Part I

The Querist

by George Berkeley

PART I, THE QUERIST by George Berkeley





Query 1.

Whether there ever was, is, or will be, an industrious nation poor,
or an idle rich?

2. Qu. Whether a people can be called poor, where the common sort
are well fed, clothed, and lodged?

3. Qu. Whether the drift and aim of every wise State should not be,
to encourage industry in its members? And whether those who employ
neither heads nor hands for the common benefit deserve not to be
expelled like drones out of a well-governed State?

4. Qu. Whether the four elements, and man's labour therein, be not
the true source of wealth?

5. Qu. Whether money be not only so far useful, as it stirreth up
industry, enabling men mutually to participate the fruits of each
other's labour?

6. Qu. Whether any other means, equally conducing to excite and
circulate the industry of mankind, may not be as useful as money.

7. Qu. Whether the real end and aim of men be not power? And whether
he who could have everything else at his wish or will would value
money?

8. Qu. Whether the public aim in every well-govern'd State be not
that each member, according to his just pretensions and industry,
should have power?

9. Qu. Whether power be not referred to action; and whether action
doth not follow appetite or will?

10. Qu. Whether fashion doth not create appetites; and whether the
prevailing will of a nation is not the fashion?

11. Qu. Whether the current of industry and commerce be not
determined by this prevailing will?

12. Qu. Whether it be not owing to custom that the fashions are
agreeable?

13. Qu. Whether it may not concern the wisdom of the legislature to
interpose in the making of fashions; and not leave an affair of so
great influence to the management of women and fops, tailors and
vintners?

14. Qu. Whether reasonable fashions are a greater restraint on
freedom than those which are unreasonable?

15. Qu. Whether a general good taste in a people would not greatly
conduce to their thriving? And whether an uneducated gentry be not
the greatest of national evils?

16. Qu. Whether customs and fashions do not supply the place of
reason in the vulgar of all ranks? Whether, therefore, it doth not
very much import that they should be wisely framed?

17. Qu. Whether the imitating those neighbours in our fashions, to
whom we bear no likeness in our circumstances, be not one cause of
distress to this nation?

18. Qu. Whether frugal fashions in the upper rank, and comfortable
living in the lower, be not the means to multiply inhabitants?

19. Qu. Whether the bulk of our Irish natives are not kept from
thriving, by that cynical content in dirt and beggary which they
possess to a degree beyond any other people in Christendom?

20. Qu. Whether the creating of wants be not the likeliest way to
produce industry in a people? And whether, if our peasants were
accustomed to eat beef and wear shoes, they would not be more
industrious?

21. Qu. Whether other things being given, as climate, soil, etc.,
the wealth be not proportioned to the industry, and this to the
circulation of credit, be the credit circulated or transferred by
what marks or tokens soever?

22. Qu. Whether, therefore, less money swiftly circulating, be not,
in effect, equivalent to more money slowly circulating? Or, whether,
if the circulation be reciprocally as the quantity of coin, the
nation can be a loser?

23. Qu. Whether money is to be considered as having an intrinsic
value, or as being a commodity, a standard, a measure, or a pledge,
as is variously suggested by writers? And whether the true idea of
money, as such, be not altogether that of a ticket or counter?

24. Qu. Whether the value or price of things be not a compounded
proportion, directly as the demand, and reciprocally as the plenty?

25. Qu. Whether the terms crown, livre, pound sterling, etc., are
not to be considered as exponents or denominations of such
proportion? And whether gold, silver, and paper are not tickets or
counters for reckoning, recording, and transferring thereof?

26. Qu. Whether the denominations being retained, although the
bullion were gone, things might not nevertheless be rated, bought,
and sold, industry promoted, and a circulation of commerce
maintained?

27. Qu. Whether an equal raising of all sorts of gold, silver, and
copper coin can have any effect in bringing money into the kingdom?
And whether altering the proportions between the kingdom several
sorts can have any other effect but multiplying one kind and
lessening another, without any increase of the sum total?

28. Qu. Whether arbitrary changing the denomination of coin be not a
public cheat?

29. Qu. Whether, nevertheless, the damage would be very
considerable, if by degrees our money were brought back to the
English value there to rest for ever?

30. Qu. Whether the English crown did not formerly pass with us for
six shillings? And what inconvenience ensued to the public upon its
reduction to the present value, and whether what hath been may not
be?

31. Qu. What makes a wealthy people? Whether mines of gold and
silver are capable of doing this? And whether the negroes, amidst
the gold sands of Afric, are not poor and destitute?

32. Qu. Whether there be any vertue in gold or silver, other than as
they set people at work, or create industry?

33. Qu. Whether it be not the opinion or will of the people,
exciting them to industry, that truly enricheth a nation? And
whether this doth not principally depend on the means for counting,
transferring, and preserving power, that is, property of all kinds?

34. Qu. Whether if there was no silver or gold in the kingdom, our
trade might not, nevertheless, supply bills of exchange, sufficient
to answer the demands of absentees in England or elsewhere?

35. Qu. Whether current bank notes may not be deemed money? And
whether they are not actually the greater part of the money of this
kingdom?

36. Qu. Provided the wheels move, whether it is not the same thing,
as to the effect of the machine, be this done by the force of wind,
or water, or animals?

37. Qu. Whether power to command the industry of others be not real
wealth? And whether money be not in truth tickets or tokens for
conveying and recording such power, and whether it be of great
consequence what materials the tickets are made of?

38. Qu. Whether trade, either foreign or domestic, be in truth any
more than this commerce of industry?

39. Qu. Whether to promote, transfer, and secure this commerce, and
this property in human labour, or, in other words, this power, be
not the sole means of enriching a people, and how far this may be
done independently of gold and silver?

40. Qu. Whether it were not wrong to suppose land itself to be
wealth? And whether the industry of the people is not first to be
consider'd, as that which constitutes wealth, which makes even land
and silver to be wealth, neither of which would have, any value but
as means and motives to industry?

41. Qu. Whether in the wastes of America a man might not possess
twenty miles square of land, and yet want his dinner, or a coat to
his back?

42. Qu. Whether a fertile land, and the industry of its inhabitants,
would not prove inexhaustible funds of real wealth, be the counters
for conveying and recording thereof what you will, paper, gold, or
silver?

43. Qu. Whether a single hint be sufficient to overcome a prejudice?
And whether even obvious truths will not sometimes bear repeating?

44. Qu. Whether, if human labour be the true source of wealth, it
doth not follow that idleness should of all things be discouraged in
a wise State?

45. Qu. Whether even gold or silver, if they should lessen the
industry of its inhabitants, would not be ruinous to a country? And
whether Spain be not an instance of this?

46. Qu. Whether the opinion of men, and their industry consequent
thereupon, be not the true wealth of Holland and not the silver
supposed to be deposited in the bank at Amsterdam?

47. Qu. Whether there is in truth any such treasure lying dead? And
whether it be of great consequence to the public that it should be
real rather than notional?

48. Qu. Whether in order to understand the true nature of wealth and
commerce, it would not be right to consider a ship's crew cast upon
a desert island, and by degrees forming themselves to business and
civil life, while industry begot credit, and credit moved to
industry?

49. Qu. Whether such men would not all set themselves to work?
Whether they would not subsist by the mutual participation of each
other's industry? Whether, when one man had in his way procured more
than he could consume, he would not exchange his superfluities to
supply his wants? Whether this must not produce credit? Whether, to
facilitate these conveyances, to record and circulate this credit,
they would not soon agree on certain tallies, tokens, tickets, or
counters?

50. Qu. Whether reflection in the better sort might not soon remedy
our evils? And whether our real defect be not a wrong way of
thinking?

51. Qu. Whether it would not be an unhappy turn in our gentlemen, if
they should take more thought to create an interest to themselves in
this or that county, or borough, than to promote the real interest
of their country?

52. Qu. Whether it be not a bull to call that making an interest,
whereby a man spendeth much and gaineth nothing?

53. Qu. Whether if a man builds a house he doth not in the first
place provide a plan which governs his work? And shall the pubic act
without an end, a view, a plan?

54. Qu. Whether by how much the less particular folk think for
themselves, the public be not so much the more obliged to think for
them?

55. Qu. Whether cunning be not one thing and good sense another? and
whether a cunning tradesman doth not stand in his own light?

56. Qu. Whether small gains be not the way to great profit? And if
our tradesmen are beggars, whether they may not thank themselves for
it?

57. Qu. Whether some way might not be found for making criminals
useful in public works, instead of sending them either to America,
or to the other world?

58. Qu. Whether we may not, as well as other nations, contrive
employment for them? And whether servitude, chains, and hard labour,
for a term of years, would not be a more discouraging as well as a
more adequate punishment for felons than even death itself?

59. Qu. Whether there are not such things in Holland as bettering
houses for bringing young gentlemen to order? And whether such an
institution would be useless among us?

60. Qu. Whether it be true that the poor in Holland have no resource
but their own labour, and yet there are no beggars in their streets?

61. Qu. Whether he whose luxury consumeth foreign products, and
whose industry produceth nothing domestic to exchange for them, is
not so far forth injurious to his country?

62. Qu. Whether, consequently, the fine gentlemen, whose employment
is only to dress, drink, and play, be not a pubic nuisance?

63. Qu. Whether necessity is not to be hearkened to before
convenience, and convenience before luxury?

64. Qu. Whether to provide plentifully for the poor be not feeding
the root, the substance whereof will shoot upwards into the
branches, and cause the top to flourish?

65. Qu. Whether there be any instance of a State wherein the people,
living neatly and plentifully, did not aspire to wealth?

66. Qu. Whether nastiness and beggary do not, on the contrary,
extinguish all such ambition, making men listless, hopeless, and
slothful?

67. Qu. Whether a country inhabited by people well fed, clothed and
lodged would not become every day more populous? And whether a
numerous stock of people in such circumstances would? and how far
the product of not constitute a flourishing nation; our own country
may suffice for the compassing of this end?

68. Qu. Whether a people who had provided themselves with the
necessaries of life in good plenty would not soon extend their
industry to new arts and new branches of commerce?

69. Qu. Whether those same manufactures which England imports from
other countries may not be admitted from Ireland? And, if so,
whether lace, carpets, and tapestry, three considerable articles of
English importation, might not find encouragement in Ireland? And
whether an academy for design might not greatly conduce to the
perfecting those manufactures among us?

70. Qu. Whether France and Flanders could have drawn so much money
from England for figured silks, lace, and tapestry, if they had not
had academies for designing?

71. Qu. Whether, when a room was once prepared, and models in
plaster of Paris, the annual expense of such an academy need stand
the pubic in above two hundred pounds a year?

72. Qu. Whether our linen-manufacture would not find the benefit of
this institution? And whether there be anything that makes us fall
short of the Dutch in damasks, diapers, and printed linen, but our
ignorance in design?

73. Qu. Whether those specimens of our own manufacture, hung up in a
certain public place, do not sufficiently declare such our
ignorance? and whether for the honour of the nation they ought not
to be removed?

74. Qu. Whether those who may slight this affair as notional have
sufficiently considered the extensive use of the art of design, and
its influence in most trades and manufactures, wherein the forms of
things are often more regarded than the materials?

75. Qu. Whether there be any art sooner learned than that of making
carpets? And whether our women, with little time and pains, may not
make more beautiful carpets than those imported from Turkey? And
whether this branch of the woollen manufacture be not open to us?

76. Qu. Whether human industry can produce, from such cheap
materials, a manufacture of so great value by any other art as by
those of sculpture and painting?

77. Qu. Whether pictures and statues are not in fact so much
treasure? And whether Rome and Florence would not be poor towns
without them?

78. Qu. Whether they do not bring ready money as well as jewels?
Whether in Italy debts are not paid, and children portioned with
them, as with gold and silver?

79. Qu. Whether it would not be more prudent, to strike out and
exert ourselves in permitted branches of trade, than to fold our
hands, and repine that we are not allowed the woollen?

80. Qu. Whether it be true that two millions are yearly expended by
England in foreign lace and linen?

81. Qu. Whether immense sums are not drawn yearly into the Northern
countries, for supplying the British navy with hempen manufactures?

82. Qu. Whether there be anything more profitable than. hemp? And
whether there should not be great premiums for encouraging our
hempen trade? What advantages may not Great Britain make of a
country where land and labour are so cheap?

83. Qu. Whether Ireland alone might not raise hemp sufficient for
the British navy? And whether it would not be vain to expect this
from the British Colonies in America, where hands are so scarce, and
labour so excessively dear?

84. Qu. Whether, if our own people want will or capacity for such an
attempt, it might not be worth while for some undertaking spirits in
England to make settlements, and raise hemp in the counties of Clare
and Limerick, than which, perhaps, there is not fitter land in the
world for that purpose? And whether both nations would not find
their advantage therein?

85. Qu. Whether if all the idle hands in this kingdom were employed
on hemp and flax, we might not find sufficient vent for these
manufactures?

86. Qu. How far it may be in our own power to better our affairs,
without interfering with our neighbours?

87. Qu. Whether the prohibition of our woollen trade ought not
naturally to put us on other methods which give no jealousy?

88. Qu. Whether paper be not a valuable article of commerce? And
whether it be not true that one single bookseller in London yearly
expended above four thousand pounds in that foreign commodity?

89. Qu. How it comes to pass that the Venetians and Genoese, who
wear so much less linen, and so much worse than we do, should yet
make very good paper, and in great quantity, while we make very
little?

90. Qu. How long it will be before my countrymen find out that it is
worth while to spend a penny in order to get a groat?

91. Qu. If all the land were tilled that is fit for tillage, and all
that sowed with hemp and flax that is fit for raising them, whether
we should have much sheep-walk beyond what was sufficient to supply
the necessities of the kingdom?

92. Qu. Whether other countries have not flourished without the
woollen trade?

93. Qu. Whether it be not a sure sign or effect of a country's
inhabitants? And, thriving, to see it well cultivated and full of;
if so, whether a great quantity of sheep-walk be not ruinous to a
country, rendering it waste and thinly inhabited?

94. Qu. Whether the employing so much of our land under sheep be not
in fact an Irish blunder?

95. Qu. Whether our hankering after our woollen trade be not the
true and only reason which hath created a jealousy in England
towards Ireland? And whether anything can hurt us more than such
jealousy?

96. Qu. Whether it be not the true interest of both nations to
become one people? And whether either be sufficiently apprised of
this?

97. Qu. Whether the upper part of this people are not truly English,
by blood, language, religion, manners, inclination, and interest?

98. Qu. Whether we are not as much Englishmen as the children of old
Romans, born in Britain, were still Romans?

99. Qu. Whether it be not our true interest not to interfere with
them; and, in every other case, whether it be not their true
interest to befriend us?

100. Qu. Whether a mint in Ireland might not be of great convenience
to the kingdom; and whether it could be attended with any possible
inconvenience to Great Britain? And whether there were not mints in
Naples and Sicily, when those kingdoms were provinces to Spain or
the house of Austria?

101. Qu. Whether anything can be more ridiculous than for the north
of Ireland to be jealous of a linen manufacturer in the south?

102. Qu. Whether the county of Tipperary be not much better land
than the county of Armagh; and yet whether the latter is not much
better improved and inhabited than the former?

103. Qu. Whether every landlord in the kingdom doth not know the
cause of this? And yet how few are the better for such their
knowledge?

104. Qu. Whether large farms under few hands, or small ones under
many, are likely to be made most of? And whether flax and tillage do
not naturally multiply hands, and divide land into small holdings,
and well-improved?

105. Qu. Whether, as our exports are lessened, we ought not to
lessen our imports? And whether these will not be lessened as our
demands, and these as our wants, and these as our customs or
fashions? Of how great consequence therefore are fashions to the
public?

106. Qu. Whether it would not be more reasonable to mend our state
than to complain of it; and how far this may be in our own power?

107. Qu. What the nation gains by those who live in Ireland upon the
produce of foreign Countries?

108. Qu. How far the vanity of our ladies in dressing, and of our
gentlemen in drinking, contributes to the general misery of the
people?

109. Qu. Whether nations, as wise and opulent as ours, have not made
sumptuary laws; and what hinders us from doing the same?

110. Qu. Whether those who drink foreign liquors, and deck
themselves and their families with foreign ornaments, are not so far
forth to be reckoned absentees?

111. Qu. Whether, as our trade is limited, we ought not to limit our
expenses; and whether this be not the natural and obvious remedy?

112. Qu. Whether the dirt, and famine, and nakedness of the bulk of
our people might not be remedied, even although we had no foreign
trade? And whether this should not be our first care; and whether,
if this were once provided for, the conveniences of the rich would
not soon follow?

113. Qu. Whether comfortable living doth not produce wants, and
wants industry, and industry wealth?

114. Qu. Whether there is not a great difference between Holland and
Ireland? And whether foreign commerce, without which the one could
not subsist, be so necessary for the other?

115. Qu. Might we not put a hand to the plough, or the spade,
although we had no foreign commerce?

116. Qu. Whether the exigencies of nature are not to be answered by
industry on our own soil? And how far the conveniences and comforts
of life may be procured by a domestic commerce between the several
parts of this kingdom?

117. Qu. Whether the women may not sew, spin, weave, embroider
sufficiently for the embellishment of their persons, and even enough
to raise envy in each other, without being beholden to foreign
countries?

118. Qu. Suppose the bulk of our inhabitants had shoes to their
feet, clothes to their backs, and beef in their bellies, might not
such a state be eligible for the public, even though the squires
were condemned to drink ale and cider?

119. Qu. Whether, if drunkenness be a necessary evil, men may not as
well drink the growth of their own country?

120. Qu. Whether a nation within itself might not have real wealth,
sufficient to give its inhabitants power and distinction, without
the help of gold and silver?

121. Qu. Whether, if the arts of sculpture and painting were
encouraged among us, we might not furnish our houses in a much
nobler manner with our own manufactures?

122. Qu. Whether we have not, or may not have, all the necessary
materials for building at home?

123. Qu. Whether tiles and plaster may not supply the place of
Norway fir for flooring and wainscot?

124. Qu. Whether plaster be not warmer, as well as more secure, than
deal? And whether a modern fashionable house, lined with fir, daubed
over with oil and paint, be not like a fire-ship, ready to be
lighted up by all accidents?

125. Qu. Whether larger houses, better built and furnished, a
greater train of servants, the difference with regard to equipage
and table between finer and coarser, more and less elegant, may not
be sufficient to feed a reasonable share of vanity, or support all
proper distinctions? And whether all these may not be procured by
domestic industry out of the four elements, without ransacking the
four quarters of the globe?

126. Qu. Whether anything is a nobler ornament, in the eye of the
world, than an Italian palace, that is, stone and mortar skilfully
put together, and adorned with sculpture and painting; and whether
this may not be compassed without foreign trade?

127. Qu. Whether an expense in gardens and plantations would not be
an elegant distinction for the rich, a domestic magnificence
employing many hands within, and drawing nothing from abroad?

128. Qu. Whether the apology which is made for foreign luxury in
England, to wit, that they could not carry on their trade without
imports as well as exports, will hold in Ireland?

129. Qu. Whether one may not be allowed to conceive and suppose a
society or nation of human creatures, clad in woollen cloths and
stuffs, eating good bread, beef and mutton, poultry and fish, in
great plenty, drinking ale, mead, and cider, inhabiting decent
houses built of brick and marble, taking their pleasure in fair
parks and gardens, depending on no foreign imports either for food
or raiment? And whether such people ought much to be pitied?

130. Qu. Whether Ireland be not as well qualified for such a state
as any nation under the sun?

131. Qu. Whether in such a state the inhabitants may not contrive to
pass the twenty-four hours with tolerable ease and cheerfulness? And
whether any people upon earth can do more?

132. Qu. Whether they may not eat, drink, play, dress, visit, sleep
in good beds, sit by good fires, build, plant, raise a name, make
estates, and spend them?

133. Qu. Whether, upon the whole, a domestic trade may not suffice
in such a country as Ireland, to nourish and clothe its inhabitants,
and provide them with the reasonable conveniences and even comforts
of life?

134. Qu. Whether a general habit of living well would not produce
numbers and industry' and whether, considering the tendency of human
kind, the consequence thereof would not be foreign trade and riches,
how unnecessary soever?

135. Qu. Whether, nevertheless, it be a crime to inquire how far we
may do without foreign trade, and what would follow on such a
supposition?

136. Qu. Whether the number and welfare of the subjects be not the
true strength of the crown?

137. Qu. Whether in all public institutions there should not be an
end proposed, which is to be the rule and limit of the means?
Whether this end should not be the well-being of the whole? And
whether, in order to this, the first step should not be to clothe
and feed our people?

138. Qu. Whether there be upon earth any Christian or civilized
people so beggarly, wretched, and destitute as the common Irish?

139. Qu. Whether, nevertheless, there is any other people whose
wants may be more easily supplied from home?

140. Qu. Whether, if there was a wall of brass a thousand cubits
high round this kingdom, our natives might not nevertheless live
cleanly and comfortably, till the land, and reap the fruits of it?

141. Qu. What should hinder us from exerting ourselves, using our
hands and brains, doing something or other, man, woman, and child,
like the other inhabitants of God's earth?

142. Qu. Be the restraining our trade well or ill advised in our
neighbours, with respect to their own interest, yet whether it be
not plainly ours to accommodate ourselves to it?

143. Qu. Whether it be not vain to think of persuading other people
to see their interest, while we continue blind to our own?

144. Qu. Whether there be any other nation possess'd of so much good
land, and so many able hands to work it, which yet is beholden for
bread to foreign countries?

145. Qu. Whether it be true that we import corn to the value of two
hundred thousand pounds in some years?

146. Qu. Whether we are not undone by fashions made for other
people? And whether it be not madness in a poor nation to imitate a
rich one?

147. Qu. Whether a woman of fashion ought not to be declared a
public enemy?

148. Qu. Whether it be not certain that from the single town of Cork
were exported, in one year, no less than one hundred and seven
thousand one hundred and sixty-one barrels of beef; seven thousand
three hundred and seventy-nine barrels of pork; thirteen thousand
four hundred and sixty-one casks, and eighty-five thousand seven
hundred and twenty-seven firkins of butter? And what hands were
employed in this manufacture?

149. Qu. Whether a foreigner could imagine that one half of the
people were starving, in a country which sent out such plenty of
provisions?

150. Qu. Whether an Irish lady, set out with French silks and
Flanders lace, may not be said to consume more beef and butter than
a hundred of our labouring peasants?

151. Qu. Whether nine-tenths of our foreign trade be not carried on
singly to support the article of vanity?

152. Qu. Whether it can be hoped that private persons will not
indulge this folly, unless restrained by the public?

153. Qu. How vanity is maintained in other countries? Whether in
Hungary, for instance, a proud nobility are not subsisted with small
imports from abroad?

154. Qu. Whether there be a prouder people upon earth than the noble
Venetians, although they all wear plain black clothes?

155. Qu. Whether a people are to be pitied that will not sacrifice
their little particular vanities to the public. good? And yet,
whether each part would not except their own foible from this public
sacrifice, the squire his bottle, the lady her lace?

156. Qu. Whether claret be not often drank rather for vanity than
for health, or pleasure?

157. Qu. Whether it be true that men of nice palates have been
imposed on, by elder wine for French claret, and by mead for palm
sack?

158. Qu. Do not Englishmen abroad purchase beer and cider at ten
times the price of wine?

159. Qu. How many gentlemen are there in England of a thousand
pounds per annum who never drink wine in their own houses? Whether
the same may be said of any in Ireland who have even? one hundred
pounds per annum.

160. Qu. What reasons have our neighbours in England for
discouraging French wines which may not hold with respect to us
also?

161. Qu. How much of the necessary sustenance of our people is
yearly exported for brandy?

162. Qu. Whether, if people must poison themselves, they had not
better do it with their own growth?

163. Qu. If we imported neither claret from France, nor fir from
Norway, what the nation would save by it?

164. Qu. When the root yieldeth insufficient nourishment, whether
men do not top the tree to make the lower branches thrive?

165. Qu. Whether, if our ladies drank sage or balm tea out of Irish
ware, it would be an insupportable national calamity?

166. Qu. Whether it be really true that such wine is best as most
encourages drinking, i.e., that must be given in the largest dose to
produce its effect? And whether this holds with regard to any other
medicine?

167. Qu. Whether that trade should not be accounted most pernicious
wherein the balance is most against us? And whether this be not the
trade with France?

168. Qu. Whether it be not even madness to encourage trade with a
nation that takes nothing of our manufacture?

169. Qu. Whether Ireland can hope to thrive if the major part of her
patriots shall be found in the French interest?

170. Qu. Why, if a bribe by the palate or the purse be in effect the
same thing, they should not be alike infamous?

171. Qu. Whether the vanity and luxury of a few ought to stand in
competition with the interest of a nation?

172. Qu. Whether national wants ought not to be the rule of trade?
And whether the most pressing wants of. the majority ought not to be
first consider'd?

173. Qu. Whether it is possible the country should be well improved,
while our beef is exported, and our labourers live upon potatoes?

174. Qu. If it be resolved that we cannot do without foreign trade,
whether, at least, it may not be worth while to consider what
branches thereof deserve to be entertained, and how far we may be
able to carry it on under our present limitations?

175. Qu. What foreign imports may be necessary for clothing and
feeding the families of persons not worth above one hundred pounds a
year? And how many wealthier there are in the kingdom, and what
proportion they bear to the other inhabitants?

176. Qu. Whether trade be not then on a right foot, when foreign
commodities are imported in exchange only for domestic
superfluities?

177. Qu. Whether the quantities of beef, butter, wool, and leather,
exported from this island, can be reckoned the superfluities of a
country, where there are so many natives naked and famished?

178. Qu. Whether it would not be wise so to order our trade as to
export manufactures rather than provisions, and of those such as
employ most hands?

179. Qu. Whether she would not be a very vile matron, and justly
thought either mad or foolish, that should give away the necessaries
of life from her naked and famished children, in exchange for pearls
to stick in her hair, and sweetmeats to please her own palate?

180. Qu. Whether a nation might not be consider'd as a family?

181. Qu. Whether other methods may not be found for supplying the
funds, besides the custom on things imported?

182. Qu. Whether any art or manufacture be so difficult as the
making of good laws?

183. Qu. Whether our peers and gentlemen are born legislators? Or,
whether that faculty be acquired by study and reflection?

184. Qu. Whether to comprehend the real interest of a people, and
the means to procure it, doth not imply some fund of knowledge,
historical, moral, and political, with a faculty of reason improved
by learning?

185. Qu. Whether every enemy to learning be not a Goth? And whether
every such Goth among us be not an enemy to the country?

186. Qu. Whether, therefore, it would not be an omen of ill presage,
a dreadful phenomenon in the land, if our great men should take it
in their heads to deride learning and education?

187. Qu. Whether, on the contrary, it should not seem worth while to
erect a mart of literature in this kingdom, under wiser regulations
and better discipline than in any other part of Europe? And whether
this would not be an infallible means of drawing men and money into
the kingdom?

188. Qu. Whether the governed be not too numerous for the governing
part of our college? And whether it might not be expedient to
convert thirty natives-places into twenty fellowships?

189. Qu. Whether, if we had two colleges, there might not spring a
useful emulation between them? And whether it might not be contrived
so to divide the fellows, scholars, and revenues between both, as
that no member should be a loser thereby?

190. Qu. Whether ten thousand pounds well laid out might not build a
decent college, fit to contain two hundred persons; and whether the
purchase money of the chambers would not go a good way towards
defraying the expense?

191. Qu. Where this college should be situated?

192. Qu. Whether it is possible a State should not thrive, whereof
the lower part were industrious, and the upper wise?

193. Qu. Whether the collected wisdom of ages and nations be not
found in books, improved and applied by study?

194. Qu. Whether it was not an Irish professor who first opened the
public schools at Oxford? Whether this island hath not been
anciently famous for learning? And whether at this day it hath any
better chance for being considerable?

195. Qu. Whether we may not with better grace sit down and complain,
when we have done all that lies in our power to help ourselves?

196. Qu. Whether the gentleman of estate hath a right to be idle;
and whether he ought not to be the great promoter and director of
industry among his tenants and neighbours?

197. Qu. Whether the real foundation for wealth must not be laid in
the numbers, the frugality, and the industry of the people? And
whether all attempts to enrich a nation by other means, as raising
the coin, stock-jobbing, and such arts are not vain?

198. Qu. Whether a door ought not to be shut against all other
methods of growing rich, save only by industry and. merit? And
whether wealth got otherwise would not be ruinous to the public?

199. Qu. Whether the abuse of banks and paper-money is a just
objection against the use thereof? And whether such abuse might not
easily be prevented?

200. Qu. Whether national banks are not found useful in Venice,
Holland, and Hamburg? And whether it is not possible to contrive one
that may be useful also in Ireland?

201. Qu. Whether any nation ever was in greater want of such an
expedient than Ireland?

202. Qu. Whether the banks of Venice and Amsterdam are not in the
hands of the public?

203. Qu. Whether it may not be worth while to inform ourselves in
the nature of those banks? And what reason can be assigned why
Ireland should not reap the benefit of such public banks as well as
other countries?

204. Qu. Whether a bank of national credit, supported by public
funds and secured by Parliament, be a chimera or impossible thing?
And if not, what would follow from the supposal of such a bank?

205. Qu. Whether the currency of a credit so well secured would not
be of great advantage to our trade and manufactures?

206. Qu. Whether the notes of such public bank would not have a more
general circulation than those of private banks, as being less
subject to frauds and hazards?

207. Qu. Whether it be not agreed that paper hath in many respects
the advantage above coin, as being of more dispatch in payments,
more easily transferred, preserved, and recovered when lost?

208. Qu. Whether, besides these advantages, there be not an evident
necessity for circulating credit by paper, from the defect of coin
in this kingdom?

209. Qu. Whether the public may not as well save the interest which
it now pays?

210. Qu. What would happen if two of our banks should break at once?
And whether it be wise to neglect providing against an event which
experience hath shewn us not to be impossible?

211. Qu. Whether such an accident would not particularly affect the
bankers? And therefore whether a national bank would not be a
security even to private bankers?

212. Qu. Whether we may not easily avoid the inconveniencies
attending the paper-money of New England, which were incurred by
their issuing too great a quantity of notes, by their having no
silver in bank to exchange for notes, by their not insisting upon
repayment of the loans at the time prefixed, and especially by their
want of manufactures to answer their imports from Europe?

213. Qu. Whether a combination of bankers might not do wonders, and
whether bankers know their own strength?

214. Qu. Whether a bank in private hands might not even overturn a
government? and whether this was not the case of the Bank of St.
George in Genoa? [Footnote: See the Vindication and Advancement of
our national Constitution and Credit. Printed in London 1710.]

215. Qu. Whether we may not easily prevent the ill effects of such a
bank as Mr Law proposed for Scotland, which was faulty in not
limiting the quantum of bills, and permitting all persons to take
out what bills they pleased, upon the mortgage of lands, whence by a
glut of paper, the prices of things must rise? Whence also the
fortunes of men must increase in denomination, though not in value;
whence pride, idleness, and beggary?

216. Qu. Whether such banks as those of England and Scotland might
not be attended with great inconveniences, as lodging too much power
in the hands of private men, and giving handle for monopolies,
stock-jobbing, and destructive schemes?

217. Qu. Whether the national bank, projected by an anonymous writer
in the latter end of Queen Anne's reign, might not on the other hand
be attended with as great inconveniencies by lodging too much power
in the Government?

218. Qu. Whether the bank projected by Murray, though it partake, in
many useful particulars, with that of Amsterdam, yet, as it placeth
too great power in the hands of a private society, might not be
dangerous to the public?

219. Qu. Whether it be rightly remarked by some that, as banking
brings no treasure into the kingdom like trade, private wealth must
sink as the bank riseth? And whether whatever causeth industry to
flourish and circulate may not be said to increase our treasure?

220. Qu. Whether the ruinous effects of Mississippi, South Sea, and
such schemes were not owing to an abuse of paper money or credit, in
making it a means for idleness and gaming, instead of a motive and
help to industry?

221. Qu. Whether those effects could have happened had there been no
stock-jobbing? And whether stock-jobbing could at first have been
set on foot, without an imaginary foundation of some improvement to
the stock by trade? Whether, therefore, when there are no such
prospects, or cheats, or private schemes proposed, the same effects
can be justly feared?

222. Qu. Whether by a national bank, be not properly understood a
bank, not only established by public authority as the Bank of
England, but a bank in the hands of the public, wherein there are no
shares: whereof the public alone is proprietor, and reaps all the
benefit?

223. Qu. Whether, having considered the conveniencies of banking and
paper-credit in some countries, and the inconveniencies thereof in
others, we may not contrive to adopt the former, and avoid the
latter?

224. Qu. Whether great evils, to which other schemes are liable, may
not be prevented, by excluding the managers of the bank from a share
in the legislature?

225. Qu. Whether the rise of the bank of Amsterdam was not purely
casual, for the security and dispatch of payments? And whether the
good effects thereof, in supplying the place of coin, and promoting
a ready circulation of industry and commerce may not be a lesson to
us, to do that by design which others fell upon by chance?

226. Qu. Whether the bank proposed to be established in Ireland,
under the notion of a national bank, by the voluntary subscription
of three hundred thousand pounds, to pay off the national debt, the
interest of which sum to be paid the subscribers, subject to certain
terms of redemption, be not in reality a private bank, as those of
England and Scotland, which are national only in name, being in the
hands of particular persons, and making dividends on the money paid
in by subscribers? [Footnote: See a Proposal for the Relief of
Ireland, &c. Printed in Dublin A. D. 1734]

227. Qu. Whether plenty of small cash be not absolutely necessary
for keeping up a circulation among the people; that is, whether
copper be not more necessary than gold?

228. Qu. Whether it is not worth while to reflect on the expedients
made use of by other nations, paper-money, bank-notes, public funds,
and credit in all its shapes, to examine what hath been done and
devised to add to our own animadversions, and upon the whole offer
such hints as seem not unworthy the attention of the public?

229. Qu. Whether that, which increaseth the stock of a nation be not
a means of increasing its trade? And whether that which increaseth
the current credit of a nation may not be said to increase its
stock?

230. Qu. Whether it may not be expedient to appoint certain funds or
stock for a national bank, under direction of certain persons,
one-third whereof to be named by the Government, and one-third by
each House of Parliament?

231. Qu. Whether the directors should not be excluded from sitting
in either House, and whether they should not be subject to the audit
and visitation of a standing committee of both Houses?

232. Qu. Whether such committee of inspectors should not be changed
every two years, one-half going out, and another coming in by
ballot?

233. Qu. Whether the notes ought not to be issued in lots, to be let
at interest on mortgaged lands, the whole number of lots to be
divided among the four provinces, rateably to the number of hearths
in each?

234. Qu. Whether it may not be expedient to appoint four
counting-houses, one in each province, for converting notes into
specie?

235. Qu. Whether a limit should not be fixed, which no person might
exceed, in taking out notes?

236. Qu. Whether, the better to answer domestic circulation, it may
not be right to issue notes as low as twenty shillings?

237. Qu. Whether all the bills should be issued at once, or rather
by degrees, that so men may be gradually accustomed and reconciled
to the bank?

238. Qu. Whether the keeping of the cash, and the direction of the
bank, ought not to be in different hands, and both under public
control?

239. Qu. Whether the same rule should not alway be observed, of
lending out money or notes, only to half the value of the mortgaged
land? and whether this value should not alway be rated at the same
number of years' purchase as at first?

240. Qu. Whether care should not be taken to prevent an undue rise
of the value of land?

241. Qu. Whether the increase of industry and people will not of
course raise the value of land? And whether this rise may not be
sufficient?

242. Qu. Whether land may not be apt to rise on the issuing too
great plenty of notes?

243. Qu. Whether this may not be prevented by the gradual and slow
issuing of notes, and by frequent sales of lands?

244. Qu. Whether interest doth not measure the true value of land;
for instance, where money is at five per cent, whether land is not
worth twenty years' purchase?

245. Qu. Whether too small a proportion of money would not hurt the
landed man, and too great a proportion the monied man? And whether
the quantum of notes ought not to bear proportion to the pubic
demand? And whether trial must not shew what this demand will be?

246. Qu. Whether the exceeding this measure might not produce divers
bad effects, one whereof would be the loss of our silver?

247. Qu. Whether interest paid into the bank ought not to go on
augmenting its stock?

248. Qu. Whether it would or would not be right to appoint that the
said interest be paid in notes only?

249. Qu. Whether the notes of this national bank should not be
received in all payments into the exchequer?

250. Qu. Whether on supposition that the specie should fail, the
credit would not, nevertheless, still pass, being admitted in all
payments of the public revenue?

251. Qu. Whether the pubic can become bankrupt so long as the notes
are issued on good security?

252. Qu. Whether mismanagement, prodigal living, hazards by trade,
which often affect private banks, are equally to be apprehended in a
pubic one?

253. Qu. Whether as credit became current, and this raised the value
of land, the security must not of course rise?

254. Qu. Whether, as our current domestic credit grew, industry
would not grow likewise; and if industry, our manufactures; and if
these, our foreign credit?

255. Qu. Whether by degrees, as business and people multiplied, more
bills may not be issued, without augmenting the capital stock,
provided still, that they are issued on good security; which further
issuing of new bills, not to be without consent of Parliament?

256. Qu. Whether such bank would not be secure? Whether the profits
accruing to the pubic would not be very considerable? And whether
industry in private persons would not be supplied, and a general
circulation encouraged?

257. Qu. Whether such bank should, or should not, be allowed to
issue notes for money deposited therein? And, if not, whether the
bankers would have cause to complain?

258. Qu. Whether, if the public thrives, all particular persons must
not feel the benefit thereof, even the bankers themselves?

259. Qu. Whether, beside the Bank-Company, there are not in England
many private wealthy bankers, and whether they were more before the
erecting of that company?

260. Qu. Whether as industry increased, our manufactures would not
flourish; and as these flourished, whether better returns would not
be made from estates to their landlords, both within and without the
kingdom?

261. Qu. Whether we have not paper-money circulating among, whether,
therefore, we might not as well have that us already which is
secured by the public, and whereof the pubic reaps the benefit?

262. Qu. Whether there are not two general ways of circulating
money, to wit, play and traffic? and whether stock-jobbing is not to
be ranked under the former?

263. Qu. Whether there are more than two things that might draw
silver out of the bank, when its credit was once well established,
to wit, foreign demands and small payments at home?

264. Qu. Whether, if our trade with France were checked, the former
of these causes could be supposed to operate at all? and whether the
latter could operate to any great degree?

265. Qu. Whether the sure way to supply people with tools and
materials, and to set them at work, be not a free circulation of
money, whether silver or paper?

266. Qu. Whether in New England all trade and business is not as
much at a stand, upon a scarcity of paper-money, as with us from the
want of specie?

267. Qu. Whether paper-money or notes may not be issued from the
national bank, on the security of hemp, of linen, or other
manufactures whereby the poor might be supported in their industry?

268. Qu. Whether it be certain that the quantity of silver in the
bank of Amsterdam be greater now than at first; but whether it be
not certain that there is a greater circulation of industry and
extent of trade, more people, ships, houses, and commodities of all
sorts, more power by sea and land?

269. Qu. Whether money, lying dead in the bank of Amsterdam, would
not be as useless as in the mine?

270. Qu. Whether our visible security in land could be doubted? And
whether there be anything like this in the bank of Amsterdam?

271. Qu. Whether it be just to apprehend danger from trusting a
national bank with power to extend its credit, to circulate notes
which it shall be felony to counterfeit, to receive goods on loans,
to purchase lands, to sell also or alienate them, and to deal in
bills of exchange; when these powers are no other than have been
trusted for many years with the bank of England, although in truth
but a private bank?

272. Qu. Whether the objection from monopolies and an overgrowth of
power, which are made against private banks, can possibly hold
against a national one?

273. Qu. Whether banks raised by private subscription would be as
advantageous to the public as to the subscribers? and whether risks
and frauds might not be more justly apprehended from them?

274. Qu. Whether the evil effects which of late years have attended
paper-money and credit in Europe did not spring from subscriptions,
shares, dividends, and stock-jobbing?

275. Qu. Whether the great evils attending paper-money in the
British Plantations of America have not sprung from the overrating
their lands, and issuing paper without discretion, and from the
legislators breaking their own rules in favour of themselves, thus
sacrificing the public to their private benefit? And whether a
little sense and honesty might not easily prevent all such
inconveniences?

276. Qu. Whether an argument from the abuse of things, against the
use of them, be conclusive?

277. Qu. Whether he who is bred to a part be fitted to judge of the
whole?

278. Qu. Whether interest be not apt to bias judgment? and whether
traders only are to be consulted about trade, or bankers about
money?

279. Qu. Whether the subject of Freethinking in religion be not
exhausted? And whether it be not high time for our freethinkers to
turn their thoughts to the improvement of their country?

280. Qu. Whether any man hath a right to judge, that will not be at
the pains to distinguish?

281. Qu. Whether there be not a wide difference between the profits
going to augment the national stock, and being divided among private
sharers? And whether, in the former case, there can possibly be any
gaming or stock-jobbing?

282. Qu. Whether it must not be ruinous for a nation to sit down to
game, be it with silver or with paper?

283. Qu. Whether, therefore, the circulating paper, in the late
ruinous schemes of France and England, was the true evil, and not
rather the circulating thereof without industry? And whether the
bank of Amsterdam, where industry had been for so many years
subsisted and circulated by transfers on paper, doth not clearly
decide this point?

284. Qu. Whether there are not to be seen in America fair towns,
wherein the people are well lodged, fed, and clothed, without a
beggar in their streets, although there be not one grain of gold or
silver current among them?

285. Qu. Whether these people do not exercise all arts and trades,
build ships and navigate them to all parts of the world, purchase
lands, till and reap the fruits of them, buy and sell, educate and
provide for their children? Whether they do not even indulge
themselves in foreign vanities?

286. Qu. Whether, whatever inconveniences those people may have
incurred from not observing either rules or bounds in their paper
money, yet it be not certain that they are in a more flourishing
condition, have larger and better built towns, more plenty, more
industry, more arts and civility, and a more extensive commerce,
than when they had gold and silver current among them?

287. Qu. Whether a view of the ruinous effects of absurd schemes and
credit mismanaged, so as to produce gaming and madness instead of
industry, can be any just objection against a national bank
calculated purely to promote industry?

288. Qu. Whether a scheme for the welfare of this nation should not
take in the whole inhabitants? And whether it be not a vain attempt,
to project the flourishing of our Protestant gentry, exclusive of
the bulk of the natives?

289. Qu. Whether, therefore, it doth not greatly concern the State,
that our Irish natives should be converted, and the whole nation
united in the same religion, the same allegiance, and the same
interest? and how this may most probably be effected?

290. Qu. Whether an oath, testifying allegiance to the king, and
disclaiming the pope's authority in temporals, may not be justly
required of the Roman Catholics? And whether, in common prudence or
policy, any priest should be tolerated who refuseth to take it?

291. Qu. Whether there have not been Popish recusants? and, if so,
whether it would be right to object against the foregoing oath, that
all would take it, and none think themselves bound by it?

292. Qu. Whether those of the Church of Rome, in converting the
Moors of Spain or the Protestants of France, have not set us an
example which might justify a similar treatment of themselves, if
the laws of Christianity allowed thereof?

293. Qu. Whether compelling men to a profession of faith is not the
worst thing in Popery, and, consequently, whether to copy after the
Church of Rome therein, were not to become Papists ourselves in the
worst sense?

294. Qu. Whether, nevertheless, we may not imitate the Church of
Rome, in certain places, where Jews are tolerated, by obliging our
Irish Papists, at stated times, to hear Protestant sermons? and
whether this would not make missionaries in the Irish tongue useful?

295. Qu. Whether the mere act of hearing, without making any
profession of faith, or joining in any part of worship, be a
religious act; and, consequently, whether their being obliged to
hear, may not consist with the toleration of Roman Catholics?

296. Qu. Whether, if penal laws should be thought oppressive, we may
not at least be allowed to give premiums? And whether it would be
wrong, if the public encouraged Popish families to become hearers,
by paying their hearth-money for them?

297. Qu. Whether in granting toleration, we ought not to distinguish
between doctrines purely religious, and such as affect the State?

298. Qu. Whether the case be not very different in regard to a man
who only eats fish on Fridays, says his prayers in Latin, or
believes transubstantiation, and one who professeth in temporals a
subjection to foreign powers, who holdeth himself absolved from all
obedience to his natural prince and the laws of his country? who is
even persuaded, it may be meritorious to destroy the powers that
are?

299. Qu. Whether, therefore, a distinction should not be made
between mere Papists and recusants? And whether the latter can
expect the same protection from the Government as the former?

300. Qu. Whether our Papists in this kingdom can complain, if they
are allowed to be as much Papists as the subjects of France or of
the Empire?

301. Qu. Whether there is any such thing as a body of inhabitants,
in any Roman Catholic country under the sun, that profess an
absolute submission to the pope's orders in matters of an
indifferent nature, or that in such points do not think it their
duty to obey the civil government?

302. Qu. Whether since the peace of Utrecht, mass was not celebrated
and the sacraments administered in divers dioceses of Sicily,
notwithstanding the Pope's interdict?

303. Qu. Whether every plea of conscience is to be regarded?
Whether, for instance, the German Anabaptists, Levellers, or Fifth
Monarchy men would be tolerated on that pretence?

304. Qu. Whether Popish children bred in charity schools, when bound
out in apprenticeship to Protestant masters, do generally continue
Protestants?

305. Qu. Whether a Sum, which would go but a little way towards
erecting hospitals for maintaining and educating the children of the
native Irish, might not go far in binding them out apprentices to
Protestant masters, for husbandry, useful trades, and the service of
families?

306. Qu. Whether if the parents are overlooked, there can be any
great hopes of success in converting the children?

307. Qu. Whether there be any instance, of a people's being
converted in a Christian sense, otherwise than by preaching to them
and instructing them in their own language?

308. Qu. Whether catechists in the Irish tongue may not easily be
procured and subsisted? And whether this would not be the most
practicable means for converting the natives?

309. Qu. Whether it be not of great advantage to the Church of Rome,
that she hath clergy suited to all ranks of men, in gradual
subordination from cardinals down to mendicants?

310. Qu. Whether her numerous poor clergy are not very useful in
missions, and of much influence with the people?

311. Qu. Whether, in defect of able missionaries, persons conversant
in low life, and speaking the Irish tongue, if well instructed in
the first principles of religion, and in the popish controversy,
though for the rest on a level with the parish clerks, or the
school-masters of charity-schools, may not be fit to mix with and
bring over our poor illiterate natives to the Established Church?
Whether it is not to be wished that some parts of our liturgy and
homilies were publicly read in the Irish language? And whether, in
these views, it may not be right to breed up some of the better sort
of children in the charity-schools, and qualify them for
missionaries, catechists, and readers?

312. Qu. Whether there be any nation of men governed by reason? And
yet, if there was not, whether this would be a good argument against
the use of reason in pubic affairs?

313. Qu. Whether, as others have supposed an Atlantis or Utopia, we
also may not suppose an Hyperborean island inhabited by reasonable
creatures?

314. Qu. Whether an indifferent person, who looks into all hands,
may not be a better judge of the game than a party who sees only his
own?

315. Qu. Whether one, whose end is to make his countrymen think, may
not gain his end, even though they should not think as he doth?

316. Qu. Whether he, who only asks, asserts? and whether any man can
fairly confute the querist?

317. Qu. Whether the interest of a part will not always be preferred
to that of the whole?