our
ancestors reduced this kingdom to the obedience of England, for which we
have been rewarded with a worse climate, the privilege of being governed
by laws to which we do not consent, a ruined trade, a House of Peers
without jurisdiction, almost an incapacity for all employments; and the
dread of Wood's halfpence.

But we are so far from disputing the King's prerogative in coining, that
we own he has power to give a patent to any man for setting his royal
image and superscription upon whatever materials he pleases, and liberty
to the patentee to offer them in any country from England to Japan, only
attended with one small limitation, That nobody alive is obliged to take
them.

Upon these considerations I was ever against all recourse to England for
a remedy against the present impending evil, especially when I observed
that the addresses of both Houses, after long expectance, produced
nothing but a REPORT altogether in favour of Wood, upon which I made
some observations in a former letter, and might at least have made as
many more. For it is a paper of as singular a nature as I ever beheld.

But I mistake; for before this Report was made, His Majesty's most
gracious answer to the House of Lords was sent over and printed, wherein
there are these words, "granting the patent for coining halfpence and
farthings AGREEABLE TO THE PRACTICE OF HIS ROYAL PREDECESSORS, &c." That
King Charles 2d. and King James 2d. (AND THEY ONLY) did grant patents
for this purpose is indisputable, and I have shewn it at large. Their
patents were passed under the great seal of Ireland by references to
Ireland, the copper to be coined in Ireland, the patentee was bound on
demand to receive his coin back in Ireland, and pay silver and gold in
return. Wood's patent was made under the great seal of England, the
brass coined in England, not the least reference made to Ireland, the
sum immense, and the patentee under no obligation to receive it again
and give good money for it: This I only mention, because in my private
thoughts I have sometimes made a query, whether the penner of those
words in His Majesty's most gracious answer, "agreeable to the practice
of his royal predecessors," had maturely considered the several
circumstances, which, in my poor opinion seem to make a difference.

Let me now say something concerning the other great cause of some
people's fear, as Wood has taught the London newswriter to express it.
That "his Excellency the