FN 152 The Irish Roman Catholics complained, and with but too much reason, that, at a later period, the Treaty of Limerick was violated; but those very complaints are admissions that the Statute 3 W. & M. c. 2. was not a violation of the Treaty. Thus the author of A Light to the Blind speaking of the first article, says: "This article, in seven years after, was broken by a Parliament in Ireland summoned by the Prince of Orange, wherein a law was passed for banishing the Catholic bishops, dignitaries, and regular clergy." Surely he never would have written thus, if the article really had, only two months after it was signed, been broken by the English Parliament. The Abbe Mac Geoghegan, too, complains that the Treaty was violated some years after it was made. But he does not pretend that it was violated by Stat. 3 W.
& M. c. 2.
FN 153 Stat. 21 Jac. 1. c. 3.
FN 154 See particularly Two Letters by a Barrister concerning the East India Company (1676), and an Answer to the Two Letters published in the same year. See also the judgment of Lord Jeffreys concerning the Great Case of Monopolies. This judgment was published in 1689, after the downfall of Jeffreys. It was thought necessary to apologize in the preface for printing anything that bore so odious a name. "To commend this argument,"says the editor, "I'll not undertake because of the author. But yet I may tell you what is told me, that it is worthy any gentleman's perusal." The language of Jeffreys is most offensive, sometimes scurrilous, sometimes basely adulatory; but his reasoning as to the mere point of law is certainly able, if not conclusive.
FN 155 Addison's Clarinda, in the week of which she kept a journal, read nothing but Aurengzebe; Spectator, 323. She dreamed that Mr. Froth lay at her feet, and called her Indamora. Her friend Miss Kitty repeated, without book, the eight best lines of the play; those, no doubt, which begin, "Trust on, and think to-morrow will repay." There are not eight finer lines in Lucretius.
FN 156 A curious engraving of the India House of the seventeenth century will be found in the Gentleman's Magazine for December 1784.
FN 157 See Davenant's Letter to Mulgrave.
FN 158 Answer to Two Letters concerning the East India Company, 1676.
FN 159 Anderson's Dictionary; G. White's Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691; Treatise on the East India Trade by Philopatris, 1681.
FN 160 Reasons for constituting a New East India Company in London, 1681; Some Remarks upon the Present State of the East India Company's Affairs, 1690.
FN 161 Evelyn, March 16. 1683.
FN 162 See the State Trials.
FN 163 Pepys's Diary, April 2. and May 10 1669.
FN 164 Tench's Modest and Just Apology for the East India Company, 1690.
FN 165 Some Remarks on the Present State of the East India Company's Affairs, 1690; Hamilton's New Account of the East Indies.
FN 166 White's Account of the East India Trade, 1691; Pierce Butler's Tale, 1691.
FN 167 White's Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691;Hamilton's New Account of the East Indies; Sir John Wyborne to Pepys from Bombay, Jan. 7. 1688.
FN 168 London Gazette, Feb. 16/26 1684.
FN 169 Hamilton's New Account of the East Indies.
FN 170 Papillon was of course reproached with his inconsistency.
Among the pamphlets of that time is one entitled "A Treatise concerning the East India Trade, wrote at the instance of Thomas Papillon, Esquire, and in his House, and printed in the year 1680, and now reprinted for the better Satisfaction of himself and others."FN 171 Commons' Journals, June 8. 1689.
FN 172 Among the pamphlets in which Child is most fiercely attacked are Some Remarks on the Present State of the East India Company's Affairs, 1690; fierce Butler's Tale, 1691; and White's Account of the Trade to the East Indies, 1691.
FN 173 Discourse concerning the East India Trade, showing it to be unprofitable to the Kingdom, by Mr. Cary; pierce Butler's Tale, representing the State of the Wool Case, or the East India Case truly stated, 1691. Several petitions to the same effect will be found in the Journals of the House of Commons.
FN 174 Reasons against establishing an East India Company with a joint Stock, exclusive to all others, 1691.
FN 175 The engagement was printed, and has been several times reprinted. As to Skinners' Hall, see Seymour's History of London, 1734FN 176 London Gazette, May 11. 1691; White's Account of the East India Trade.
FN 177 Commons' Journals, Oct. 28. 1691.
FN 178 Ibid. Oct. 29. 1691.
FN 179 Rowe, in the Biter, which was damned, and deserved to be so, introduced an old gentleman haranguing his daughter thus:
"Thou hast been bred up like a virtuous and a sober maiden; and wouldest thou take the part of a profane wretch who sold his stock out of the Old East India Company?"FN 180 Hop to the States General, Oct 30/Nov. 9 1691.
FN 181 Hop mentions the length and warmth of the debates; Nov.
12/22. 1691. See the Commons' Journals, Dec. 17. and 18.
FN 182 Commons' Journals, Feb 4. and 6. 1691.
FN 183 Ibid. Feb. 11. 1691.
FN 184 The history of this bill is to be collected from the bill itself, which is among the Archives of the Upper House, from the Journals of the two Houses during November and December 1690, and January 1691; particularly from the Commons' Journals of December 11. and January 13. and 25., and the Lords' Journals of January 20. and 28. See also Grey's Debates.
FN 185 The letter, dated December 1. 1691, is in the Life of James, ii. 477.
