublin and his own college, that of Trinity, were in favour of keeping the language alive. (See Lecky's "Ireland," vol. i., pp. 331-332.) [T. S.]

[100]See Swift's "Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures." [T. S.]

[101]See Swift's "Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures." [T. S.]

[102]The text here given is that of Scott read by the "Miscellaneous Pieces" of 1789. The "Observations" were written, probably, in 1729. [T. S.]

[103]Monck Mason has an elaborate note on this subject ("Hist. of St. Patrick's Cathedral," pp. 320-321, ed. 1819), which is well worth reprinting here, since it is an excellent statement of facts, and is fully borne out by Hely Hutchinson's account in his "Commercial Restraints of Ireland," to which reference has already been made:"In the year 1698 a bill was introduced into the English Parliament, grounded upon complaints, that the woollen manufacture in Ireland prejudiced the staple trade of England; the matter terminated at last in an address to the King, wherein the commons 'implored his majesty's protection and favour on this matter, and that he would make it his royal care, and enjoin all those whom he employed in Ireland, to use their utmost diligence, to hinder the exportation of wool from Ireland (except it be imported into England), and for the discouraging the woollen manufacture, and increasing the linen manufacture of Ireland.' Accordingly, on the 16th July, the King wrote a letter of instructions to the Earl of Galway, in which the following passage appears: 'The chief thing that must be tried to be prevented, is, that the Irish parliament takes no notice of what has passed in this here, and that you make effectual laws for the linen manufacture, and discourage as far as possible the woollen.'—The Earl of Galway and the other justices convened the parliament on the 27th of September; in their speech, they recommended a bill for the encouragement of the manufactures of linen and hemp, 'which,' say they, 'will be found more advantageous to this kingdom than the woollen manufacture, which, being the settled trade of England from whence all foreign markets are supplied, can never be encouraged here.' The house of commons so far concurred with the lords justices' sentiments as to say, in their address of thanks, that they would heartily endeavour to establish the linen manufacture, and to render the same useful to England, and 'we hope,' they add, 'to find such a temperament, with respect to the woollen trade here, that the same may not be injurious to England' ('Cont. Rapin's Hist.,' p. 376). 'And they did,' says Mr. Smith, 'so far come into a temperament in this case, as, hoping it would be accepted by way of compromise, to lay a high duty of ... upon all their woollen manufacture exported; under which, had England acquiesced, I am persuaded it would have been better for the kingdom in general. But the false notion of a possible monopoly, made the English deaf to all other terms of accommodation; by which means they lost the horse rather than quit the stable' ('Memoirs of Wool,' vol. ii., p. 30). The duties imposed by the Irish parliament, at this time, upon the export of manufactured wool, was four shillings on the value of twenty shillings of the old drapery, and two shillings upon the like value of the new, except friezes. But this concurrence of the people of Ireland seemed rather to heighten the jealousy between the two nations, by making the people of England imagine the manufactures of Ireland were arrived at a dangerous pitch of improvement, since they could be supposed capable of bearing so extravagant a duty: accordingly, in the next following year, the English parliament passed an Act (10-11 William III: cap. 10), that no person should export from Ireland wool or woollen goods, except to England or Wales, under high penalties, such goods to be shipped only from certain ports in Ireland, and to certain ports in England: But this was not the whole grievance; the old duties upon the import of those commodities, whether raw or manufactured, into Great Britain, were left in the same state as before, which amounted nearly to a prohibition; thus did the English, although they had not themselves any occasion for those commodities, prohibit, nevertheless, their being sent to any other nation."The discouragement of the woollen manufacture of Ireland, affected particularly the English settlers there, for the linen was entirely in the hands of the Scotch, who were established in Ulster, and the Irish natives had no share in either. It is stated in a pamphlet, entitled, 'A Discourse concerning Ireland, etc. in answer to the Exon and Barnstaple petitions,' printed 1697-8, that there were then, in the city and suburbs of Dublin, 12,000 English families, and throughout the nation, 50,000, who were bred to trades connected with the manufacture of wool, 'who could no more get their bread in the linen manufacture, than a London taylor by shoe-making.'"Mr. Walter Scott says ('Life of Swift,' p. 278) that the Irish woollen manufacture produced an annual million, but this is not the fact; Mr. Dobbs in his 'Essay on the Trade of Ireland,' informs us, from the custom-house books, that in the year 1697 (which immediately preceded the year in which the address above-mentioned was transmitted to the king) the total value of Irish woollen exports, of all sorts, was only £23,614 9s.6d., and in 1687, when they were at the highest, they did not exceed £70,521 14s.0d.It moreover appears, that the greater part of these exports were of a sort which did not interfere with the trade of England, £56,415 16s.0d.was in friezes, and £2,520 18s.0d.coarse stockings, the rest consisted in serges and other stuffs of the new drapery, which affected not the trade of England generally, but only the particular interests of Exeter and its neighbourhood, and a very few other inconsiderable towns."But, whatever injury was intended, little prejudice was done to Ireland, except what followed immediately after the passing of this Act. It appears from Mr. Dobbs's pamphlet, that, a few years after, four times the quantity of woollen goods were shipped in each year, clandestinely, than had ever been exported, legally, before: moreover, the Irish vastly increased their manufactures for home consumption, and learned to make fine cloth from Spanish wool: it was only to England itself that any disadvantage redounded; many manufacturers who were unsettled by this measure, passed over to Germany, Spain, and to Rouen and other parts of France, 'from these beginnings they have, in many branches, so much improved the woollen manufactures of France, as to vie with the English in foreign markets.—Upon the whole, those nations may be justly said to have deprived Britain of millions since that time, instead of the thousands Ireland might possibly have made.'—What Mr. Dobbs has here asserted, relative to the removal of the manufacturers, has been confirmed by another tract, 'Letter from a Clothier a Member of Parliament,' printed in 1731, which informs us that, for some years after, the English seemed to engross all the woollen trade, 'but this appearance of benefit abated, as the foreign factories, raised on the ruin of the Irish, acquired strength': he shows too, that the importation of unmanufactured wool from Ireland to England had been gradually decreasing since that time, which was probably on account of the increase of the illicit trade to foreign parts, towards the encouragement of which the duties, or legal transportation, served to act as a bounty of 36 per cent. 'So true it is, that England can never fall into measures for unreasonably cramping the industry of the people of Ireland, without doing herself the greatest prejudice.'" (Note g, pp. 320-321).[T. S.]

"In the year 1698 a bill was introduced into the English Parliament, grounded upon complaints, that the woollen manufacture in Ireland prejudiced the staple trade of England; the matter terminated at last in an address to the King, wherein the commons 'implored his majesty's protection and favour on this matter, and that he would make it his royal care, and enjoin all those whom he employed in Ireland, to use their utmost diligence, to hinder the exportation of wool from Ireland (except it be imported into England), and for the discouraging the woollen manufacture, and increasing the linen manufacture of Ireland.' Accordingly, on the 16th July, the King wrote a letter of instructions to the Earl of Galway, in which the following passage appears: 'The chief thing that must be tried to be prevented, is, that the Irish parliament takes no notice of what has passed in this here, and that you make effectual laws for the linen manufacture, and discourage as far as possible the woollen.'—The Earl of Galway and the other justices convened the parliament on the 27th of September; in their speech, they recommended a bill for the encouragement of the manufactures of linen and hemp, 'which,' say they, 'will be found more advantageous to this kingdom than the woollen manufacture, which, being the settled trade of England from whence all foreign markets are supplied, can never be encouraged here.' The house of commons so far concurred with the lords justices' sentiments as to say, in their address of thanks, that they would heartily endeavour to establish the linen manufacture, and to render the same useful to England, and 'we hope,' they add, 'to find such a temperament, with respect to the woollen trade here, that the same may not be injurious to England' ('Cont. Rapin's Hist.,' p. 376). 'And they did,' says Mr. Smith, 'so far come into a temperament in this case, as, hoping it would be accepted by way of compromise, to lay a high duty of ... upon all their woollen manufacture exported; under which, had England acquiesced, I am persuaded it would have been better for the kingdom in general. But the false notion of a possible monopoly, made the English deaf to all other terms of accommodation; by which means they lost the horse rather than quit the stable' ('Memoirs of Wool,' vol. ii., p. 30). The duties imposed by the Irish parliament, at this time, upon the export of manufactured wool, was four shillings on the value of twenty shillings of the old drapery, and two shillings upon the like value of the new, except friezes. But this concurrence of the people of Ireland seemed rather to heighten the jealousy between the two nations, by making the people of England imagine the manufactures of Ireland were arrived at a dangerous pitch of improvement, since they could be supposed capable of bearing so extravagant a duty: accordingly, in the next following year, the English parliament passed an Act (10-11 William III: cap. 10), that no person should export from Ireland wool or woollen goods, except to England or Wales, under high penalties, such goods to be shipped only from certain ports in Ireland, and to certain ports in England: But this was not the whole grievance; the old duties upon the import of those commodities, whether raw or manufactured, into Great Britain, were left in the same state as before, which amounted nearly to a prohibition; thus did the English, although they had not themselves any occasion for those commodities, prohibit, nevertheless, their being sent to any other nation.

"The discouragement of the woollen manufacture of Ireland, affected particularly the English settlers there, for the linen was entirely in the hands of the Scotch, who were established in Ulster, and the Irish natives had no share in either. It is stated in a pamphlet, entitled, 'A Discourse concerning Ireland, etc. in answer to the Exon and Barnstaple petitions,' printed 1697-8, that there were then, in the city and suburbs of Dublin, 12,000 English families, and throughout the nation, 50,000, who were bred to trades connected with the manufacture of wool, 'who could no more get their bread in the linen manufacture, than a London taylor by shoe-making.'

"Mr. Walter Scott says ('Life of Swift,' p. 278) that the Irish woollen manufacture produced an annual million, but this is not the fact; Mr. Dobbs in his 'Essay on the Trade of Ireland,' informs us, from the custom-house books, that in the year 1697 (which immediately preceded the year in which the address above-mentioned was transmitted to the king) the total value of Irish woollen exports, of all sorts, was only £23,614 9s.6d., and in 1687, when they were at the highest, they did not exceed £70,521 14s.0d.It moreover appears, that the greater part of these exports were of a sort which did not interfere with the trade of England, £56,415 16s.0d.was in friezes, and £2,520 18s.0d.coarse stockings, the rest consisted in serges and other stuffs of the new drapery, which affected not the trade of England generally, but only the particular interests of Exeter and its neighbourhood, and a very few other inconsiderable towns.

"But, whatever injury was intended, little prejudice was done to Ireland, except what followed immediately after the passing of this Act. It appears from Mr. Dobbs's pamphlet, that, a few years after, four times the quantity of woollen goods were shipped in each year, clandestinely, than had ever been exported, legally, before: moreover, the Irish vastly increased their manufactures for home consumption, and learned to make fine cloth from Spanish wool: it was only to England itself that any disadvantage redounded; many manufacturers who were unsettled by this measure, passed over to Germany, Spain, and to Rouen and other parts of France, 'from these beginnings they have, in many branches, so much improved the woollen manufactures of France, as to vie with the English in foreign markets.—Upon the whole, those nations may be justly said to have deprived Britain of millions since that time, instead of the thousands Ireland might possibly have made.'—What Mr. Dobbs has here asserted, relative to the removal of the manufacturers, has been confirmed by another tract, 'Letter from a Clothier a Member of Parliament,' printed in 1731, which informs us that, for some years after, the English seemed to engross all the woollen trade, 'but this appearance of benefit abated, as the foreign factories, raised on the ruin of the Irish, acquired strength': he shows too, that the importation of unmanufactured wool from Ireland to England had been gradually decreasing since that time, which was probably on account of the increase of the illicit trade to foreign parts, towards the encouragement of which the duties, or legal transportation, served to act as a bounty of 36 per cent. 'So true it is, that England can never fall into measures for unreasonably cramping the industry of the people of Ireland, without doing herself the greatest prejudice.'" (Note g, pp. 320-321).[T. S.]

[104]The causes for absenteeism are thus noted by Lecky ("Hist. of Ireland," p. 213, vol. i., ed. 1892): "The very large part of the confiscated land was given to Englishmen who had property and duties in England, and habitually lived there. Much of it also came into the market, and as there was very little capital in Ireland, and as Catholics were forbidden to purchase land, this also passed largely into the hands of English speculators. Besides, the level of civilization was much higher in England than in Ireland. The position of a Protestant landlord, living in the midst of a degraded population, differing from him in religion and race, had but little attraction, the political situation of the country closed to an Irish gentleman nearly every avenue of honourable ambition, and owing to a long series of very evident causes, the sentiment of public duty was deplorably low. The economical condition was not checked by any considerable movement in the opposite direction, for after the suppression of the Irish manufactures but few Englishmen, except those who obtained Irish offices, came to Ireland."The amount of the rent obtained in Ireland that was spent in England is estimated elsewhere by Swift to have been at least one-third. In 1729, Prior assessed the amount at £627,000. In the Supplement to his "List of Absentees," Prior gives eight further "articles" by which money was "yearly drawn out of the Kingdom." See the "Supplement," pp. 242-245 in Thone's "Collection of Tracts," Dublin, 1861. [T. S.]

The amount of the rent obtained in Ireland that was spent in England is estimated elsewhere by Swift to have been at least one-third. In 1729, Prior assessed the amount at £627,000. In the Supplement to his "List of Absentees," Prior gives eight further "articles" by which money was "yearly drawn out of the Kingdom." See the "Supplement," pp. 242-245 in Thone's "Collection of Tracts," Dublin, 1861. [T. S.]

[105]John Erskine, Earl of Mar, has elsewhere been characterized by Swift as "crooked; he seemed to me to be a gentleman of good sense and good nature." The great rebellion of 1715, for which Mar was responsible, was stirred up by him in favour of the Pretender, and succeeded so far as to bring the Chevalier to Scotland. The Duke of Argyll, however, fought his forces, and though the victory remained undecided, Mar was compelled to seek safety in France. The rebellion caused so much disturbance in every part of the British Isles that Ireland suffered greatly from bad trade. [T. S.]

[106]Joshua, Lord Allen. See note on p. 175. [T. S.]

[107]See page 60 of vol. iii. of the present edition. [T. S.]

[108]Chief Justice Whitshed. [T. S.]

[109]See page 14. [T. S.]

[110]Edward Waters. [T. S.]

[111]See pages 96, 235-6, of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.]

[112]The person here intimated, Joshua, Lord Allen (whom Swift elsewhere satirizes under the name of Traulus), was born in 1685. He is said to have been a weak and dissipated man; and some particulars are recorded by tradition concerning his marriage with Miss Du Pass (whose father was clerk of the secretary of state's office in James the Second's reign, and died in India in 1699), which do very little honour either to his heart or understanding.It is reported, that being trepanned into a marriage with this lady, by a stratagem of the celebrated Lionel, Duke of Dorset, Lord Allen refused, for some time, to acknowledge her as his wife. But the lady, after living some time in close retirement, caused an advertisement to be inserted in the papers, stating the death of a brother in the East Indies, by which Miss Margaret Du Pass had succeeded to a large fortune. Accordingly, she put on mourning, and assumed an equipage conforming to her supposed change of fortune. Lord Allen's affairs being much deranged, he became now as anxious to prove the marriage with the wealthy heiress, as he had formerly been to disown the unportioned damsel; and succeeded, after such opposition as the lady judged necessary to give colour to the farce. Before the deceit was discovered, Lady Allen, by her good sense and talents, had obtained such ascendance over her husband, that they ever afterwards lived in great harmony.Lord Allen was, at the time of giving offence to Swift, a privy-counsellor; and distinguished himself, according to Lodge, in the House of Peers, by his excellent speeches for the benefit of his country. He died at Stillorgan, 1742. [S.]Swift did not allow Lord Allen to rest with this "advertisement." In the poem entitled "Traulus," Allen is gibbetted in some lively rhymes. He calls him a "motley fruit of mongrel seed," and traces his descent from the mother's side (she was the sister of the Earl of Kildare) as well as the father's (who was the son of Sir Joshua Allen, Lord Mayor of Dublin in 1673):"Who could give the looby such airs?Were they masons, were they butchers?This was dexterous at the trowel,That was bred to kill a cow well:Hence the greasy clumsy mienIn his dress and figure seen;Hence the mean and sordid soul,Like his body rank and foul;Hence that wild suspicious peep,Like a rogue that steals a sheep;Hence he learnt the butcher's guile,How to cut your throat and smile;Like a butcher doomed for lifeIn his mouth to wear a knife;Hence he draws his daily foodFrom his tenants' vital blood."[T. S.]

It is reported, that being trepanned into a marriage with this lady, by a stratagem of the celebrated Lionel, Duke of Dorset, Lord Allen refused, for some time, to acknowledge her as his wife. But the lady, after living some time in close retirement, caused an advertisement to be inserted in the papers, stating the death of a brother in the East Indies, by which Miss Margaret Du Pass had succeeded to a large fortune. Accordingly, she put on mourning, and assumed an equipage conforming to her supposed change of fortune. Lord Allen's affairs being much deranged, he became now as anxious to prove the marriage with the wealthy heiress, as he had formerly been to disown the unportioned damsel; and succeeded, after such opposition as the lady judged necessary to give colour to the farce. Before the deceit was discovered, Lady Allen, by her good sense and talents, had obtained such ascendance over her husband, that they ever afterwards lived in great harmony.

Lord Allen was, at the time of giving offence to Swift, a privy-counsellor; and distinguished himself, according to Lodge, in the House of Peers, by his excellent speeches for the benefit of his country. He died at Stillorgan, 1742. [S.]

Swift did not allow Lord Allen to rest with this "advertisement." In the poem entitled "Traulus," Allen is gibbetted in some lively rhymes. He calls him a "motley fruit of mongrel seed," and traces his descent from the mother's side (she was the sister of the Earl of Kildare) as well as the father's (who was the son of Sir Joshua Allen, Lord Mayor of Dublin in 1673):

"Who could give the looby such airs?Were they masons, were they butchers?This was dexterous at the trowel,That was bred to kill a cow well:Hence the greasy clumsy mienIn his dress and figure seen;Hence the mean and sordid soul,Like his body rank and foul;Hence that wild suspicious peep,Like a rogue that steals a sheep;Hence he learnt the butcher's guile,How to cut your throat and smile;Like a butcher doomed for lifeIn his mouth to wear a knife;Hence he draws his daily foodFrom his tenants' vital blood."

[T. S.]

[113]See note on page 66 of vol. vi. of present edition. The patent to Lord Dartmouth, granting him the right to coin copper coins, provided that he should give security to redeem these coins for gold or silver on demand. John Knox obtained this patent and Colonel Moore acquired it from Knox after the Revolution. [T. S.]

[114]Of ten pence in every two shillings. [F.]

[115]But M'Culla hath still 30l.per cent. by the scheme, if they be returned. [F.]

[116]Faulkner's edition adds here: "For the benefit of defrauding the crown never occurreth to the public, but is wholly turned to the advantage of those whom the crown employeth." [T. S.]

[117]See page 89 of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.]

[118]1: Faulkner's edition adds here: "it being a matter wholly out of my trade." [T. S.]

[119]See "A Proposal for the Universal Use of Irish Manufactures," p. 19. [T. S.]

[120]See Swift's letter to Archbishop King on the weavers, p. 137. [T. S.]

[121]Edward Waters. [T. S.]

[122]See note prefixed to pamphlet on p. 15. [T. S.]

[123]See notes on pp. 6, 7, 8 and 73 of vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.]

[124]See Appendix V. in vol. vi. of present edition. [T. S.]

[125]See page 81. [T. S.]

[126]Nathaniel Mist was the publisher of the "Weekly Journal," for which Defoe wrote many important papers. The greater part of his career as a printer was spent in trials and imprisonments for the "libels" which appeared in his journal. This was largely due to the fact that his weekly newspaper became the recognized organ of Jacobites and "High-fliers." From 1716 to 1728 he was a pretty busy man with the government, and finally was compelled to go to France to escape from prosecution. In France he joined Wharton, but his "Journal" still continued to be issued until September 21st of the year 1728, which was the date of the last issue. On the 28th of the same month, however, appeared its continuation under the title, "Fog's Weekly Journal," and this was carried on by Mist's friends. Mist died in 1737. [T. S.]

[127]See notes on pp. 158-159. [T. S.]

[128]"Observations on the Precedent List: Together with a View of the Trade of Ireland, and the Great Benefits which accrue to England thereby; with some hints for the further improvement of the same." Dublin, second edition, 1729. Reprinted in Thom's "Tracts and Treatises of Ireland," 1861, vol. ii. [T. S]

[129]A reference to Alberoni's expedition in aid of the Jacobites made several years before Swift wrote. [T. S.]

[130]Sir W. Petty gives the population of Ireland as about one million, two hundred thousand ("Pol. Arithmetic," 1699). [T. S.]

[131]This is probably a Swiftian plausibility to give an air of truth to his remarks. Certain parts of America were at that time reputed to be inhabited by cannibals. [T. S.]

[132]This anecdote is taken from the Description of the Island of Formosa by that very extraordinary impostor George Psalmanazar, who for some time passed himself for a native of that distant country. He afterwards published a retractation of his figments, with many expressions of contrition, but containing certain very natural indications of dislike to those who had detected him. The passage referred to in the text is as follows: "We also eat human flesh, which I am now convinced is a very barbarous custom, though we feed only upon our open enemies, slain or made captive in the field, or else upon malefactors legally executed; the flesh of the latter is our greatest dainty, and is four times dearer than other rare and delicious meat. We buy it of the executioner, for the bodies of all public capital offenders are his fees. As soon as the criminal is dead, he cuts the body in pieces, squeezes out the blood, and makes his house a shambles for the flesh of men and women, where all people that can afford it come and buy. I remember, about ten years ago, a tall, well-complexioned, pretty fat virgin, about nineteen years of age, and tire-woman to the queen, was found guilty of high treason, for designing to poison the king; and accordingly she was condemned to suffer the most cruel death that could be invented, and her sentence was, to be nailed to a cross, and kept alive as long as possible. The sentence was put in execution; when she fainted with the cruel torment, the hangman gave her strong liquors, &c. to revive her; the sixth day she died. Her long sufferings, youth, and good constitution, made her flesh so tender, delicious, and valuable, that the executioner sold it for above eight tallies; for there was such thronging to this inhuman market, that men of great fashion thought themselves fortunate if they could purchase a pound or two of it." Lond. 1705, p. 112. [S.]

[133]The English government had been making concessions to the Dissenters, and, of course, Swift satirically alludes here to the arguments used by the government in the steps they had taken. But the truth of the matter, Swift hints, was, that those who desired to abolish the test were more anxious for their pockets than their consciences. [T. S.]

[134]The inhabitants of a district of Brazil supposed to be savages, making the name synonymous with savage ignorance. [T. S.]

[135]"Remove me from this land of slaves,Where all are fools, and all are knaves,Where every fool and knave is bought,Yet kindly sells himself for nought."(From Swift's note-book, written while detained at Holyhead in September, 1727.) [T. S.]

[135]

"Remove me from this land of slaves,Where all are fools, and all are knaves,Where every fool and knave is bought,Yet kindly sells himself for nought."

(From Swift's note-book, written while detained at Holyhead in September, 1727.) [T. S.]

Back to Index Next