Digitized by the Internet Arciiive 
 in 2011 witin funding from 
 Duke University Libraries 
 
 littp://www.arcliive.org/details/generalviewofbilOOanst 
 
A GENERAL 
 
 VIEW OF THE BILL 
 
 PRESENTED TO PARLIAMENT, 
 
 POR PREVENTING 
 
 THE ILLICIT EXPORTATION 
 
 O F 
 
 Britilh Wool and Live Sheep. 
 
 [Price Two Shillings.] 
 
A GENERAL 
 
 VI EW OF THE BILL 
 
 PRESENTED TO PARLIAMENT 
 
 DURING TttE LAST SESSION, 
 FOR PREVENTING 
 
 THE ILLICIT EXPORTATION 
 
 O F 
 
 Britifti Wool and Live Sheep. 
 
 IN WHICH ARE EXHIBITED, 
 
 The Origin of the Enquiry; 
 Remarks on the Inefficacy 
 
 of the prefent Laws to 
 
 prevent tlie Exportation 
 
 of Wool; 
 The Principle on which the 
 
 Bill is founded j 
 Curfor}' Obfervations on the 
 
 Nature of the Evidence 
 
 which will be produced to 
 
 the Houfe of Commons. 
 
 General Obfervations on 
 what has been advanced 
 by different Writers, on 
 the Expediency of per- 
 mitting the Exportation 
 of Britifh Wool ; 
 
 AND 
 
 Remarks on the Condu6t 
 of fome Perfons who 
 have publicly attacked 
 the Bill. 
 
 WITH MISCELLANEOUS 
 
 Reflexions on the Woollen Manufafture, 
 
 As connedled with the Prefent Enquiry. 
 
 ADDRESSED TO THE MOST NOBLE 
 
 THE MARQUIS OF LANSDOWN. 
 
 BY THE 
 
 CHAIRMAN of the GENERAL MEETINGS. 
 
 BATH, PRINTED BY R. CRUTTWELL ; AND SOLD BY 
 
 C. DILLY, POULTRY, LONDON. 
 
 MDCCLXXXVII. 
 
' 1 . 
 A 
 
 T O 
 
 THE MOST NOBLE 
 
 The MARQUIS of LANSDOWN. 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 "^TOUR Lordfhip having frequently con- 
 defcended to converfe v^ith me on the 
 fubje6l of the Woollen Manufa6lure, I am 
 defirous of introducing the difcuffion of a 
 queflion of confiderable importance, and 
 which is intimately conne6led with it, to the 
 notice of the public, under your Lordfhip's 
 patronage. 
 
 The extenfive knowledge which your Lord- 
 
 fliip poflefles, both of the a6lual flate of the 
 
 Trade and Commerce of this Kingdom, and 
 
 B alfo 
 
[ 6 ] 
 
 alfo of its relative fituation with refpedl to 
 our general commercial intercourfe with 
 foreign countries, juftly entitles you to ge- 
 neral refpe6l:j and to no perfon can I addrefs 
 myfelf on fuch a fubjeft with more fatisfac- 
 tion than to your Lordfhip. 
 
 The Woollen Manufa61:urers, being now 
 perfectly united in fentiment refpe6ling the 
 increaling pradlice of fmuggling Britifti 
 Wool to France, and the inefficacy of the 
 prefent laws to prevent it, are determined 
 to bring forward this feffion of Parliament 
 the Bill which was prefented laft year, with 
 fuch alterations and amendments as have been 
 propofed fince the recefs. 
 
 The various mifreprefentations which have 
 been held out to the public, of the real de- 
 
 fign 
 
[ 7 ] 
 
 fign of the manufa6lurers, and which have 
 been induftrioufly propagated and invidioufly 
 commented on by a noble Author in his fpeech 
 at a County Meeting, and by writers of in- 
 ferior rank in periodical pubUcations, have 
 induced me occafionally to notice their unjufl 
 charges through the channel of the publick 
 prints, and to challenge them to a proof of 
 their affertions j but as it is extremely difa- 
 greeable to anfwer fnnilar obje6lions, con- 
 tinually brought forward by different perfons, 
 I intend this addrefs to your Lordfhip as a 
 kind of general anfwer; and I have the more 
 readily undertaken this mode of reply, as it 
 affords me an opportunity of confidering the 
 queftion in a more diffufe manner than can 
 polTibly be effe6led in the compafs of a letter 
 defigned for infertion in a newfpaper. 
 
 B 2 Through 
 
[ 8 ] 
 
 Through the whole of this arduous un- 
 dertaking, I have been uniformly guided by 
 fa(5ls, without being bialTed either by party, 
 or by perfonal intereft^ and the fame line of 
 condu6l will, I trufl, mark all my future 
 proceedings j as a flricl adherence to truth, 
 without regarding the partial reafonings of 
 any fet of men whatever, can alone fatisfy 
 my own mind, or afford me the leaft profpecl 
 of being in this inftance ferviceable to my 
 country. To your Lordfhip's, and to the 
 publick candour, therefore, I moil willingly 
 fubmit the following obfervations on the 
 Wool Bill. 
 
 Before I proceed dire6lly to the confidera^ 
 tion of my fubje6l, I beg leave to flate the 
 origin of the enquiry, and its progrefs to the 
 prefent time; the conduct of the manufac- 
 turers 
 
[ 9 ] 
 
 turers having, in this inflance, as well as 
 others, been much mifreprefented. 
 
 In the year 1784, fome perfons in the- 
 Woollen Trade, in Somerfetfhire, being 
 alarmed by the accounts which they had re- 
 ceived of the fmuggling of wool in that part 
 of the country, requefted by publick adver- 
 tifement a meeting of the manufa6lurers and 
 wool-dealers at Briftol fair. In confequence 
 of this requeft, a very numerous and refpec- 
 table meeting was held, at which I attended, 
 without the moft diflant idea of taking an 
 aftive part in the bufuiefs ; but that meeting 
 having been pleafed unanimoufly to call me 
 to the chair, I could not confiftently with 
 propriety decline it. 
 
 B 3 The 
 
[ 10 ] 
 
 The informations received at this meeting, 
 refpe6ting the fmuggling of wool and live 
 fheep, were deemed amply fufficient to war- 
 rant a further inquiry; and the refolutions 
 entered into for that purpofe were made 
 publick. 
 
 Soon after the manufacturers of the Weft 
 had met at Briflol, a fimilar meeting was 
 held at Leeds in Yorkfliire. The refolutions 
 of this and other fubfequent meetings in 
 thofe parts were tranfmitted to me, as alfo 
 fome information on the fubje6l; and a mu- 
 tual correfpondence for facilitating the ope- 
 rations of the manufadlurers in general, foort 
 after took place. 
 
 Some confiderable feizures of wool having 
 been made in the river Thames, and in Dor- 
 
 fetfhire. 
 
[ " ] 
 
 fetfhire, and frefh difcoveries in the fmug- 
 gling of wool being continually produced, 
 the manufa6lurers were ftimulated to a6l 
 with firmnefs and vigour 3 and a very liberal 
 fubfcription was entered into for defraying 
 the necelFary expences. 
 
 At a meeting held at Bath, a memorial 
 was drawn up, and prefented to the Lords 
 of the Treafury, praying that the laws for 
 fupprefTing the fmuggling of wool might be 
 more vigoroufly executed j and it was likewife 
 refolved, fhould it appear necefTary, to apply 
 to Parliament for more ample provifions to 
 reftrain the fraudulent exportation of this 
 valuable article. 
 
 Perfonal application was made to his 
 Majefty's minifters on the fubjedl, and the 
 
 ftrongeil 
 
[ 12 ] 
 
 ftrongeft alTurances were received of the fup- 
 port of Government 5 but the important dif- 
 cuflion of the Irifh proportions fo much 
 engaged the attention of Parhament, that it 
 was judged moft advifeable to drop all further 
 application at this time. In the mean while 
 I employed myfelf in a Uriel inveftigation of 
 the fubje6l, and drew up obfervations on the 
 prefent laws, and a rough iketch of a plan 
 for new regulations: but fo many difficulties 
 prefented themfelves to my view, that I felt 
 myfelf inclined to drop the profecution of 
 the fcheme. 
 
 The manufacturers, when again afTembled, 
 
 were however determined to perfeverc in the 
 
 profecution of the obje6l for which they 
 
 had united; and, as I very ardently wifhed 
 
 •to bring. the matter to fome ifTue, I delivered 
 
 -> ' • my 
 
[ 13 ] 
 
 ray papers, by the direftion of the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, into the hands ofMv.Rofei 
 and the SoHcitor to the Cuftoms received 
 orders to perufe them, and to prepare the 
 draft of a bill for the infpe6lion of Miniftry. 
 
 Copies of thefe papers I had previoufly 
 tranfmitted to the meeting at Leeds. At 
 that time the draft of another bill for fup- 
 prefling the fmuggling of wool, drawn up 
 by a cuftom-houfe officer, was fent for my 
 perufal, and a copy of the fame was conveyed 
 to the manufacturers in the North. This 
 bill being the work of a perfon unacquainted 
 with the nature of the woollen manufac- 
 ture, contained many objc6lionable claufes'; 
 and a groundlefs opinion prevailing in the 
 North, that it had received the fan6lion of 
 Government, and probably fome other claufes 
 
 concur- 
 
[Hi 
 
 concurring, an unexpe6led and violent op- 
 pofition arofe in that quarter, and a memorial 
 was prefented to the Lords of the Treafury, 
 praying that no alteration whatever might be 
 made in the fublifting laws refpe6ling the 
 exportation of wool. 
 
 This unexpecled event not a little endan- 
 gered the fuccefs of our meafures ; for it was 
 fignified to me, that Government could not 
 bring forward any proportion, while the 
 manufacturers were fo much divided among 
 themfelves. 
 
 But this defedion of the Northern manu- 
 facturers was in fome meafure compenfated 
 by an acceffion of Itrength from other quar- 
 ters. The merchants and manufa6lurers of 
 Exeter, experiencing a want of wool, held 
 
 a meeting 
 
[ »5 ] 
 
 a meeting in that city, and came to refolu- 
 tions fomevvhat fimilar to thofe which had 
 been originally entered into at Briflolj and 
 almoft at the fame inflant, the wool-dealers 
 in the county of Kent, perceiving that the 
 fmuggling of wool in that county had con- 
 fiderably increafed, aflembled at Canterbury, 
 and offered to fend delcsrates to a general 
 meeting of the manufa6lurers to be held in 
 London. Such a meeting was alfo propofed 
 by the gentlemen of Exeter j and having re- 
 ceived the fan6lion of the manufacturers 
 affembled at Salifbury, an advertifement, 
 announcing it, was pubHfhed in the papers 5 
 in confequence of which, delegates from eigh- 
 teen counties (which, exclufive of Yorkfhire, 
 included the manufaCluring intereft of nearly 
 the whole kingdom) met at the Crown and 
 Anchor tavern in the Strand. Here again I 
 
 was 
 
[ i6 ] 
 
 was nominated to the chair. The meeting: 
 was fo very refpeftable, that Government 
 thought proper to give their approbation 
 and concurrence^ and a confiderable number 
 of the members of the Houfe of Commons 
 honoured the meetings by their attendance; 
 and being perfe6lly fatisfied with the evidence 
 produced, came to feveral refolutions in fup- 
 port of the meafures of the manufa6lurers. 
 
 A Committee being formed, and the heads 
 of the propofed bill being drawn up, we fo- 
 licited an examination before the Houfe of 
 Commons. Leave was obtained for a com- 
 mittee of that Houfe to receive evidence; 
 which being by them deemed fatisfaiSloiy, a 
 report was grounded on the fame, and the 
 bill was ordered to be printed; but the feffion 
 was fo far advanced, that nothing further 
 
 could 
 
[ '7 ] 
 
 could be done in the bufinefs. At this time 
 a part of the manufacturers in the North 
 exprefled their defire of joining in an appli- 
 cation to Parliament; and two perfons of 
 confequence, from that diftri6l of Yorkfliire 
 which had appeared the mofl inimical to our 
 defigns, attended our committee at the Crown 
 and Anchor fome days before it broke up, 
 and exprefTed themfelves perfe6tly fatisfied 
 with the impartiality of our proceedings : we 
 had therefore fome reafon to hope for a re- 
 union; but from many circumftances which 
 had occurred fmce the adjournment of the 
 General Meeting in London, I muft confefs 
 I placed but little dependance on fo defirable 
 an event. 
 
 The opponents of the bill have exerted 
 themfelves to the utmoft, not only in mifre- 
 
 prefenting 
 
[ i8 ] 
 
 prefenting the claufes which it contains, but 
 in propagating fuch infinuations as were 
 moll Hkely to widen the breach that had un- 
 happily taken place. But all their efforts 
 proved abortive, as appears from the pro- 
 ceedings of a general meeting of the Nobility, 
 Land-owners, Wool-growers, Manufa6lu- 
 rers, &c. lately held at Bradford in that 
 county, for the purpofe of taking the pro- 
 pofed bill into confideration 5 who have re- 
 folved to fupport an application to Parliament 
 jointly with the manufafturers of the Weft, 
 and have deputed three gentlemen to attend 
 the next meeting which may be held in Lon- 
 don. Thus, my Lord, after all the confli6ls 
 we have fuftained from internal difTentions, 
 and the avowed efforts of the opponents of 
 the bill, the bond of union is likely to be 
 drawn clofer than ever 5 and all thofe manu* 
 
 faclurersj 
 
[ '9 ] 
 
 fafturers, who are more immediately inte- 
 refled in the fuccefs of the bill, will with one 
 voice prefent their requefls to the legiilature. 
 
 Though I rejoice at this union, yet it is 
 not becaufe I view it in the light of an op- 
 pofition to the landed interefl. No, my 
 Lord ; I am fully convinced, that both in- 
 terefts are in this kingdom infeparably united, 
 and that it is madnefs to expe6l they can ever 
 be feparated without mutual difadvantage. 
 
 The refolutions of the meeting at Brad- 
 ford give the higheft fan6lion to the proceed- 
 ings of the general meeting in London ; fince 
 nothing but the force of evidence could have 
 operated to produce fuch a change of fenti- 
 ment, in a part of the country which had be- 
 fore profefTed itfelf fo inimical to our meafures. 
 
 Having 
 
[ 20 ] 
 
 Having thus given a concife view of the 
 origin and progrefs of the inquiry concerning 
 the fmuggling of Enghfh wool, down to the 
 prefent time, I will now proceed to offer 
 fome arguments for the propriety of an ap- 
 plication to Parliament. 
 
 The queftion naturally divides itfelf into 
 two branches. 
 The firft is. 
 
 Whether the pra6lice of fmuggling 
 wool is carried on to any confider- 
 able extent? 
 The fecond. 
 
 Whether the laws now in force are fuf- 
 ficient to prevent that pernicious 
 pra6lice? 
 
 Thefe two points I fhall confider diftin6lly. 
 • . The 
 
[ 21 ] 
 
 The evidence delivered to the Committee of 
 the Houfe of Commons, was deemed amply 
 fufficient on v^hich to ground a report, 
 though a part only of what might have been 
 given was then produced. 
 
 I am, however, now in pofTefTion of much 
 more ample information; the force of which 
 no art or fophiftry can evade. 
 
 The liberal fubfcription which was en- 
 tered into immediately on the formation of 
 the general meeting in London, has enabled 
 me to employ perfons capable of procuring 
 intelligence; and I have fpared no pains or 
 expence in order to furnifh myfelf with fuch 
 materials as, from their folidity, I doubt 
 not, are capable of combating all oppofi- 
 tion to this proportion — that Britifli wool is 
 
 fmuggled in great quantities. 
 
 C The 
 
[ 22 ] 
 
 The information which, by the concur- 
 rence of fingular events, has been obtained 
 from the Continent, exceeds my moll: fan- 
 guine expedlations : but prudence will not 
 permit me to give your Lordfhip, or the 
 public, a detail of the information which 
 has been already obtained, as it might pre- 
 vent my procuring that which I have reafon 
 further to expedl. 
 
 It is not accounts of a few folitary bags of 
 wool conveyed to the Continent by the fmug- 
 glers, as a return for brandy brought from 
 thence, or even of cafual cargoes of more 
 confequence occafionally fent to France, 
 which make up the fum of my information; 
 but I have been able to procure the mod fa- 
 tisfa6lory evidence, that a regular trade in 
 that article has been carried on to an amount 
 
 beyond 
 
[ 23 ] 
 
 beyond what even the manufacturers them- 
 felves had any idea of. 
 
 Every flep I advance in this inquiry leads 
 to more important difcoveries ; and I have no 
 doubt of being able to lay before Parliament 
 fuch evidence as will furprife thofe who now 
 vaunt, that the manufadlurers have raifed a 
 clamour about a thing which either hath no 
 exiftence, or at mod is of very trifling confe- 
 quence. I will only add, my Lord, under this 
 head, that profecutions are now carrying 
 on againft feveral perfons for fmuggling 
 this article: and were not the undertaking 
 too extenfive for the Committee, profecuti- 
 ons might alfo be commenced againft many 
 other perfons in different parts of the 
 
 kingdom. 
 
 C2 It 
 
[ 24 ] 
 
 It now remains to be confidered, 
 Whether the prefent laws are fufficient to 
 prevent fuch fraudulent pra6lices, in cafe they 
 were properly executed? 
 
 In order to point out clearly the defe61:s in 
 the wool laws now in force, it is neceflary 
 that they fhould be diftin6lly reviewed j but 
 I cannot expeft either your Lordfliip, or the 
 public at large, to attend to fuch a laborious 
 invefligation. I fliall therefore content my- 
 felf with taking notice of fome of the pro- 
 minent features, which are mofl eafily deli- 
 neated. 
 
 Of the laws now in force to prevent the 
 exportation of wool, fome are general, bind- 
 ing upon all parts of the kingdom within a 
 certain diilance from the fea^ others are par- 
 ticularly 
 
[ 25 ] 
 
 ticularly binding only upon the counties of 
 Kent and SulTex, 
 
 The former of thefe oblige " Every grower 
 '* of wool refiding within five miles of the 
 " fea, before he carries his wool home from 
 " the place of fhearing, to give notice ten days 
 ** after fhearing, to the next officer of the 
 " cufloms, of the true number of his fleeces, 
 " and where it is houfed, and not to remove 
 " the fame without certifying to the faid of- 
 *^ ficer under his hand his intention fo to do 
 " three days before." As there is no further 
 controul over the wool, it is very eafy to 
 confign it into the hands of the fmuggler, 
 and therefore in this refpe(5l the law is inef- 
 fe6lual*. C 3 Many 
 
 * The above daufe, though meant by the legiflature to be ge- 
 neral, is only incidentally mentioned, agreeable to the Icofe 
 manner in which many of the adls are drawn; and I am inclined 
 to believe that in fome counties it is not attended to, 
 
[ 26 ] 
 
 Many of the a6ls are alfo fo vaguely ex- 
 prefTed, and the claufes of them fo very un- 
 conne6led, that it is frequently hardly poflible 
 to trace their real meaning. 
 
 The local laws are alfo defe6live, though 
 not in fo great a degree; the defign of them 
 is to oblige every grower of wool, in the dif- 
 tri6ls to which they extend, " To give an ac- 
 " count in writing, in three days after fhear- 
 " ing, of his number of fleeces, and where 
 ** lodged, to the next cuftom-houfe officer j 
 " and the like notice, before he removes any 
 *' part thereof, of the number of fleeces and 
 " the weight, and the name and abode of 
 *' the perfon to whom it is difpofed, and the 
 ** place where intended to be carried, and fliall 
 " take a certificate from the officer who firfl: 
 l^ entered the fame, (paying fix-pence) on 
 
 pain 
 
[ 27 ] 
 
 " pain of forfeiting the wool; and alfo Three 
 " Shillings for every pound thereof, as if it 
 " had been actually exported." 
 
 So far they are calculated to anfvver the end 
 propofed -, but having no claufe requiring a 
 return of the certificate, and an acknowledg- 
 ment from the purchafer, of his having re- 
 ceived the wool, the intention of the legifla- 
 ture is defeated i it being very pofTible (and 
 which can be confirmed by evidence) to 
 convey wool out of the kingdom, and at 
 the fame time to comply with the letter of 
 the law. 
 
 One of the claufes in this a6t is like- 
 wife fo abfurd, that it is abfolutely necellary, 
 for the benefit of the trade, that the wool- 
 dealer fhould rifk the forfeiture of the bond 
 
 which 
 
[ 28 ] 
 
 which the law requires him to give, rather 
 than comply with fo injudicious a reftri<5lion.* 
 
 There are alfo defe(5ls in the laws for re- 
 gulating the conveyance of wool coaftwife. 
 There is no controul over wool which is 
 found lying on the common wharfs, from 
 whence it may be eafily conveyed on board 
 vefTels bound to foreign parts, without any 
 probability of dete6lion. All wool, when it 
 comes within the limits of a port, ceafes to 
 be under the controul of the officers of the 
 cuftoms; in confequence of which, wool that 
 
 * By the claufe in the a£l of the 9th and loth of William, chap, . 
 40, §. 3. *' No perfon within 15 miles of the fea, in the coun- 
 ties of Kent and SufTex, fliall buy any wool before he enters into 
 bond, with fureties, that all the wool he fhall buy fliall not be 
 fold by him to any perfon within 15 miles of the fea." By this 
 claufe, every wool-dealer within the regifter in the faid counties 
 is abfolutely prohibited from felling his wool to any perfon in 
 Yorkiliire, or any other county, v/ho reiides within 1 5 miles of 
 the fea. 
 
 is 
 
[ 29 ] 
 
 is brought from the country, and depofited 
 at Gravefend, (which is within the port of 
 London) may pafs without any certificate ^ it 
 is of courfe very eafy to convey wool from 
 thence on board veffels (lying within the port 
 of London) ready to tranfport the fame to 
 foreign countries. 
 
 To remedy thefe defe6ls, and alfo to abolifh 
 injudicious reflri61ions, is the end of the in- 
 tended bill; and this end it propofes to attain, 
 by extending the laws, at prefent binding only 
 on the counties of Kent and Suflex, to all 
 parts of the kingdom, within a limited dif- 
 tance from the fea, but with fuch alterations 
 and enlargements, as will give them that ef- 
 fe6l and energy of which they are at prefent 
 deilitute, and by fuggefting fuch regulations 
 ir| other cafes as may appear neceffary. 
 
 To 
 
[ 30 ] 
 
 To compleat a plan of fuch an extenfive 
 nature, and in which fo many interefls are 
 involved, without experiencing oppofition, 
 is hardly to be expedled^ but it was the 
 endeavour of the Committee, in drawing up 
 the heads of the bill, to efFe6l the end defigned 
 in a manner the leafl oppreflive to the par- 
 ties concerned. 
 
 The opponents of the bill have alked, 
 " How the manufa6turers can a6l fo abfurd- 
 " ly, as to demand an extenfion of the laws 
 ** which now fubfift in the counties of Kent 
 *' and SufTex, when it is fuppofed, that the 
 " greateft quantities of wool are fmuggled 
 " from thefe parts?" 
 
 In reply to this, the fa(St is not fubftantia- 
 ted, that the greateft quantities are fmuggled 
 
 from 
 
[ 3« ] 
 
 from thefe two counties; on the contrary, it 
 ♦J will appear that larger quantities are fmug- 
 gled from other parts of the kingdom, where 
 no fuch regulations exift. But owing to the 
 regifter in the above counties, the quantity of 
 wool grown within a certain diftance of the 
 fea is more accurately known i and from hence 
 it may be determined, with much greater cer- 
 tainty than in other parts, how much wool 
 is taken off by the fmugglers. The queflion 
 put by our opponents fuppofes, that thefe 
 laws, inftead of reflraining the pra6lice of 
 fmuggling, are an a6lual encouragement of 
 it: this, however, is not the cafe: they are, 
 as defigned to prevent fmuggling, good in 
 their principle -, but this principle not being 
 fufRciently extended, the end propofed by the 
 Legillature is not fully anfwered. 
 
 There 
 
[ 32 I 
 
 There is one part of the bill, which may 
 be more violently oppofed than even all the 
 regulations for preventing the exportation of 
 wool; I mean that which relates to the falfe 
 winding of the article. 
 
 The law now in being for the regulation 
 of winding or making up the fleece of wool, 
 pafTed fo long ago as the reign of Henry the 
 Vlllth; and from the difference in the value 
 of money between that and the prefent period, 
 the penalty which was then enabled for the 
 breach of the law is 7iow fo trifling, that it 
 is fcarcely worth any perfon's trouble to 
 commence a profecution for damages, except 
 at common law. 
 
 The neceflity of more ample provifion for 
 the fecurity of the wool-dealer, in this in- 
 
 flance, 
 
t 33 ] 
 
 ftance, is therefore univerfally confefTed, and 
 will be fully afcertained by evidence when 
 demanded. How far it may be poflible to 
 prevent all the ill confequences which follow 
 from the prefent mode of marking the flieep, 
 and from the fliameful manner of making up 
 the wool, it is impoflible to determine ; but 
 the importance of thefe obje6ls may be feen 
 by referring to the journals of the Houfe of 
 Commons. 
 
 thave now, I hope, fully explained the 
 two pofitions previoufly advanced, in as con- 
 cife a manner as the nature of the fubjed; 
 will admit. 
 
 The legiflature has already determined on 
 the necefiity of preventing the exportation 
 of wool 3 and the manufa6turers only wifli 
 
 for 
 
[ 34 ] • 
 
 for fuch additions and amendments to the 
 prefent laws, as appear necefTary to effe6l the 
 defign propofed by them. 
 
 To affirm that the bill is entirely free from 
 defe6ls, would be the moft unwarrantable 
 vanity on the part of the manufa6lurers5 and 
 had its opponents condu6led themfelves with 
 candour, this appeal would have been unne- 
 cefTaryi but every method has been tried, 
 which ingenuity could devife, to render the 
 promoters of the bill obnoxious to the Land- 
 owners j and it is become abfolutely neceflary, 
 that the manufa6lurers fhould vindicate 
 themfelves from thofe afperfions which have 
 been fo wantonly thrown on their principles 
 and condu6t. 
 
 It is, indeed, one of the maxims of the 
 great Sir Jofiah Childy " that a merchant (as a 
 
I 35 ] 
 
 merchant) is incapable of having juft views 
 of commerce, where his intereft is concern- 
 ed." Though I am perfuaded that this, Hke 
 other general rules, is not without its excep- 
 tions, yet I will not at prefent fet myfelf to 
 oppofe it, but will freely acknowledge the 
 abfolute necelTity of the Legiflature's guard- 
 ing, with the greatefl circumfpe6lion, againft 
 haflily adopting propofals for new regula- 
 tions, either from manufacturers or from 
 any other perfons. 
 
 A manufacturer may probably affix too 
 great a degree of criminality to the exporta- 
 tion of wool i nor is it proper that the merits 
 of the queftion fhould be decided by thofe 
 alone, whofe intereft is fuppofed to be im- 
 mediately concerned. But whatever errors 
 an attention to our own interefts may have 
 
 occafioned. 
 
[ 36 I 
 
 occafioned, we may fafely truft for the re- 
 moval of them to the wifdom of Parliament, 
 who, being free from prejudice in favour of 
 any particular clafs of men, will be able to 
 judge with impartiality, and to decide in a 
 manner the beft adapted to promote the 
 public welfare. 
 
 For my own part, I have ever confidered 
 the fubje6l as of national importance, and 
 unworthy of attention in any other point of 
 viewi and though I am anxioufly defirous 
 of interefting your Lordfhip in the caufe of 
 the manufaclurers, fo far as it fhall appear 
 to be confident with the public good, yet I 
 will not attempt to impofe on your judgment 
 by any arguments, except fuch as appear to 
 myfelf to be founded in truth. 
 
 Our 
 
[ 37 ] 
 
 Our opponents will attempt to blend the 
 confideration of the hardfhip which they 
 may fuppofe the wool-grower to labour un- 
 der from the prohibition of exporting wool, 
 with the objedls of the prefent enquiry; but 
 for the credit of the manufacturers, I hope 
 your Lordfliip will clearly difcern the pro- 
 priety of keeping thefe things feparate and 
 difl:in6l. Nothing more is required of the 
 manufa(5lurers, than to prove the prefent 
 laws inefFe6lual, and to demonftrate the ex- 
 iflence of the fmuggling of wool to a con- 
 fiderable extent. 
 
 If thefe two pofitions fhall appear properly 
 fupported, the manufa6lurers will fully prove 
 their public afTertions; and are, therefore, 
 juftified in their application for an amend- 
 ment of the prefent laws. 
 
 D I am 
 
t 38 ] 
 
 I am very far from blaming a wool-grower 
 in Lincolnfliire, or in any other part of the 
 kingdom, for endeavouring to obtain the pri- 
 vilege of exporting wool, provided it can be 
 demonftrated to be of no national difadvan- 
 tagej but, in the prefent circumflance, the 
 rnanufa6turers are not called upon to combat 
 thisopinion; andwilhout the leafl imputation 
 of declining the conteft, for want of ability 
 to fupport it, they would be fully juftified in 
 taking that for granted which Parliament by 
 its prohibitory .a6ts has fully eftabliflicd, viz. 
 that the exportation of wool is detr'imental to the 
 
 nation. 1 will, however, hazard a few ob- 
 
 fervations on this delicate fubje6l. 
 
 The beft author, who has profelTedly \ 
 treated on the expediency of exporting Britifli 
 wool, is Mr. Smithy in his Hiflory of Wool. 
 
 J have 
 
[ 39 ] 
 
 I have read this performance with much fatis- 
 fa6lion, and I admire the impartiaUty which 
 pervades the greater part of this author's 
 works. There is one material point, how- 
 ever, ill which he is defe6livei and every 
 fucceeding writer on the fubje6l is Uable to 
 he charged with the fame defect. 
 
 The wool of this kingdom may be con- 
 fidered under two grand divifions, which are 
 well known by the appellation of Combing 
 Wool and Clothing Wool ; and tho' there is 
 a great variety of forts, which may be clafTed 
 under each divifion, yet they are efTentially dif- 
 ferent. But this diftin6lion is by no means 
 accurately obferved by Mr. Smithy or by any 
 other author who has treated on this fubje6l. 
 
 1 will readily grant, that many things 
 
 which have been advanced by fome injudi- 
 D 2 cious 
 
[ 4° ] 
 
 cious authors, on the abfokite necefiity of 
 our wool to the manufa6lurers of France, 
 are deftitute of foundation; and that it is 
 not true, what has been frequently advanced 
 as a fad:, " That the French can neither make 
 " their faperfine cloth from Spanifh Wool, 
 " nor any of the inferior forts from their 
 '* own, without a mixture of Englifh wool.*^ 
 But it does not from hence follow, that fome 
 kinds of our wool are not effential to the pro- 
 per manufafturing of particular fabricks, in 
 which they endeavour to rival this kingdom. 
 
 It has been my grand objeft, through the 
 progrefs of this inquiry, to obtain the mofl 
 authentic information of the ufes to which 
 the French apply the wool of this country, 
 and to afcertain the true reafon why they ai*e 
 induced to give fuch a price for it as may 
 compenfate the fmuggler for his rifk. 
 
[ 41 ] 
 
 From a variety of intelligence which I have 
 received, I am now fully convinced, that our 
 combing wool in particular is abfolutely ne- 
 ceflary in fome of the French manufa6tures, 
 and that, without it, they cannot manufac- 
 ture fome fpecies of goods in imitation of 
 the Englifh fabrick. 
 
 As the price of labour in many of the 
 provinces of that kingdom is undoubtedly 
 lower than in England,* this advantage will 
 in a great meafure compenfate for the extra 
 price which they are obliged to pay for 
 Engliili wool. And as the proportion of 
 
 * From the bed information which I can obtain, the rate of 
 wages in the woollen manufafture of France is not materially 
 different from v/hat it is in England, particularly in the article 
 of fuperfine cloth; but in thofe places where the coarfer goods are 
 made, the wages of the manufadurers are lower. The difference, 
 however, is by no means fo material as to warrant the conclufions 
 which have been drawn from it by the oppofers of the Conuner- 
 cial Treaty with France* 
 
 D 3 labour 
 
[ 42 ] 
 
 labour to the price of the raw materials, in 
 feme of the lighter fabricks in which comb- 
 ing wool is employed, is very confiderable -j 
 a very fmall difference in the price of labour, 
 thro' the different flages of manufa6luring a 
 piece of goods, will compenfate for the advance 
 on the raw materials from which it is made. 
 
 If, therefore, our own manufa6lurers can 
 confume all the wool of the kingdom, of that 
 kind which is fo neceffary to the French, it 
 appears incompatible with found policy to 
 permit its exportation. 
 
 In making up an affortment of goods for 
 a foreign market, it is often abfolutely ne- 
 ceffary to comprife a variety of manufa6lures ; 
 and the want of thofe goods to the French, 
 which are made either intirely or in part from 
 
 Englifh 
 
[ 43 ] 
 
 Englifh wool, muft be a confiderable difad- 
 vantage in their foreign trade. If they can- 
 not make them, by being precluded from ob- 
 taining our wool, they muft of neceffity pur- 
 chafe them from tbis country; and no perfon 
 the leaft converfant in commercial affairs 
 will pretend to deny, that it is much more 
 for the interefl of the kingdom to export a 
 manufaftured article, than the raw materials 
 of which it is compofed. 
 
 Thefe remarks are confined entirely to 
 the article of combing wool; but the appa- 
 rent probability of an extenfive commercial 
 intercourfe with France, having introduced 
 to my acquaintance fomc very eminent wool- 
 len-drapers, natives of that kingdom, who 
 have come to England for the purpofe of 
 fettling a correfpondence with the Britifh 
 
 manu- 
 
[ 44 ] 
 
 manufa6lurersi I have availed myfelf of this 
 favourable opportunity to procure every pof- 
 fible information on the article of v^oolj and 
 from the converfation I have had with them 
 on this fubje6l, I am fully convinced, that 
 fome kinds of our clothing wool are very 
 necefTary in making the French fabricks of 
 the inferior qualities, denominated in England 
 fecond or livery cloths j and that probably no 
 other kind of wool, which can be obtained by 
 the manufacturers of France, is a proper fub- 
 ftitute in the manufacturing of fuch goods. 
 
 I am well informed, that during the war, 
 when the introduction of Britifh wool to 
 France was attended with particular diffi- 
 culty, the manufacturers of Sedan made but 
 little cloth J but that fince the peace, the trade 
 in that place has much increafed, from the 
 
 facility 
 
[ 45 ] 
 
 facility with which our wool is now pro- 
 cured. One of the perfons with whom I had 
 particular converfation on this fubje6l, and 
 who is a very intelligent man, did not hefitate 
 to declare, that if we could keep our wool 
 from being fent to France, we muft have an 
 undoubted advantage over their manufac- 
 tures in the w^oollen branch from the com- 
 mercial treaty. 
 
 From hence appears the necefllty of an aft 
 which may be effcBual for keeping our own 
 wool within the kingdom j* for, by having this 
 valuable article in much greater abundance 
 
 and 
 
 * I beg it may be obferved, that I am not fetting myfelf di- 
 reftly to prove the necefllty of prohibiting the exportation of 
 wool, on general principles, which would require a more com- 
 prehenlive view of the fubjedl than I chufe now to take of it ; 
 and that where I advance any argument of my own, it is on the 
 fuppofition of the manufadurers being able to confume the wool 
 of the kingdom ; as I am no adyocate for depreffing the value of 
 wool beyond a fair average price, merely that the manufaflurer 
 may purchafe it at a very low rate ; which, as I fhall note in the 
 
 progrefs 
 
[ 46 ] 
 
 and variety than the French, our manufac- 
 turers may perhaps, more than by any other 
 means, be able to fupport a competition with 
 the manufacturers of that nation. 
 
 Do6lor A. Smith, in his work intitled, 
 " An inquiry into the Nature and Caufes of 
 " the Weakh of Nations," has afferted, " that 
 *' the price of wool has fallen very confider- 
 " ably fmce the reign of Edward Illd^" and 
 he has attributed the caufe of this degra- 
 dation, in the value of that article, to the 
 efFe6ls of violence and artifice. 
 
 Fh'Jl; To what he calls the abfurd prohi- 
 bition of exporting wool from England. 
 
 progreG of this publication, does not appear to be any lafting 
 advantage to himfeir. I do not however mean, that the low price 
 of wool for a fhort period of time, and which may be produced 
 by circumftances affefting all concerns in general, is to beconfi- 
 dered as a good reafon in itfelf (and abftraded from all other 
 confiderations) for permitting the exportation of the article. 
 
[ 47 ] 
 
 idly. To the permifiion of importing 
 Spanifh wool, duty free. And, 
 
 3^/)' J To the prohibition of exporting wool 
 from Ireland to any other part, except to 
 England alone. 
 
 That learned author alfo flates., that there 
 are many authentic records which demon- 
 Itrate, that during the reign of the above 
 prince, a tod of Englifli wool of 2 Sib. was 
 worth thirty fliilHngs of our prefent money; 
 but that, in the prefent times, twenty-one 
 fliillings may be reckoned a very good price 
 for '■oery good Englifh wool. 
 
 This flatement is certainly erroneous. For 
 in the year 1776, when Dr. Smith's publica- 
 tion firfl appeared, the price of a tod of 
 Wiltfhire wool was from twenty to twenty- 
 two 
 
[ 48 ] 
 
 two fliillings; and the wool of this county- 
 can be efleemed only in the third clafs of 
 Englifh clothing wool ; not only the counties 
 of Hereford, Salop, and SulTex, (in which the 
 fineft wool is produced in any confiderable 
 quantities) but alfo Surry, Dorfet, Somerfet, 
 and feveral others, being confefledly fuperior. 
 - — From this ftatement, therefore, it appears 
 that 2 IS. per tod was by no means a very good 
 price for very good Englifli wool, at the time 
 when the Doftor publifhed his work. 
 
 The argument will, however, appear much 
 ftronger at the prefent time, Wiltfhire wool 
 fold lad year at much the fame price as the 
 preceding year, which was from twenty- 
 eight to thirty fhillings per tod; and all the 
 clothing wool in the kingdom is advanced 
 proportionably in value. 
 
 A tod 
 
[ 49 ] 
 
 A tod of fine Herefordiliire wool was fold 
 in the year 1785, ivoYi\ forty to forty-fwo 
 Jhillings, and it funk in value but very little 
 at the laft fairs, after {hearing. 
 
 In the courfe of my examination of the 
 merits of the Irifh propofitions, I found, 
 in fome of the official papers which were 
 tranfmittcd to me, an average price of the 
 wool of England for feveral years, which ap- 
 pearing to me very erroneous, I endeavoured 
 to obtain information how it was fixed, 
 but could by no means meet with proper 
 fatisfa6lion. Indeed it is almoft impolTible for 
 any writer, from theory alone, to flate with 
 accuracy the average prices of Englifh wool. 
 -—Though the prefent price of Englifli wool 
 much exceeds what it was fome years fmce, 
 yet poflibly a fair average at the prefent in- 
 
 ftant 
 
[ 5° 3 
 
 ftant might not exceed an average made at a 
 more diftant period. The fa6l is, that the 
 coarfer wools now bear a much greater pro- 
 portion to the finer forts, than they did ten 
 or twelve years ago; which is owing to the 
 prefent improved fyflem of agriculture, and 
 the introdu6lion of a larger breed of fheep. 
 — Allowing, therefore, that the arguments 
 Avhich the Doctor produces, in order to prove 
 that the real price of wool in the reign of 
 Edward the Hid. was ftill fuperior to the 
 nominal price, yet he will fail in his proof 
 of the degradation in value of that article in 
 the prefent times. 
 
 That the wool of England has fufFered a 
 degradation i?i point of quality^ even within 
 feventeen or eighteen years pafl,* no perfon 
 
 * My own experience does not enable me to fpeak of a more 
 diftant period; but from the teftimony of other perfons, I am 
 convinced of its having fufFered, in point of qualit}', more than 
 I am fenfible of myfelf. 
 
[ 5» ] 
 
 at all acquainted with the fubjefl will pretend 
 to deny, though the price has fo much ad- 
 vanced in general. 
 
 There is no good ground to fuppofe, that 
 the introdu6lion of Spanifli wool into this 
 kingdom tends to lefl'en the value of our own 
 produ61:ion. The importations from Spain 
 cannot pofTibly affeft any other than Englifh 
 wool of the firft quality, (except it fhould be 
 allowed that fome of the inferior forts of 
 Spanifli wool are cheaper than our own of a 
 fimilar quality, which, if true, will certainly 
 militate fl:rongly againfl the arguments of 
 other perfons who have written on this fub- 
 jeft:) and indeed the manufaclurers of this 
 kingdom will agree in aflerting the direct 
 contrary of the above polition, fine Englifli 
 wool, except under fome particular circum- 
 
 ftances. 
 
[ 52 1 
 
 fiances, having always rifen in value in pro- 
 portion to the rife on Spanifh wool, not- 
 withftanding the imports from Spain in that 
 commodity have been nearly doubled within 
 the lafl: fifty years ; nor has Englifh clothing 
 wool of the inferior qualities been dimi- 
 niflied, but on the contrary, has advanced in 
 value during the above period. 
 
 The competition of the wool of Ireland 
 with .that of England, in our market, is 
 fcarcely worth noticing; the quantity of wool 
 grown in Ireland is very far from being con-- 
 fiderable, and the imports from thence have 
 been conftantly declining for many years 
 pad; which may be owing in part to the 
 Irifti having turned their attention to the 
 breeding of large cattle, lince the impolitic 
 acl of Charles the lid was repealed, by which 
 
 they 
 
[ 53 ] 
 
 they were reftri6led from exporting their 
 live cattle to this kingdom, and alfo from 
 the privilege which the Irifli now enjoy (of 
 which no liberal mind will envy them) of 
 exporting their woollen manufactures to 
 other markets befides that of England. 
 
 The reputation which Doctor Smith's pub- 
 lications have juftly obtained, naturally give 
 weight to his opinions on every fubje6l which, 
 hath fallen under his difcudioni but the 
 learned author cannot with propriety be of- 
 fended with thefe obfervations from a perfon 
 whom a confiderable intereft, as well as fome 
 experience, in the woollen manufadlures of 
 England, has rendered capable of forming a 
 tolerably competent judgment of thofe things 
 which immediately relate to the bulinefs in 
 which he is engaged. 
 
 E On 
 
[ 54 ] 
 
 On this account, I have been induced to 
 throw out thefe remarks on what the above 
 author hath advanced on the article of wool, 
 which are not founded on inferences drawn 
 from theoretical reafoning, but on an appeal 
 to fa6ts; which, in treating a fubje6l like the 
 prefent, ought alone to have weight. 
 
 As I do not pretend to treat this fubje6l 
 otherwife than in a curfory manner, it is not 
 necefTary for me to note the obfervations on 
 the expediency of an exportation of Britifli 
 wool, which have been advanced by every 
 njoriter who has occafionally delivered his fen- 
 timents on it. 
 
 There is nothing materially different in 
 the remarks of Lord Karnes from thofe of 
 Dr. A. Smitbi except in one particular, which 
 
 I have 
 
[ 55 3 
 
 I have noticed at the end of my obfervations 
 on Sir John Dalrymples pamphlet in favour 
 of exporting our wool, which was publifhed 
 when the Lincolnfhire petition was prefented, 
 
 and which was anfwered by Dr. Fojier. 
 
 Whether that anfwer be fufficiently fatis- 
 fadlory, is not necefTary for me to prove, as I 
 do not by any means intend making myfelf 
 a party in the caufe; my defign being only to 
 note thofe defe6ls which are apparent in 
 the advocates for the meafurcj I will only 
 juft obfcrve, that Sir John Dairy fnpk ftates, 
 " That he had examined every flock of flieep 
 " and magazine of wool in Portugal, Spain, 
 *^ and France, that lay within his reach; and 
 *' that he can with certainty declare, that 
 " every /pedes of wool is to be found in Spain 
 " and Portugal, except the Mg wool of Lin- 
 " colnfliire. In Languedoc, he obferves, are 
 E 2 " the 
 
 I 
 
[ i6 ] 
 
 " the fliort wools of the weft and fouth coafts 
 *^ of England, and the long wools of Lin- 
 " colnftilre, in perfecHony 
 
 Allowhig the facts to be truly ftated, it 
 may be very naturally afked in what quantity 
 is the Lincolnfliire wool found in Languedoc? 
 as he only mentions this particular province, 
 and allows that there is none of the kind in 
 Spain or Portugal. 
 
 For my part I am clearly convinced, from 
 experience, that the fine and middling wools 
 of England, in contradiftion to what muft 
 be inferred from the general reafoning in Mr, 
 Smith's Hiftory of Wool, are equally high in 
 price with the wools of Spain and Portugal, 
 that bear any refemblance to them. If the 
 French, therefore, have the cofnbing wool, and 
 
 the 
 
C ii ] 
 
 the lowsr kinds of wool in plenty, . fimllar to 
 the growth of England, why are they indu- 
 ced to give fuch prices as are fufficient to 
 anfwer the rifk which the fmuggler runs in 
 procuring them from England? 
 
 I have afligned my rcafons for this in the 
 beginning of thefe obfervations; and, if any 
 others can be adduced, I fliall be glad to 
 have them pointed out, as the inveftigation 
 of truth is my only obje6l. 
 
 Sir John afks, " Why allow the exporta- 
 " tion of wheat, and prohibit the exportation 
 " of wool?" when it fliall be proved that 
 the French can be fupplied, either by an in- 
 creafe of their own growth, or from other 
 countries, with combing wool fimilar to 
 that of England; and alfo with the lower 
 E 3 kinds 
 
C 58 ] 
 
 kinds of clothing wool, properly adapted for 
 making the fort of goods, which I have 
 mentioned above; it will be foon enough to 
 anfwer this queflion. 
 
 Dean Truckers reflexions on the low price 
 of wools, publifhed in 1782, will not in gene- 
 ral be objected to by a candid manufa6lurer; 
 but, on his own ground, there can be now no 
 reafon for permitting the exportation of wool 5 
 as he acknowledges, ^' that the overflowings 
 " of the home market, after the natives have 
 " been fupplied, fliould alone be exported.'* 
 I believe it will not be proved that there is 
 at prefent any want of demand for the low 
 wools of England; the flourifhing fl:ate of 
 the Baize trade, and the large confumption 
 of coarfe wool for the Carpet ManufaBory^ 
 mufl: prevent ^ny quantity from remaining 
 
 long: 
 
[ 59 : 
 
 long in hand. At this inftant I am alfo in- 
 formedj that the manufacturers of Witney in 
 Oxfordfhire are very much in want of coarfe 
 wool, which is alfo the cafe at Kidderminfter 
 in Worcefterlliire. 
 
 I have lately heard with pleafure, from a 
 friend of mine who refided fome time in 
 Conftantinople, that by accident the article of 
 Shalloons has been introduced into Turkey, 
 and that the confumption was likely to be 
 confiderable, which mufl eventually be ad- 
 vantageous to the growers of combing wool. 
 
 The Dean has propofed a fcheme fimilar 
 to one which may be feen in SmitlSs hiftory 
 of wool, viz. " To allow the exportation of 
 " wool under a certain duty, and the monies 
 *' arlfmg from the duty to be applied as a 
 
 " bounty 
 
C 6o ] , 
 
 *' bounty on the exportation of woollens." 
 He obferves, " That this regulation would, 
 " like a two-edged fword, a6l both ways. 
 ** The more wool was exported, the greater 
 *' would be the reward to be given for ex- 
 *' porting our own manufa6lures made out of 
 ** the fame kind of wool; fo that the evil, (fo 
 ** much dreaded, or apprehended) viz. the 
 ** exportation of the raw material, w^ould 
 " operate as a premium in favour of the 
 " Englifh manufa6lurer at a foreign market." 
 *— This propofal is certainly liberal; but I 
 muft confefs, that neither the concife argu- 
 ments of the Deafly or the more dilated ones of 
 Mr. Smith, in its favour, have convinced me 
 of its propriety. 
 
 Mr. Smith afferts, that the wool-grower is 
 intitled to have a better price for his wool -, 
 
 and 
 
C 6i 3 
 
 and that the confequence of his propofal 
 being carried into effect, would be an ad- 
 vance upon this article. Whatever neceflity 
 might be pleaded for fuch a meafure when 
 he wrote, I hope I fhall not be deemed an 
 enemy to the wool-grower, if I afTert that at 
 prefent it no longer exifts 3 fnice not only the 
 wool, but alfo the carcafe of the flieep, is 
 fo much increafed in value. 
 
 But I fliould be glad to know, if the foreign 
 manufacturers can purchafe our wool, bur- 
 dened with this duty and the charges of fliip- 
 ping it, and manufa6lure it for their own 
 and other markets abroad, how the Britifh 
 manufacturer is to be benefited by the bounty? 
 He can only derive advantage from it, by 
 being able to fupply the foreign market; but 
 from this he will be utterly excluded, if the 
 
 foreign 
 
c 62 : 
 
 foreign manufafturer, either from the low 
 price of labour y or from whatever other caufe^ is 
 able to fupply it himfelf to greater advantage. 
 
 Either our wool would not he exported 
 under the propofed dutyj or elfe, if exported, 
 the export of manufa6lured goods would de- 
 creafe in proportion to the quantity of the 
 raw materials fent out of the kingdom. I 
 do not fee how this argument can be refuted, 
 except it fhall be faid, that the wool, thus 
 exported, will ferve only to fupply thofe 
 foreign markets to which we have no accefs. 
 But this appears to be a conclufion, which 
 it is not poffible to fupport. 
 
 If, therefore, I am not deceived in the 
 juftnefs of the inference which I have drawn, 
 the propofal can only be claffed among thofe 
 
 which 
 
C 63 ] 
 
 which have a fpecious appearance in theory; 
 but which, when reduced to pra6lice, vanifh 
 like " the bafelefs fabric of a vifion." 
 
 Though I am forry to obferve, that the 
 Dean has in fome meafure adopted the lan- 
 guage which is fo very fafhionable refpe6ling 
 the monopolizing fpirit of the manufac- 
 turers, and with which even the ingenuous 
 and candid Sjuith was ftrongly tin6lured, yet 
 he deferves the thanks of the wool-grower as 
 well as the manufaflurer, (who is alfo indebt- 
 ed to him on many other accounts) for fug- 
 gefling another plan, which, if encouraged, 
 might tend to the increafe of the woollen 
 manufa6lure. 
 
 It does not appear very confident with 
 liberality of fentiment, to declaim againfl the 
 
 monopolizing 
 
C 64 ] 
 
 monopolizing fpirit of the manufacturers, 
 when it muft be confefled that the charge is 
 equally applicable to other clafTes of men as 
 well as to them. 
 
 Is there more enlargednefs of mind difco- 
 verable in thofe countries, where trade and 
 commerce are defpifed by the haughty tyrant 
 of an extenfive but impoverifhed domain, 
 exerting the feudal fpirit over a wretched 
 peafantry, than in this kingdom, where trade 
 and commerce, cheriftied and prote6led by an 
 enlightened legiflature, difpenfe their blef- 
 iings to all ranks and conditions of men ? 
 
 The prejudiced and uninformed manu- 
 facturer may indeed not hefitate to declare, 
 that it is of no confequence to him how 
 low the wool of this country finks in value, 
 
 as 
 
: 65 1 
 
 as it will enable him to go to market on 
 better terms; and alfo be one mean of 
 bringing the gentlemen of landed property 
 nearer to his own level, by diminifiiing the 
 value of their eftates. On the contrary, the 
 proud and bigotted land-owner may look 
 down with contempt on the merchant or 
 manufafturer, and foolifhly fuppofe, that he 
 can derive neither profit nor advantage from 
 any fort of connexion with them; and that 
 every approach to a union tends only to de- 
 bafe his own dignity. 
 
 But the truly enlightened perfon, how 
 exalted foever his rank may be, will never 
 experience any degradation from a proper 
 aflbciation with thofe who arc capable of 
 affording him information, on points with 
 which, |rom the nature of his education, he 
 
 cannot 
 
[ 66 ] 
 
 cannot be fuppofed to be converfant j and he 
 will feel no envy at the increafe of the trade 
 and commerce of the kingdom; while, on 
 the other hand, the merchant or manufac- 
 turer, whofe views are extended beyond his 
 compting-houfe or workfhop, will, without 
 any proflitution of charafter to mere raiik 
 and fortune, place a juft value on the con- 
 ne6lion, and will view with pleafure the 
 improvement of landed eflates, enabled by 
 fuch improvement to fupport thofe accu- 
 mulated loads under which they at prefent 
 labour. 
 
 That felf-interefl is ftill too prevalent 
 among the generality of manufa6lurers, as 
 well as mere land-owners, cannot be difputed; 
 but inftead of foflering prejudices between 
 the landed and manufaduring intereft, it 
 
 would 
 
[ 67 ] 
 
 would be much more patriotic to point out 
 the errors of each, and to evince the neceflity 
 of a cordial union. 
 
 Any reply to what has been again ad- 
 vanced by the author of the Annals of Agri- 
 culture, on the wool bill, in his 37th 
 number, cannot be expe6led from me. 
 
 Till Mr. Toung has either proved the af- 
 fertions which he fo confidently threw out 
 in his 36th number of the Annals of Agri- 
 culture, or has candour enough to retra6l 
 them; I am confident that, without being 
 liable to the imputation either of vanity or 
 arrogance, I may not only difregard the un- 
 warrantable allufions, but that I may alfo 
 pafs by unnoticed the arguments of a perfon 
 who appears in the prefent inftance to be 
 
 under 
 
[ 68 ] 
 
 under the influence of prejudice ia fuch a 
 degree, that it is fcarcely poflible for him to 
 have that regard to truth which is fo eflential 
 to an impartial inveftigation of the fubje6l 
 which he profefTes to difcufs.* 
 
 Nothing can be more contrary to liberality 
 of fentiment, than after having pointed out 
 a perfon by difcriminating marks, which no 
 one could miftake, to affe6l an air of fupe- 
 riority, merely becaufe that perfon had fpirit 
 enough to repel the attack on his own ac- 
 count, and in behalf of the manufa6lurers 
 in general : but in vain does the author of 
 the Annals endeavour to conceal his inability 
 to prove what he had advanced, by amufing 
 
 * It is necefTary to obferve, that Mr. Toung had aflerted it to 
 be the defign of the framers of the bill to obftrudl the conveyance 
 of wool to the North ; and that I publickly challenged hiiji to 
 prove this afiertion. 
 
 his 
 
[ 69 ] 
 
 his readers with obfervations and remarks 
 totally foreign to the fubjedl. 
 
 There are fome perfons, my Loid, with 
 whom the ingenuous and liberal-minded man 
 can with difficulty be at variancci and whofe 
 errors and miftakes he would, if confiflent 
 with a juft regard to truth, fupprefs, rather 
 than expofe. 
 
 I c^n truly fay that this is the cafe with 
 me, in refpe6l to the author of the Annals 
 of Agriculture. Being each of us members 
 of the Agriculture Society at Bath, it is 
 natural to fuppofe, that an author, who has 
 written fo much on hufbandry affairs, could 
 not in his literary chara6ler be unknown to 
 me; and our late worthy Secretary had ex- 
 cited in my mind a defire of being perfonally 
 F acquainted 
 
[ 7° ] 
 
 acquainted with the author, as, in his opi- 
 nion, we fliould be mutually pleafed with 
 each other's converfation. 
 
 I muft confefs therefore, that when I firfl 
 faw the 36th number of the Annals of Agri- 
 <> culture, I was really mortified, not on ac- 
 count of the author's difapprobation of the 
 bill, and his entertaining an opinion contrary 
 to that which had been given by the manu- 
 fa6lurers, (which would have given me no j 
 offence) but merely from the illiberal fpirit 
 which was difcovered in the publication, 
 and the grofs calumny thrown on the framers j 
 of the bill, founded only in giving credit tQ 
 thofe falfhoods which had been fo indullri- 
 oufly propagated. 
 
 I fhall, my Lord, leave my readers either 
 to condemn or acquit me for the publication 
 
[ 7' ] 
 
 of my Card addrefTed to the author, after they 
 have perufed his firft attack in the 36th num- 
 ber of the Annals; only juft obferving, that 
 not one of the Committee knew any thing 
 of my card, till it had been fent to the Secre- 
 tary in London for publication; though the 
 author of the Annals, having aflerted that the 
 manufa6lurers aflembled merely to raife fub- 
 fcriptions in order to publifh abufive adver- 
 tifements againil him, has afTumed to himfelf 
 the merit of being perfecuted by a meeWig^ 
 w^hich never had any exiftence but in his 
 own fertile imagination. 
 
 Though I have declined myfelf replying 
 to his obfervations, yet his mifreprefentations 
 
 * I pofitively declare that no meeting has been held fince 
 Mr. Toungh firft publication; and that, to the beft of my know- 
 ledge, his name was never mentioned at any of our meetings. 
 
 F2 and 
 
[ 72 ] 
 
 and falfe conclufions have been well expofed, 
 by one of our committee, in the Norwich 
 Chronicle. 
 
 I mull beg permifTion to notice what ap- 
 pears to me very fmgular conduct in a noble 
 author. -f His Lordihip, in his book entitled 
 " Obfervations on the Commerce of the 
 " American States," in pages 7, 8, &c. has 
 made fome remarks on the woollen trade of 
 England and France, and points out the fupe- 
 riority of the woollen manufa6lure of this 
 country over that of France, particularly in 
 the article of middling and coarfe cloths i and 
 by comparing the quality of the wool which 
 grows in this country with that of France, 
 proves that the French are defirous of ob- 
 taining our wool. Though his Lordfhip is 
 
 t Lord Sheffield. 
 
 niiftaken 
 
{ 73 ] 
 
 miftaken in {bme points relative to the fub- 
 je(5l; yet it is a fatisfa6lion to obferve in his 
 work a full confirmation of my own opinion, 
 refpeding the wool and the woollen manu- 
 fa6lure of France. 
 
 In a note under page 8, are the following 
 remarks : 
 
 ** Several perfons are now in England, fent 
 *' from France to obferve the management of 
 ** our flocks, in order to acquire knowledge 
 " relative to wool. They may obferve, that 
 " it will be neceffary to change tlife climate 
 " and whole fyflem of hufbandry in France, 
 " before that country can raife any quantity 
 " of wool fuch as ours." How does this 
 agree with Sir John DalrympJes account men- 
 tioned above? 
 
 F 3 His 
 
[ 74 ] 
 
 His Lordrtiip goes on to obferve : ^' The 
 *^ quantity of wool raifed in France is not 
 " conjiderabky when compared with the con- 
 " fumption. We may in fome degree judge, 
 *' from the feizures, of the increafe of the 
 ^^ praBice of fmuggling wooL In 1770, the 
 " quantity feized was only 32 pounds. In 
 " 1780, it had increafed to 12383 pounds; 
 y and in 1782, it amounted to 139 16 pounds" 
 
 By this mode of arguing, (which muft be 
 
 confefTed by every impartial perfon to be not 
 
 deflitute of force) I can prove the ftill greater 
 
 increafe of the practice; as in the years 1783 
 
 and 1784 the quantities feized were much 
 
 Ligeri but waving this, I wifh to know how 
 
 '..ordihip can reconcile the fentiments 
 
 M-.. t;;d, which were given to the public 
 
 e year 1784, with that determined op- 
 
 pofition 
 
[ 75 ] 
 
 pofition manifefted by him at the county 
 meeting held fome time fmce at Lewes in 
 SulFex, againft a bill which is defigned to 
 check the pra6lice of fmuggling a neceflary 
 commodity into a kingdom acknowledged to 
 be a powerful rival, and the quality of whofe 
 wool is confefled by his Lordfhip to be much 
 ifjferior to our own. 
 
 His Lordfhip may, perhaps, alledge in his 
 j unification, that though he is an enemy to 
 the fmuggling of wool, yet the regulations 
 propofed are fo injurious to tlie land- owners, 
 wool-growers, &c. that the remedy propofed 
 will be worfe than the difeafej but before he 
 adduces this plea, let him fairly examine the 
 intended bill, and compare it with the pre- 
 fent laws. This I am pretty confident his 
 Lordlhip had not done when he delivered his 
 
 fentiments 
 
t 76 ] 
 
 fentiments at Lewes i as he was repeatedly 
 informed by the Secretary of the wool meet- 
 ing, who attended there, that fome of the 
 claufes, to which his Lordfhip objected, were 
 merely copied from the prefent laws. Had 
 he taken any pains to examine the bill, he 
 never would have hazarded the affertion, 
 " That if the bill pafTed in its prefent form, 
 " no mafter of a vefTel would ever be found 
 ** willing to carry wool coaflwife." 
 
 From what has been before obferved, it is 
 unnecefTary for me to notice what his Lord- 
 fhip was pleafed to fay refpe6ling the plan 
 propofed by the framers of the bill, of re- 
 flricling, as much as poflible, the conveyance 
 of wool to the North, through envy and 
 jealoufy againft the manufacturers in that 
 part of the kingdom. 
 
 J have, 
 
I 77 ] 
 
 I have, however, omitted to notice v^hat 
 is a complete anfwer to this afTertion, viz. 
 That feveral refpe6lable wool-dealers in Lon- 
 don were on the committee, and gave con- 
 ftant attendance at the meeting, whofe con- 
 nexions in the Weft are trifling indeed, when 
 compared with thofe which they have in the 
 North. If, therefore, any fuch defign had 
 been formed, they would not have a6led 
 wifely in alTenting to regulations, defigned 
 to check and controul their principal trade. 
 
 Before his Lordfhip again declaims on 
 the declining manufa6lures of the Weft, I 
 would wifh him to be better acquainted 
 with the a6lual ftate of the trade in thofe 
 parts. Though, from feveral favourable 
 circumftances, the manufa6turers of the 
 North have acquired a confiderable part of 
 
 the 
 
I 78 ] 
 
 the coarfe trade of thofe counties, yet within 
 fifty years pafl the annual confumption of 
 Spanilh wool, in this kingdom, has increafed 
 from fix thoufand bags to between eleven and 
 twelve thoufand J and the far greater part of 
 this is confumed in the counties of Wilts, 
 Glocefter, and Somerfet. 
 
 It may be necefTary alfo to inform his 
 Lordfhip, that a fpirit of invention, as it 
 refpecls new fabricks, has for many years 
 been prevalent in the Wejiern Cowtties; and to 
 this caufe muft principally be afcribed that 
 fredileBion for EngUjh woollen manufaSiures, 
 wbicb for fame time paji has beenfo cotifpicuous 
 in the French nation J^ 
 
 * 1 do not mean toinfinuate, that if it had not been for the in- 
 troduflion of fancy articles into France, our inferior forts of wool- 
 lens would not in confequence of the Commercial Treaty have 
 found their way into that kingdom; but only that the circum- 
 ftance alluded to has, with other caufes, excited a defireof being 
 fupplied with Englilh cloths. 
 
 This 
 
[ 79 ] 
 
 This introdu6tion of new fabricks, which 
 had their origin in the Well, has been of 
 the greatefl fervice to the manufacturers of 
 the North. Though the different forts of 
 fancy goods manufa6lured in the Northern 
 counties, principally from Englifh wool, now 
 form a confiderable branch of their trade; 
 yet I believe I fhall run no hazard in chal- 
 lenging his Lordfhip to produce any one 
 fabrick of Northern manufacture that was 
 not copied from the finer forts made in the 
 Weftern counties. 
 
 I alTure his Lordfhip, that fo far from 
 envying the flourifhing flate of the manufac- 
 tures in the North, I really rejoice at their 
 extenfion, confidered in a national point of 
 view. The induflry and frugality of the 
 lower manufacturers, joined to a very great 
 
 attention 
 
[ 8o ] 
 
 attention in making their goods, and aided 
 by the afiiftance of machines, have enabled 
 them to fiunifh their extenfive cloth-halls 
 with an ample fupply of fabricks. Hence 
 the wholefale dealer can, without delay, fup- 
 ply the orders which, by the medium of his 
 agents, he is conftantly receiving from dif« 
 ferent parts of the kingdom : and from hence 
 alfo, the merchant can make his afTortment 
 for the German, Portugal, and other mar- 
 kets, without being obliged to give his orders 
 to the manufa6lurers, except in fome par- 
 ticular cafes. 
 
 Thefe flourifliing manufadories have un- 
 doubtedly added to the wealth of the king- 
 dom ', and on this account the noble author 
 would have been juftified in holding them 
 out to publick view, as objeds of real con- 
 
 fequence. 
 
[ 8« ] 
 
 fequence, which ought not to be cramped 
 by the narrow views of any fet of men what- 
 ever. If, after a fair examination, fuch a 
 Jefign had been difcovered in the promoters 
 of the wool bill, they would have deferved 
 the indignation not only of his Lordfiipy but 
 of the nation at large. 
 
 If the manufa6lurers of the Weft were im- 
 plicitly to adopt all the principles upon which 
 the trade is carried on in the North, they 
 would undoubtedly deprive themfelves of 
 fome particular advantage which they at pre- 
 fent enjoy ; yet I acknowledge the propriety 
 of the general plan of manufacture which 
 prevails in thofe parts, and am convinced 
 that, under certain regulations, it might be 
 introduced into the counties of Wilts, Glo- 
 cefter, &c. not only with fafety, but even 
 with advantage. .p-ij 
 
. [ 82 ] 
 
 Till fomething of this kind is done, in 
 vain do the Weftern manufa6lurers attribute 
 all the benefits enjoyed by their Northern 
 rivals, in the manufa6lure of cloths from 
 Englifh wool, to the introdu6lion of ma- 
 chines for facilitating labour. Advantages 
 are undoubtedly derived from thefe machines 3 
 and as they will by degrees more generally 
 prevail in the Weft, it is not improbable but 
 that their ufe may in courfe of time effedl the 
 alteration, which in the inferior manufac- 
 tures is fo neceflary to their perfe6lion. 
 
 In the North, the hiterefi of the fmall 
 manufafturer is immediately concerned in pre- 
 venting every poflible wafte in the making of 
 his goods; and when his cloths are milled, 
 he is able to difpofe of them without lofs of i 
 time in the public halls of Leeds or Halifax, 
 
 where 
 
( 83 ] 
 
 \vhere the merchant or wholefale manufac- 
 turer can at any time fupply himfelf with 
 iuch goods as he may want. Nothing more 
 is requifite from the merchant, than fending 
 the cloths to a public drefler, or finishing 
 them himfelf J and in confequence of this 
 mode of purchafing, he is under no ne- 
 ceflity of keeping a large flock. On the 
 contrary, the Clothier in the Weft is obliged 
 to go through all the procefs of manufactu- 
 ring, by the medium of perfons who, fo far 
 from confulting his interejl^ are too generally 
 difpofed to purloin and embezzle his pro- 
 perty, and is obliged to employ a large ca- 
 pital for producing, comparatively fpeaking, 
 a fmall quantity of goods j and, inftead of 
 having an open market from whence he 
 might fupply himfelf, muft depend on his 
 own flock alone for executing his orders. 
 
 Though 
 
[ 84 ] 
 
 Though thefe inconveniences are infepa-^ 
 rable from fome branches of the manufac- 
 ture, particularly the fancy trade, yet ther^. 
 are others in which the happinefs of the 
 work-people would be promoted, by placing 
 them in a fituation in which their own intereji 
 would be immediately concerned in reducing 
 the price of goods ^ and this would put the 
 principal manufacturers of the Weft on a 
 nearer equality with thofe of the North.* 
 
 As nothing but a fincere defire of promo- 
 ting the general good could have drawn from 
 me thefe refle6lions on the prefent ftate of 
 the woollen manufa6lure in my own and the 
 adjoining counties, they will, I hope, meet 
 
 * Though I have freely commented on the conduft of the noble 
 author, which appears to have proceeded from want of fufficient 
 information, yet I am not infenfible to the merit of his Lordihip*s 
 publications, as I have received pleafure and information by a 
 perufal of them. 
 
 with 
 

 [ 85 ] 
 
 with your Lordfliip's indulgence, though they 
 may probably be deemed foreign to the fub- 
 je6l of which I am treating. 
 
 I have feen a fmall pamphlet lately pub- 
 lillied, intitled " Obfervations on the Wool 
 Bill." Though the author has adopted the 
 fame argument that is above refuted, and in 
 other refpe6ls, by aggravating trifling errors, 
 has endeavoured to charge the promoters of 
 the bill with want of capacity, yet I am ready 
 to acknowledge, that he has pointed out 
 fome errors in the bill, and has manifefted a 
 competent acquaintance with the prefent laws; 
 but I beg leave to affure him, that his 
 principal obje6lions would have been obvi- 
 ated without his afliftance, from my own 
 remarks, aided by thofe that may be made in 
 the committee, when aflembled. I wifh this 
 G writer 
 
[ 86 ] 
 
 writer pofleiTed more candour, than to have 
 made the following remark, that it was the 
 defign of the manufacturers, " to efFeft that 
 " by flratagem which they were afraid to 
 " declare openly." 
 
 He obferves, p. 9, *' That in the new 
 " claufe beginning p. 15, it is to be enacted, 
 " that every dealer within miles of the 
 
 " fea {hall give an account of the wool ill 
 " his hands 5 but when the important and 
 " alarming part of the claufe, viz. the regu- 
 *' lation, &c. comes forward, the limit or 
 " diftance from the fea is left out, doubtlefs 
 " with the hope that the omiffion might pafs 
 " unobferved, and that the reader might be I 
 *' led to imagine, that the firll mention of 
 " the limit would extend to the whole claufe." 
 He had before infmuated that it was the in- 
 
 tentian 
 
[ 8? ] 
 
 tention of the framer of the bill, " to include 
 " the wool-dealer generally in all parts of the 
 " kingdom." 
 
 I muft inform this writer, that no part of 
 the bill is founded on artifice 5 forthepro- 
 pofers of it are not fuch idiots, as to fuppofe 
 it polTible, in a matter of this importance, to 
 elude, not only the vigilance of Parliament, 
 but alfo of every perfon concerned to oppofe 
 the bill. The fa6l is, it is a mere omilTion, 
 nor did the general meeting ever once intend 
 to include any wool-dealer, in the regula- 
 tions, who does not refide within miles 
 from the fea. Whether the limit is to extend, 
 in this refpe6l, as far as fifteen miles from the 
 fea, is not yet fixed. 
 
 The refolution of the Exeter Meeting, to 
 
 which he alludes, was never adopted by the 
 
 G 2 general 
 
£ 88 • ] 
 
 general meeting; nor was it ever defigned to 
 be brought forward. From the account I 
 have already given of the rife and progrefs 
 of the bill, it appears that this u^riter is mif- 
 taken, in fuppofing that it originated with 
 the merchants and manufafturers of Exeter; 
 which, in order to favour his argument, he 
 flates to be the cafe. 
 
 I fhall proceed no further in reply to this 
 writer's remarks; which, in many inftances* 
 I could prove to be totally inapplicable. I 
 will only obferve, that he pretends it to be 
 the defign of the bill to annihilate the bufi- 
 nefs of the wool-dealer, though, as before- 
 mentioned, there are many perfons of this 
 
 defcription in the committee. As I have 
 
 profelTed to feek afliftance from every quari 
 ter, I {hall willingly profit by the remarks 
 
 of 
 
L 89 ] 
 
 of this writer on thofe few defe6ls of the 
 bill that I had not noticed. In fome cafes' 
 " the wounds of an enemy are preferable to 
 the carefTes of a friend." 
 
 It is really a fatisfa6lion to me, my Lord, 
 that I am at laft come to a conclufion of my 
 remarks on the conducl of thofe who have 
 
 oppofed the bill in this its infant flate. 
 
 If moft of the bills which are brought into 
 parliament, though framed by perfons con- 
 verfant in parliamentary bufinefs, are, when 
 examined, found too defedlive to pafs with- 
 out amendment, furely fome lenity fliould 
 be fliewn to a bill labouring under peculiar 
 difficulties, and haflily produced, merely for 
 the purpofe of making its principle more ge- 
 nerally known, by being publiflied under the 
 fan6tion of the Houfe of Commons. 
 
 G 3 I am 
 
C 9° ] 
 
 I am very ready to allow, that even candid 
 perfons may have feme reafon to fuppofe 
 that the manufa6lurers have been careful, in 
 particular inftances, to exempt themfelves 
 from the reftriclions of the bill. But fuppofing 
 the regulations refpecling the wool-grower to 
 be as burdenfome as they are falfely repre- 
 fented by our opponents, ought no diftin(Sl:ion 
 to be made between the wool-grower, who 
 can be afrefted by them only once or twice in 
 a year, and the manufa6lurer, who would, 
 under fimilar circumftances, be fubje6t to 
 them conftantly? 
 
 I am, however, well aware that fome fur- 
 ther regulations muft take place refpedling 
 the manufa6lurers, otherwife the bill will in 
 a great meafure be ufelefs; and that fome 
 exemptions muft be given up. 
 
 It 
 
C 9' ] 
 
 It is, however, peculiarly hard that the bill 
 fhould be principally attacked on account of 
 thofe exemptions which were inferted merely 
 out of regard to the lefTer manufa6lurers in 
 the North of England, as well as to thofe on 
 the Devon(hire coaft. 
 
 There is one claufe which was introduced 
 at the requeil of two gentlemen from York- 
 iliire, that has been particularly noticed, by 
 our opponents, as difcovering the real delign 
 of the manufacturers. On examining the 
 bill when printed, it plainly appeared that 
 this claufe muft undergo an alteration. This 
 was declared to be the fentiments of the meet- 
 ting by our public refolutions; it is therefore 
 extremely uncandid to comment on it in fuch 
 an invidious manner.* Had 
 
 * See the extradls from the bill publilhed under the fan(5lion of 
 the Suffolk meetings. 
 
Had thofe perfons who compofed the bill, 
 confidered themfehes only^ without any refpe<5l 
 to the fmaller manufa6lurers, the bill would 
 have been more fimple in its form; and thefe 
 complaints of partial exemptions would, in 
 a great meafure, have been prevented. 
 
 The refolutions of different counties, that 
 have been publifhed in oppofition to the 
 bill, are mere copies of the Lincolnfhire ones, 
 except (as far as I can recolle(5l) thofe of 
 Suffolk. I have had an opportunity of con- 
 fulting fome perfons who refide in the coun- 
 ties of Kent and SufTex, and they declare 
 that, with a little alteration, the regulations 
 will by no means be oppreffive , and as the 
 principle of the bill is already eflabliflied in 
 thofe counties, they are furely competent to 
 decide on its merits in this refpe6V. 
 
 Since 
 
c 93 : 
 
 Since the county meeting in SufTex, an- 
 other meeting has been held at Lewes, at 
 which Lord Sheffield prefided. ^t this meet- 
 ing, the propofal of holding a wool-fair at 
 Lewes was adopted ^ and they agreed to in- 
 flru6t their Reprefentatives to obtain a repeal 
 of thofe regulations in th*" prefent laws which 
 rerpe6l the removal of wool. 
 
 By the laws now in force, it is not only 
 impoffible to hold a wool-fair at Lewes; but 
 every wool-dealer refiding within ten miles 
 of the fea, in the counties of Kent and Suf- 
 fex, is obliged to violate one claufe in the 
 prefent a6l, fhould he fell wool to any perfon 
 refiding within fifteen miles of the fea, as is 
 apparent from the claufe before quoted. 
 
 The bill in queflion, which Lord S. 
 treated with fo little ceremony, would, if 
 
 paffed 
 
[ 94 ] 
 
 pafied into a law, render this claufe of no 
 force, and, as far as at prefent appears, would 
 not in other refpe6ls fubjed: the county of 
 Suffex to any new inconvenience. 
 
 It is declared in the refolutions of the 
 other counties as well as Suflex, that the 
 wool-growers already labour under fufficient 
 reftri6lions. This mode of delivering their 
 fentiments is very ambiguous. 
 
 *t>' 
 
 If they mean by reftri<51ions, that they are 
 not permitted to export their wool, why are 
 they afraid to declare their fentiments openly? 
 This would be taking a manly and decided 
 part, and would bring tHe conteft to a fhort 
 iffue. Should they decline this ground, the 
 only fair and candid mode of proceeding would 
 
 be 
 
C 9S ] 
 
 be to join with the manufa6lurers in endea- 
 vouring to find out the beft expedient for 
 preventing the fmuggUng of wool, provided 
 it can be proved that large quantities are 
 a6lually exported for want of more effectual 
 regulations. 
 
 It may elfe be fufpe6led, that though they 
 are unwilling to avow the principle, yet 
 their obje6l is to oppofe any regulation that 
 may more efFe£lually prevent the fmuggling 
 of this article. 
 
 Every ingenuous perfon, inftead of invol- 
 ving a queftion in obfcurity, would wifli^to 
 ftrip it of all unnecefTary appendages, and 
 reduce it to as fimple a form as polfible. It 
 is by no means my defign, to raife improper 
 fufpicions in the mind of any manj but it is 
 
 my 
 
. [ 96 ] 
 
 my duty to point out the real ground of the 
 argument, by ftatmg it clearly and explicitly. 
 
 The method adopted in the county of 
 Suffolk, of publifhing thofe claufes in the 
 bill which are deemed by their meetings to 
 be moft obnoxious, is in the higheft degree 
 partial, and has a tendency to impofe on 
 perfons unacquainted with the wool lawsj 
 no notice whatever being given how far they 
 agree or difagree with the laws now exifling. 
 
 The very firll claufe felecled for publica- 
 tion, by thefe refolutions, is grounded on 
 the A(St of Henry VIII. refpe6ling the falfe 
 winding of wool, and is no otherwife altered 
 than appears to be abfolutely neceffary for 
 the fecurity of the purchafer of wool at pre- 
 lent, except in one inilance refpe6ling the 
 pitch-mark. j ^^^jj 
 
C 97 ] 
 
 I fhall however wave any difcuffion of the 
 merits of this or any other claufe in the 
 bill, for the reafons which have been before 
 afligned. 
 
 If ever effe6tuai regulations for preventing 
 the exportation of wool from this kingdom 
 were necellary, they certainly are more pecu- 
 liarly fo at prefent. 
 
 Many years paft I was informed by a per- 
 fon, who was then largely engaged in the 
 exportation of woollens, that were a free 
 trade opened to France, confiderable quan- 
 tities of our woollen goods would moft cer- 
 tamly be introduced into that country. 
 
 My own experience fully confirms this 
 opinion, having been applied to by French 
 
 woollen- 
 
C 98 3 
 
 woollen -drapers, for recommendations to 
 nianufa6lurers in this country for thefe kind 
 of goods. 
 
 The wool-grower will undoubtedly parti- 
 cipate in thofe advantages which may arife 
 to the manufacturers, from opening this 
 new channel of trade, as the lower wools 
 are already confiderably advanced; no great 
 generofity is therefore manifefted on their 
 parts, in oppoiing the manufacturers with 
 fo much violence, and in treating their pro- 
 pofals with fuch acrimony, on account of 
 their being defirous of obtaining more effec- 
 tual regulations, to prevent the exportation of 
 of wool. 
 
 The commercial intercourle which is likely 
 to be eftablifhed between the two countries, 
 
 will 
 
[ 99 3 
 
 will probably facilitate the fmuggling of this 
 article; and on this ground alone, it may be 
 more necefTary to adopt thofe regulations 
 which may be pointed out by the promoters 
 of the bill. 
 
 Your Lordfhip is too well acquanted with 
 my general principles, to fuppofe that I can. 
 be an advocate for unneceflary reftriftions 
 on trade. Thefe principles will ever influ- 
 ence my condudt, (as has been manifeftcd on 
 a former occafion) in giving my feeble fup- 
 port to meafures that have for their object 
 an extenfion of trade and commerce, and it 
 is impofTible for me to approve of any that 
 may bear hard on a particular clafs of men, 
 without examining, with the utmofl atten , 
 tion, how far. they are necefTary to the public 
 good. 
 
 Similar 
 
{^ JOO ] 
 
 similar inquiries to this which is now 
 under confideration, have on former occafions 
 engaged the attention of the manufacturers; 
 but from fome unknown caufes, they never 
 were brought to any deciflve ilTue,- and 
 though the aftual exiftence of the pra6lice 
 of fmuggling wool could never be doubted 
 by thofe perfons who were competent judges, 
 yet no particular accounts have ever been 
 exhibited to Parliament, on which might be 
 grounded a prcbable opinion of the quantity 
 exported. 
 
 I fliall endeavour to fupply this defedt as 
 far as is in my power^ being determined, if 
 poflible, to preclude the neceffity of future 
 inquiries on the fubje6l. Had I enjoyed 
 more leifure, I fhould have gone to France 
 myfelf, which in all probability would have 
 
 enabled 
 
C lOI ] 
 
 enabled me to have obtained more complete 
 information, but what has been effected will 
 at leaft lay a foundation for procuring a 
 more accurate account of the quantity ex- 
 ported. 
 
 I hope it will be evident, by the tenor of 
 all the arguments advanced in this publica- 
 tion, that I do not attempt to juftify a pro- 
 hibition of exporting wool, on any other 
 ground than that of national advantage j and 
 no manufacturer, who has a proper view of 
 the fubje^, will be defirous (or in fa6l has 
 any reafon in point of intereft) of vindica- 
 ting it on any other principle. 
 
 Though the manufa6lurers may derive 
 fuperior profit by the low price of wool, for 
 a limited time, yet fuch is the competition in 
 
 H this 
 
t 102 ] 
 
 this bufinefs, that fuch art advantage cannot 
 be of long duration. Whether the price of 
 wool be advanced or not, provided any con- 
 fiderable flu6luation in its value can be pre- 
 vented, the profit of the manufacturers will 
 not be affected. Every perfon acquainted 
 with the woollen bufinefs muft know, that 
 the general average of profit is fo moderate 
 as not to bear a diminution j and it is im- 
 poflible it fhould be otherwife in fuch an 
 extenfive manufa6lurej the confumers of 
 woollens will therefore alone be affe6led by 
 a permanent rife in the price of wool. 
 
 It is futile to talk of the manufafturers 
 combining together for the purpofe of lower- 
 ing the price of woolj there are too many^ 
 oppofite interefts among them, for this ever 
 to be effected, were they to attempt it. It is 
 
 very 
 
[ 103 ] 
 
 very true that, on the general principle of 
 trade, they will endeavour to purchafe the 
 commodity at as cheap a rate as pofliblej and 
 on the fame principle, the wool-growers will 
 be defirous of obtaining as good a price as 
 can be procured j but caufes, very different 
 from combinations on either fide, will fix the 
 average price of the article. 
 
 In confequence of my fituation, I have 
 been held forth to public view, as a perfon 
 who, by the afiiftance of his fellow manufac- 
 turers, is endeavouring to forge chains for 
 binding the land-owners and wool-growers^ 
 and as a promoter of regulations, which 
 " a Turkifh bafha would be afliarred of." 
 
 Warm and animated language, unreftrained 
 
 by the fober dilates of Truth, and circula- 
 
 H 2 lated 
 
[ 104 ] 
 
 tated with the greateft mduftry, by thofe 
 mediums of conveyance fo common in this 
 country, mufl in fome meafure afFe6l the 
 pubHc opinion j and though it evinces but 
 little magnanimity of mind to be affe6led by 
 every idle cavil, that may be advanced againft 
 a perfon engaged in a public meafure, yet 
 I cannot be wholy infenfible to thofe repeat- 
 ed efforts, v^hich our opponents are making, 
 in order to render myfelf, and thofe perfons 
 with whom I am concerned, obnoxious to 
 the land-owners and wool-growers. 
 
 I really believe it would be difficult to 
 find any fet of men lefs influenced by private 
 views, than thofe perfons who compofe the 
 General Meeting in London 5 and I am con- 
 fident that the propofals which will be fub- 
 piitted to their confideration, for altering 
 
 fome 
 
[ 105 ] 
 
 fome parts of the intended bill, which may 
 be deemed too fevere, will be cheerfully 
 adopted. 
 
 For my own part, I can recolle6l no period 
 of my life when the ^mor Patrice did not glow 
 in my breaft ; and though I was not deftined 
 to ferve my country in the line which my 
 early youth moft approved, yet the fame 
 fpirit which (had it not been checked by a 
 mother's fears) would have led me to the 
 profeffion of arms, has conflantly a6luated 
 my condudl; and I am confident that my 
 mind is fuperior to the contra6led views of 
 private interell, when that interefl appears 
 to be in oppofition to the public good. 
 
 Your Lordfhip and the public will, I 
 
 hope, excufe this perfonal application, which 
 
 H 3 proceeds 
 
[ io6 ] 
 
 proceeds from a fenfibility of foul, that can- 
 not bear to be confidered as an enemy to my 
 country. 
 
 Had the intended bill been produced ear- 
 lier in the feflion, it might poflibly have 
 prevented fome embarraiTment to feveral 
 members of the Houfe of Commons, who 
 though they have declared themfelves friendly 
 to the meafure, may be unwilling to a6l 
 contrary to the fentiments contained in the 
 refolutions of different meetings, held in the 
 counties or towns reprefented by them. 
 
 Several unforefeen circumilances occurred 
 to prevent the application to Parliament 
 being made at the beginning of the feflion 5 
 and one principal reafon of delaying it, has 
 Ijeenowing to the ftate of my health, which 
 
 vented 
 
prevented me from attending in London. 
 Thofe gentlemen who are difpofed to ferve 
 the manu failure rs, and who were particularly 
 confulted, will, I hope, admit this apology; 
 as it is my earneil: defire to finifh the bufmefs 
 with all pofiible difpatch. 
 
 In order to fhew, that even thofe perfons, 
 who have contended for a limited exportation 
 of wool, have yet admitted the necefiity of 
 ena6ling fevere laws againft the fmuggling of 
 this article, I (hall fubjoin the plan exhibited 
 by Mr. Smitbi which may be feen in his 
 Hiftory of Wool. This extra6l may ferve to 
 ej(onerate the manufacturers from the charge 
 of any improper feverity in framing the dif- 
 ferent claufes in the propofed bill. But indeed 
 this concern has now fo much engaged the 
 attention of the publick, that it cannot fail 
 
 of 
 
[ io8 ] 
 
 of being minutely difculTed in Parliament, 
 when it will appear how far the manufac- 
 turers are liable to the imputation of fuch 
 a charge. 
 
 I intended to have made a few curfory 
 obfervations on the Commercial Treaty, as it 
 may affe6l the woollen manufa6lure of this 
 country, having feen nothing on the fubje6l 
 that has given me any fatisfaction. That fuch 
 a publication as the ' Woollen-Draper s Letter 
 fliould pafs through two editions, can only 
 be accounted for from the general defire of 
 feeing what coftld be faid by a perfon adopts 
 ing fuch an appellation j but this writer be- 
 trays almoft a total ignorance in many points 
 refpecling the woollen bufmefs, and which a 
 real woollen- draper, difpofed to converfe with 
 ■^ clothiers, could fcarcely be millaken in. 
 
 The 
 
[ 109 ] 
 
 The Monthly Reviewers have mentioned 
 this performance in terms of approbation; 
 but though they may be excufed for not be- 
 ing able to point out his mifreprefentations, 
 which thofe perfons who are acquainted with 
 the bufniefs of the clothier can alone do 3 yet 
 certainly they are in every refpecl competent 
 to detect a weak and fallacious mode of 
 reafoning. The only argument which this 
 writer has advanced, (for every thing elfe is 
 mere declamation) refpecling the fuperior 
 advantage of the French over the Englifli 
 manufa6lurer, is in the comparifon he makes 
 between the general taxes of France, and 
 thofe of England, as contrafled with the 
 number of people in each. But allowing M. 
 Neckars flatement to be accurate, on which 
 this writer's pofition is founded, and that it 
 may be pofTible to calculate, with fome degree 
 
 of 
 
[ no ] 
 
 of accuracy, the population of each country; 
 yet will any perfon pretend that it is poffibte, 
 from the fingle circumftance of an Englifh 
 ^inanufa6turer paying more taxes than a 
 French manufa6lurer, to afcertain whether a 
 piece of cloth can be made cheaper in France 
 than in England? Surely fuch inconclufivc 
 reafoning as this will never be deemed fatis- 
 faclory by any perfon who wifhes to form an 
 impartial opinion on the fubje6l. 
 
 In my opinion, arguments of a different 
 kind (except what may be deemed general 
 ones) from thofe which have come under my 
 infpe6lion, mufl be ufed, in order to prove 
 how far the commercial treaty may be either 
 "beneficial or prejudicial to the woollen ma- 
 nufacture of this kingdom j but it requires 
 ^ competent knowledge of the various kinds 
 
 of 
 
[ III ] 
 
 of woollen goods made in each kingdom, for 
 any perfon to decide with tolerable accuracy 
 on this point. 
 
 It appears to me, that the manufa6larers 
 of both kingdoms will derive advantage from 
 an infpe6lion of the fabricks, made in each 
 country i and, as far as my own experience 
 goes, a rivalfliip can never injure a manu- 
 fa6lurer, except fome peculiar circumftances 
 (hould give his rival a decided fuperiority 
 over him. 
 
 Though every real lover of his country 
 muft be defirous of fecuring thofe advantages 
 which Providence has beftowed on us, yet 
 the philofophic mind cannot but view with 
 pleafure two great and powerful nations, 
 that have for a feries of years exerted their 
 
 utmoft 
 
[ 112 ] 
 
 utmoft endeavours to deflroy each other, 
 now uniting, with apparent cordiality, in 
 promoting thofe meafures which have a 
 natural tendency to preferve the bleflings of 
 peace. 
 
 I mufl, however, drop any further confi- 
 deration of this fubjecl, having neither time 
 nor ability of doing juftice to it 5 and tho', 
 in its remote confequences, it may have an 
 influence on the immediate obje6l of my in- 
 quiry, yet I mufl acknowledge it does not 
 come under my direct notice. 
 
 I have now, 'my Lord, brought my fub- 
 je61: to a conclufion^ and I have only to 
 requeft your Lordfliip's indulgence to thofe 
 faults that may be difcerned in this perform- 
 ance. 
 
 A writer 
 
[ i>3 ] 
 
 A writer who chufes to fubmit his thoughts 
 to public notice, has no right to plead want 
 of leifure, in extenuation of delivering crude 
 and undigefted notions, or for iifmg weak 
 and fallacious arguments; but there are cir- 
 cumftances which may be urged in a writer's 
 favour for faults in point of ftile and com- 
 pofition. 
 
 Having the care of a manufa6lory of no 
 inconfiderable extent, and being alfo engaged 
 in other concerns, it cannot be expe6led that 
 I fhould find much time for vv^riting. 
 
 The leifure moments that I have enjoyed 
 while at Bath, (for the benefit of my health) 
 have been employed partly in drawing up 
 thefe obfervations; but I have been conti- 
 nually hindered by attention to other things 
 
 of 
 
[ 114 ] 
 
 of importance -, and from the neceflity I was 
 under of often returning home, in order to 
 infpecl my own bufmefs : I fhall therefore, 
 I prefume, be permitted to appeal to your 
 Lordfhip and to the pubHc on this ground, 
 without the leafl appearance of afFe6lation. 
 
 It has been my endeavour to arrange my 
 materials with fome kind of order, to avoid 
 weak and inconclufive arguments, and to ex- 
 prefs my thoughts with perfpicuity; but any 
 further attention to compofition than this, 
 has been deemed by me unneceffaryj and, 
 indeed, my time would not admit of it. 
 
 If my readers are enabled to underfland 
 the fubjeft, fo far as to be capable of per- 
 ceiving wherein the flrefs of the argument 
 lies between the promoters of the bill, and its 
 
 opponents. 
 
[•'5 3 
 
 opponents, my end in writing will be an- 
 fwered. 
 
 Through the whole progrefs of this con- 
 cern, I have avoided any application for fup- 
 port, but as founded in the re6litude of the 
 meafure; and I fhall not therefore now at- 
 tempt to make converts of my readers, by 
 embellifliing my page with a pompous dif- 
 play of the advantages derived to this kingdom 
 by the woollen manufa(5lure. 
 
 Permit me, my Lord, to acknowledge the 
 juft regard I entertain for thofe marks of 
 attention which I have received from your 
 Lordfhip, and which are efteemed by me, not 
 fo much on account of your high rank and 
 flation, as for the folid advantages which I 
 derive from perfonal converfe with you. 
 
 I have 
 
[ m6 ] 
 
 I have alfo to thank you, my Lord, for 
 permifTion to addrefs myfelf to youpubhcly; 
 and I now refign this performance to the 
 candour of your Lordfhip and of the public. 
 
 I am. 
 
 My Lord, 
 
 with fincere regard. 
 Your Lordfliip's 
 obhged, and 
 
 ;noft obedient fervant. 
 
 JOHN ANSTIE. 
 
 Devizes, March 31ft, 1787, 
 
Mr. S M I T H's 
 SCHEME 
 
 FOR FRKVENTING 
 
 The illicit Exportation of Wool. 
 
 " 'V TO wool to be carried coaflwife, or on 
 any river more than over a ferry in 
 *' the common ferry-boats. 
 
 " A revi'ard equal to 500 per cent, (inftead 
 " of all other rev^^ards) to be paid out of the 
 " public revenue for all w^ool, yarn, and 
 " vi'oollen goods, in a contraband trade feized 
 ** at fea, or unlav^'fully put on board any 
 ** navigable vefTel whatfoever. The public to 
 *' avail itfelf out of the goods and chatties, 
 ** and other confifcables of the offender orof- 
 ** fenders, in the firll place j and farther to be 
 
 I " entitled 
 
[ ii8 ] 
 
 ' entitled to one moiety of the forfeitures in 
 ' fuch cafe incurred by laws now in being; 
 ' the other moiety of the fame to be to the 
 ' crown. The captain, mafter, or chief 
 ' mariner, having direction of fuch fhip or 
 ' navigable velTel, for the time being, with 
 ' as many others of the crew as may be fup- 
 ' pofed privy to the lading thereof, (without 
 ' difcovering the fame) to be always deemed 
 ' as accomplices ; and in cafe of non-payment 
 ' of the whole penalty of the 500 per cent. 
 ' to fuffer death as felons. And (for pre- 
 ' venting collufion) in cafe of any feizure, 
 
 * and that fuch accountable captain, mafter, 
 
 * or mariners, or fome of them at leaft, are 
 
 * not apprehended and committed to fome 
 ' one of the King's prifons; in that cafe the 
 ■ perfon or perfons fo feizing, to be intitled 
 ' only to a moiety of the wool, &c. feized." 
 
 In 
 
[ "9 ] 
 
 In anfwer to thofe perfons who might ob- 
 je6l that his plan would not abfolutely pre- 
 vent the fmuggUng of wool, he farther adds, 
 
 *' That 500 per cent, reward to the feizer, 
 " at the expence of the tranlgreffor, or with 
 " the forfeiture of his life, (the one or other 
 " not to be eluded) would be fuch a terror 
 *' and difcouragement as would certainly 
 " quafli all attempts of that kind. And if 
 " this capital punifhment be thought too 
 " fevere, in this cafe particularly I only refer 
 " to the known allowed maxims, Salus Rei- 
 " publicce fuprema lex efi-, 'volenti non Jit in- 
 ^* juria; and defire them to compare this 
 " claufe with that ftatute, and the reafon of 
 " it, which makes it death to have coining 
 " inflruments found upon any perfon, &c." 
 
 1 2 I wifh 
 
[ lao ] 
 
 I wiih it to be obferved, that I do not 
 mean to charge Mr. Smith with not having 
 noticed the difference between Clothing and 
 Combing woolj but that in all cafes they 
 are not diftinguifhed by him with a fufficient 
 degree of accuracy, which is particularly the 
 cafe when he compares the price of Englilh 
 wools with thofe of other countries. 
 
 Though combing wool has not advanced 
 in price equal with clothing wool, yet it is 
 now (according to the accounts I have re- 
 ceived) at much the fame price it was before 
 the lall^war, and the holders are in expedla- 
 tion of a further advance on it. 
 
 POST- 
 
C 12' 3 
 
 POSTSCRIPT. 
 
 SINCE my letter was fent to the prefs, I 
 have feen the 38th number of the Annals of 
 Agriculture: though, for the reafons before 
 afTigned, I confidered myfelf under no obli- 
 gation to notice the obje6lions of Mr. Toiing, 
 yet I fhould deem myfelf unworthy of public 
 confidence, were I to negle6l vindicating my 
 charader againft a charge of having aflerted 
 a falfehood. 
 
 When I fent my Card to the prefs, which 
 was written at Bath, I really had no idea that 
 any alteration whatever had been made in 
 the claufes refpecling infurance. It was fo 
 ftrongly imprelied on my mind, that the 
 claufes were left juft as they fland in the 
 prefent a6l, that I never thought of fending 
 1 3 for 
 
[ 122 ] 
 
 for our propofed bill in order to examine into 
 the matter. On this account, I fcrupled not 
 to afiert, " that the claufe (claufes it fhould 
 have been faid) flood exadlly as it does in the 
 prefent bill." 
 
 Thofe claufes were abfolutely agreed in the 
 Committee to remain juft as they are in the 
 laws now in force, and fo in fa6l they fland 
 at prefent, as to their real meaning and in- 
 tention 3 but as all the acls relative to re- 
 flri6lions on wool, as they refpe6t Ireland^ 
 will (if the propofed bill pafs into a law) be 
 difcharged from the ftatutes, (that kingdom 
 not being now bound by our laws) it was ne- 
 ceffary for the Secretary to draw the claufes 
 without noticing that kingdom, it being par- 
 ticularly mentioned in the a6l of 12 Geo. II. 
 in which thofe claufes are contained. 
 
 Thofe 
 
[ J23 ] 
 
 Thofe gentlemen who are pofTefTed of the 
 propofed bill, as printed by my diredlion, with 
 references to the prefent laws, and diftin- 
 guifhing the alterations by particular marks 
 againft the claufes, will be able to judge for 
 themfelves how far Mr. T. has juftified him- 
 felf againft the charge, in ufing the following 
 language: " Thus in the claufe of infurances, 
 " in which the law at prefent is nearer than 
 " in any other cafe to the new proportion, 
 " there are no lefs than fix alterations from 
 " the a6l of 12 Geo. II. befides others that 
 " are verbal only. What therefore are we to 
 " fay to the Wiltihire Woolman, who pufhed 
 " himfelf forward to tell us, that fbis claufe 
 *■'■ fiands in the intended bill exaBly as it does in 
 *' the prefent laws ; and this in the fame page 
 "as he falfely accufes me of inaccuracy of 
 ;" reprefentation and patient inveftigation ?" 
 
 I muft 
 
C 1^4 ] 
 
 I muft indeed plead guilty to the charge, 
 fo far as to acknowledge that I did not note 
 the variation pointed out above j but I be- 
 Ueve no candid perfon will ever accufe me of 
 aflerting a falfehood on this account, as I defy 
 my opponent, or any other perfon, to prove 
 that the real defign or intention of the claufes 
 is in the leafl altered from the original. 
 
 The Secretary, by retaining, in one inftance, 
 
 the particular words of an exifling claufe, 
 
 i' , 
 though he has judicioufly omitted naming 
 
 Ireland^ has left that part open to the attack of 
 
 the perfon who has publifhed " Obfervations 
 
 " on the Billi" from which performance Mr. 
 
 Toung has given large quotations in his 38th 
 
 number. Had it been deemed prudent to 
 
 make any alteration in the original bill, as 
 
 delivered to the Houfe of Commons, this, as 
 
 well 
 
[ 125 ] 
 
 well as fome other trivial errors, would have 
 been re6lified in the new publication, which 
 is in the hands of feveral perfons. 
 
 Mr. Towig has endeavoured further to 
 deftroy the effecl of the charge exhibited 
 againft him, by the following paflage: '' But 
 " again, I obferve, that this retort is not at 
 " all requifite to my general argument, which 
 " went fo largely to the fyftem of reftri6lion, 
 " that had the claufe of infurance flood 
 " word for word as before, my attack upon 
 " it was equally juft and proper." Waving 
 any obfervation on the inaccuracy with 
 which he has exprefled himfelf, which might 
 be owing to hafte in writing, it ilill remains 
 with him to prove that the claufe in queflion 
 will deftroy " the immenfe and falutary traf- 
 " fick of infurance^" which is what, he had 
 / ftated 
 
[ 126 ] 
 
 flrated in his firft number, would be the cpn- 
 fequence of it. Till he is able to prove this 
 aTertion, the inference which I drew from his 
 
 argument v,^ill continue valid. ^Whether 
 
 "his general attack on the bill (which I fuppofe 
 is the meaning intended to be conveyed in the 
 above recited paiTage) was equally juji and 
 proper^ an impartial public muft determine. 
 
 I beg it may be obferved, that Mr. Yowig 
 retains and enforces the charge which he ori- 
 ginally exhibited againft the promoters of the 
 bill, of defigning to injure the Yorkjloire manu- 
 faSiure-, as he has inferted the following 
 paifage in a note : — " It is however worthy 
 ** of remark, that one aim of this bill is le- 
 *' veiled againft that fab rick, [viz. that of 
 •* Yorkdiire, which is mentioned in thepre- 
 *' ceding part of the note] as if the mono- 
 
 '' polifts 
 
[ 127 ] 
 
 " polifts were jealous of a progrefs which is a 
 " real reproach to them." 
 
 What can this writer fay in his juftifica- 
 tion, for bringing fuch a charge againft the 
 framers of the bill, (or the imnopolijls^ as he 
 is pleafed to call them) when I inform the 
 public, that I have received a letter from the 
 Chairman of the General Meeting in York- 
 fhire, propofing fome alterations in the bill, 
 principally in thofe claufes which relate to 
 bonds and exemptions in favour of manu- 
 fa6lurers, (which claufes I am convinced mufl 
 be altered i) but not a fmgle one in thofe 
 which relate to the coaft regulations for 
 fliipping wool. 
 
 I will not copy this writer's example, by 
 making ufe of opprobrious language i (and 
 
 Indeed 
 
[ 128 ] 
 
 indeed I am forry that in one fingle inftance I 
 retorted his own expreffions, however juftly 
 they were appUed by mej) but fhall leave the 
 pubUc to pafs an impartial fentence on our 
 refpe6live merits in point of fidelity. 
 
 It is neceiTary for me to obferve, that I have 
 never pubHfhed any remarks on Mr. Toung*^ 
 condu6l, but what are contained in the Card 
 inferted in the public papers, and alfo in this 
 
 pamphlet. Were I not anxious to fend 
 
 this addition to the prefs, I iliould notice other 
 charges brought by him againft the manufac- 
 turers, particularly what refpecls Ireland, 
 
 He afTerts, that the prefent fituation of that 
 kingdom is owing more to the defigns of 
 Woolmen, (as he calls the manufa6lurers) 
 than to any other caufe. As well might he 
 attribute it principally to the land-owners, 
 
 v.'ho 
 
[ 129 ] 
 
 who certainly propofed the acl of Charles II. 
 which prohibited the Irifh from fending live , 
 cattle into this kingdom, and which was com- 
 plained of at that time as a moil grievous 
 
 a(5l. Suppofe the manufa6lurcrs in paft 
 
 times had contra6led ideas relative to trade, 
 it may with propriety be afked, were no other 
 bodies of men then infe6led with the fame' 
 narrow views? 
 
 Have the woollen manufa6lurers niani- 
 fefted no liberality of fentiment, by not 
 oppofing the repeal of thofe laws which pro- 
 hibited Ireland from exporting her own 
 woollen manufactures to foreign countries ? 
 Or was their general conduct, when the Irifh 
 propofitions were under confideration, dic- 
 tated by narrow and partial views ? Mr. Toung 
 may polTibly plead his being ignorant of the 
 
 refolutions 
 
[ i3<^ ] 
 
 refolutions which were palTed by a confider- 
 able part of the manufa6lurers at that time. 
 Let him however read the examination of the 
 gentlemen from Birmingham, Manchefler, 
 and Hetruria, (the manufacturers of which 
 places he has contrafted with the woollen 
 manufacturers) before the Houfe of Lords 
 and Com.mons, and compare it with the ex- 
 aminations of different perfons concerned in 
 the w^oollen manufa6lure, before the privy 
 council; and then, oji his own principles^ let 
 him confider with what jullice he has made 
 the invidious comparijon. Without pretend- 
 ing to arraign the opinions of other manu- 
 facturers, I am happy to obferve, that the 
 principles which it v/as my object to incul- 
 cate, when thofe proportions were under 
 confideration, have now received almolt ge- 
 neral fanction. 
 
 Perhaps 
 
[ ^31 ] 
 
 Perhaps the tranfa6lion to which the 
 author alludes, if minutely inveftigated, may- 
 be found to have originated in the private 
 views of a few powerful individuals, rather 
 than in the prejudices of the manufaclurers 
 in general J though thefe prejudices might be 
 encouraged and drawn forth by artful and 
 defigning men. 
 
 To expe(5l men in general to be free from 
 any particular attachment to their own con- 
 cerns, is abfurd in itfelf; and indeed were 
 manufaiSlurers, or any other body of men, 
 inattentive to what concerned their united 
 and particular intereft, the mod fatal confe- 
 quences might, from fuch inattention, de- 
 
 fcend to the community at large. That 
 
 perfon only deferves to be confidered as 
 poflefling a truly liberal mind, who, fenfi- 
 
 ble 
 
[ 132 ] 
 
 ble of the neceffity of an attachment to par- 
 tial intereils, endeavours, by the fuperior 
 powers of his mind, to remove thofe improper 
 prejudices which are naturally contra6ted by 
 
 too great an attention to this principle. 
 
 He will endeavour to effect this falutary 
 purpofe, by examining the fubjecl on which 
 he chufes to exercife his thoughts, with the 
 greatefl care and attention^ and (having done 
 this without partiality) by demonftrating 
 from well-eftabliflied fa6ls andjuft reafon- 
 ing, that the indulgence of fuch prejudices 
 muft be really detrimental, not only to thofe 
 perfons whofe intereft appears to be more im- 
 mediately concerned, but alfo to the public 
 at large. 
 
 Though Mr. Smith was a profefled advocate 
 for a limited exportation of wool, yet he had 
 
 a fufficient 
 
[ 133 ] 
 
 a fufficient degree of candour to ufe the foU 
 lowing language, when fpeaking of the defigns 
 of the manufacturers: — " To this I rejoin, 
 *', that in the time of Cha. II. and fmce, a 
 " right end has been propofed,only the means 
 "'have been miflaken." ** Thofe who meant 
 **.beft to their country honeftly propofed, 
 ".that the profit of manufa6luring the Eng- 
 " lifli wool fliould be to the people of this 
 "kingdom, and not to foreigners." 
 
 In what a fuperior point of view would Mr. 
 Toiing have appeared, if, inftead of deform- 
 ing his page with indifcriminatc inve6live 
 (for in vain does he attempt to fcrecn the 
 Yorkfhire clothiers &c. from his general cen- 
 -fures) againft the woollen manufacturers, he 
 "had contented himfelf with urging his rea- 
 fons, with all tlie force oi found argument he 
 y K might 
 
[ '34 ] 
 
 might be capable of, againfl a meafurc which 
 'he deems impolitic and ufelefs. 
 
 He may be afTured, that, while I am 
 honoured with the flation in which I have 
 been placed, I fhall efteem it my duty to 
 vindicate the condu6tof the manufa6lurersj 
 which, in the profecution of this inquiry, 
 has been manly and liberal; though, at the 
 fame time, my mind fhall be preferved un- 
 biafled, and attentive to what fhall appear of 
 public benefit in the further progrefs of this 
 important concern. '^ 
 
 IM*'- ™ 
 
 THAT my readers may form their own opinion 
 of the temper and ftile o{ Mr. Touf^g's compofition, 
 I have extracted a few paflages from his laft: num- 
 ber, as I find that I was much miflaken in fuppofing 
 that the Annals of Agriculture were generally read. 
 
 Tt 
 
C -35 ] 
 
 le woiild be paying this writer too great a com- 
 pliment, were I, in confeqitence of his rriifrepre- 
 fentations, to enter on a juftification of thofe 
 claiifes in the bill which refpeft the wool-growers. 
 That refpe<5Vable body of men are intitled to too 
 much- regard from the legiflature, to have any 
 apprehenfiohs of "being bound in fhackles of 
 '* iron ■ by the manufacturers." Such turgid ex- 
 preflions as this writer makes ufe of will neither 
 add force dt fenergy to his arguments. 
 
 ... . no !;;-»;' ■'• :- - . 
 
 Extracts from the ^^th Number of the Annals 
 of Agriculture. 
 
 " And here let me afk, what epithet is due to 
 " men who could coolly and deliberately fit down 
 " totranfcribe a.fyftemof defpotifm, without one 
 *' atomof feeling for fo numerous and refpedtable 
 *' a clafs of people, as the growers of wool — 
 " who could heap puniflimenton reftriflion — add 
 " fine to penalty — blacken mifdemeanour into 
 " felony, and bind, with fhackles of iron, a harm- 
 " lefs fet of men, in every flep and progrefs of 
 
 " their 
 
[ '36 ] ■ 
 
 " their -ordinary occupations? This is jlyrly 
 '' cruel i perhaps, wanton^ly cruel. ^' .,^,.-f^ 
 
 " It is the private views of private intercfjt-^tl^c: 
 " inordinate defires of extravagant f prpfi^— -tK« 
 "arithmetic of the counter — the policy. of the 
 ^' Ihop. To buy wool cheap,, wjll^^d^ f<;>mucj> 
 ** percent, on the manu/adturers' capital. Not 
 .", the profit of all the manufadlurefs.of the king- 
 *^domj — there would have been fonriethip^ too 
 " liberal in that ideaj — but the local ones of the 
 " Weft: hence the reftridions laid on the dealer, 
 *' and the coafting trade, levelled fo pointedly at 
 " theYorkfliirefabricks." 
 
 " Let us then hear no more from woolmen of the 
 " profperity of land and manufa(5lur^s being the 
 _ " fame. Birmingham and Sheffield, Manchefter 
 " and Hetruria, may talk that language — they 
 " have no fuch monopolies againft the landed 
 " intereft — their fuccefs is our profperity," 
 
 FINIS.