{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/wikisource_The_Querist/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/wikisource_The_Querist","id":"wikisource_The_Querist","license":"Public Domain / CC-BY-SA (see source)","rights_basis":"wikisource_site_inclusion_policy","source":"wikisource","source_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Querist","summary":null,"tags":["Headers_applying_DefaultSort_key","PD-old","Philosophy","Texts_to_be_split","Texts_without_a_source","Works_of_unknown_date","Works_with_year_from_Wikidata"],"text":"The source document of this text is not known.\n\nPlease see this document's talk page for details for verification. \"Source\" means a location at which other users can find a copy of this work. Ideally this will be a scanned copy of the original that can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and proofread. If not, it is preferably a URL; if one is not available, please explain on the talk page.\n\nIt has been suggested that this work be split into multiple pages.\nIf you'd like to help, please review the style guidelines and help pages.\n\nThe Querist containing several Queries proposed to the\nconsideration of the Public\n\nI the Lord have brought down the high tree, have exalted the low\ntree, have dried up the green tree, and have made the dry tree to\nflourish. -- Ezek. xvii, 24.\n\nAdvertisement by the Author\n\nThe Querist was first published in the year one thousand seven\nhundred and thirty-five; since which time the face of things is\nsomewhat changed. In this edition some alterations have been\nmade. The three Parts are published in one; some few Queries are\nadded, and many omitted, particularly of those relating to the\nsketch or plan of a national bank, which it may be time enough to\ntake again in hand when the public shall seem disposed to make\nuse of such an expedient. I had determined with myself never to\nprefix my name to the Querist, but in the last edition was\noverruled by a friend, who was remarkable for pursuing the public\ninterest with as much diligence as others do their own. I\napprehend the same censure on this that I incurred upon another\noccasion, for meddling out of my profession; though to feed the\nhungry and clothe the naked, by promoting an honest industry,\nwill, perhaps, be deemed no improper employment for a clergyman\nwho still things himself a member of the commonwealth. As the sum\nof human happiness is supposed to consist in the goods of mind,\nbody,and fortune, I would fain make my studies of some use to\nmankind with regard to each of these three particulars, and hope\nit will not be thought faulty or indecent in any man, of what\nprofession soever, to offer his mite towards improving the\nmanners, health, and prosperity of his fellow-creatures.\n\nQUERY 1 Whether there ever was, is, or will be, an industrious\nnation poor, or an idle rich?\n\n2 Whether a people can be called poor, where the common sort are\nwell fed, clothed, and lodged?\n\n3 Whether the drift and aim of every wise State should not be, to\nencourage industry in its members? And whether those who employ\nneither heads nor hands for the common benefit deserve not to be\nexpelled like drones out of a well-governed State?\n\n4 Whether the four elements, and man's labour therein, be not the\ntrue source of wealth?\n\n5 Whether money be not only so far useful, as it stirreth up\nindustry, enabling men mutually to participate the fruits of each\nother's labour?\n\n6 Whether any other means, equally conducing to excite and\ncirculate the industry of mankind, may not be as useful as money.\n\n7 Whether the real end and aim of men be not power? And whether\nhe who could have everything else at his wish or will would value\nmoney?\n\n8 Whether the public aim in every well-governed State be not that\neach member, according to his just pretensions and industry,\nshould have power?\n\n9 Whether power be not referred to action; and whether action\ndoth not follow appetite or will?\n\n10 Whether fashion doth not create appetites; and whether the\nprevailing will of a nation is not the fashion?\n\n11 Whether the current of industry and commerce be not determined\nby this prevailing will?\n\n12 Whether it be not owing to custom that the fashions are\nagreeable?\n\n13 Whether it may not concern the wisdom of the legislature to\ninterpose in the making of fashions; and not leave an affair of\nso great influence to the management of women and fops, tailors\nand vintners?\n\n14 Whether reasonable fashions are a greater restraint on freedom\nthan those which are unreasonable?\n\n15 Whether a general good taste in a people would not greatly\nconduce to their thriving? And whether an uneducated gentry be\nnot the greatest of national evils?\n\n16 Whether customs and fashions do not supply the place of reason\nin the vulgar of all ranks? Whether, therefore, it doth not very\nmuch import that they should be wisely framed?\n\n17 Whether the imitating those neighbours in our fashions, to\nwhom we bear no likeness in our circumstances, be not one cause\nof distress to this nation?\n\n18 Whether frugal fashions in the upper rank, and comfortable\nliving in the lower, be not the means to multiply inhabitants?\n\n19 Whether the bulk of our Irish natives are not kept from\nthriving, by that cynical content in dirt and beggary which they\npossess to a degree beyond any other people in Christendom?\n\n20 Whether the creating of wants be not the likeliest way to\nproduce industry in a people? And whether, if our peasants were\naccustomed to eat beef and wear shoes, they would not be more\nindustrious?\n\n21 Whether other things being given, as climate, soil, etc., the\nwealth be not proportioned to the industry, and this to the\ncirculation of credit, be the credit circulated or transferred by\nwhat marks or tokens soever?\n\n22 Whether, therefore, less money swiftly circulating, be not, in\neffect, equivalent to more money slowly circulating? Or, whether,\nif the circulation be reciprocally as the quantity of coin, the\nnation can be a loser?\n\n23 Whether money is to be considered as having an intrinsic\nvalue, or as being a commodity, a standard, a measure, or a\npledge, as is variously suggested by writers? And whether the\ntrue idea of money, as such, be not altogether that of a ticket\nor counter?\n\n24 Whether the value or price of things be not a compounded\nproportion, directly as the demand, and reciprocally as the\nplenty?\n\n25 Whether the terms crown, livre, pound sterling, etc., are not\nto be considered as exponents or denominations of such\nproportion? And whether gold, silver, and paper are not tickets\nor counters for reckoning, recording, and transferring thereof?\n\n26 Whether the denominations being retained, although the bullion\nwere gone, things might not nevertheless be rated, bought, and\nsold, industry promoted, and a circulation of commerce\nmaintained?\n\n27 Whether an equal raising of all sorts of gold, silver, and\ncopper coin can have any effect in bringing money into the? And\nwhether altering the proportions between the kingdom several\nsorts can have any other effect but multiplying one kind and\nlessening another, without any increase of the sum total?\n\n28 Whether arbitrary changing the denomination of coin be not a\npublic cheat?\n\n29 What makes a wealthy people? Whether mines of gold and silver\nare capable of doing this? And whether the negroes, amidst the\ngold sands of Afric, are not poor and destitute?\n\n30 Whether there be any virtue in gold or silver, other than as\nthey set people at work, or create industry?\n\n31 Whether it be not the opinion or will of the people, exciting\nthem to industry, that truly enricheth a nation? And whether this\ndoth not principally depend on the means for counting,\ntransferring, and preserving power, that is, property of all\nkinds?\n\n32 Whether if there was no silver or gold in the kingdom, our\ntrade might not, nevertheless, supply bills of exchange,\nsufficient to answer the demands of absentees in England or\nelsewhere?\n\n33 Whether current bank-notes may not be deemed money? And\nwhether they are not actually the greater part of the money of\nthis kingdom?\n\n34 Provided the wheels move, whether it is not the same thing, as\nto the effect of the machine, be this done by the force of wind,\nor water, or animals?\n\n35 Whether power to command the industry of others be not real\nwealth? And whether money be not in truth tickets or tokens for\nconveying and recording such power, and whether it be of great\nconsequence what materials the tickets are made of?\n\n36 Whether trade, either foreign or domestic, be in truth any\nmore than this commerce of industry?\n\n37 Whether to promote, transfer, and secure this commerce, and\nthis property in human labour, or, in other words, this power, be\nnot the sole means of enriching a people, and how far this may be\ndone independently of gold and silver?\n\n38 Whether it were not wrong to suppose land itself to be wealth?\nAnd whether the industry of the people is not first to be\nconsidered, as that which constitutes wealth, which makes even\nland and silver to be wealth, neither of which would have, any\nvalue but as means and motives to industry?\n\n39 Whether in the wastes of America a man might not possess\ntwenty miles square of land, and yet want his dinner, or a coat\nto his back?\n\n40 Whether a fertile land, and the industry of its inhabitants,\nwould not prove inexhaustible funds of real wealth, be the\ncounters for conveying and recording thereof what you will,\npaper, gold, or silver?\n\n41 Whether a single hint be sufficient to overcome a prejudice?\nAnd whether even obvious truths will not sometimes bear\nrepeating?\n\n42 Whether, if human labour be the true source of wealth, it doth\nnot follow that idleness should of all things be discouraged in a\nwise State?\n\n43 Whether even gold or silver, if they should lessen the\nindustry of its inhabitants, would not be ruinous to a country?\nAnd whether Spain be not an instance of this?\n\n44 Whether the opinion of men, and their industry consequent\nthereupon, be not the true wealth of Holland and not the silver\nsupposed to be deposited in the bank at Amsterdam?\n\n45 Whether there is in truth any such treasure lying dead? And\nwhether it be of great consequence to the public that it should\nbe real rather than notional?\n\n46 Whether, in order to understand the true nature of wealth and\ncommerce, it would not be right to consider a ship's crew cast\nupon a desert island, and by degrees forming themselves to\nbusiness and civil life, while industry begot credit, and credit\nmoved to industry?\n\n47 Whether such men would not all set themselves to work? Whether\nthey would not subsist by the mutual participation of each\nother's industry? Whether, when one man had in his way procured\nmore than he could consume, he would not exchange his\nsuperfluities to supply his wants? Whether this must not produce\ncredit? Whether, to facilitate these conveyances, to record and\ncirculate this credit, they would not soon agree on certain\ntallies, tokens, tickets, or counters?\n\n48 Whether reflection in the better sort might not soon remedy\nour evils? And whether our real defect be not a wrong way of\nthinking?\n\n49 Whether it would not be an unhappy turn in our gentlemen, if\nthey should take more thought to create an interest to themselves\nin this or that county, or borough, than to promote the real\ninterest of their country?\n\n50 Whether if a man builds a house he doth not in the first place\nprovide a plan which governs his work? And shall the public act\nwithout an end, a view, a plan?\n\n51 Whether by how much the less particular folk think for\nthemselves, the public be not so much the more obliged to think\nfor them?\n\n52 Whether small gains be not the way to great profit? And if our\ntradesmen are beggars, whether they may not thank themselves for\nit?\n\n53 Whether some way might not be found for making criminals\nuseful in public works, instead of sending them either to\nAmerica, or to the other world?\n\n54 Whether we may not, as well as other nations, contrive\nemployment for them? And whether servitude, chains, and hard\nlabour, for a term of years, would not be a more discouraging as\nwell as a more adequate punishment for felons than even death\nitself?\n\n55 Whether there are not such things in Holland as bettering\nhouses for bringing young gentlemen to order? And whether such an\ninstitution would be useless among us?\n\n56 Whether it be true that the poor in Holland have no resource\nbut their own labour, and yet there are no beggars in their\nstreets?\n\n57 Whether he whose luxury consumeth foreign products, and whose\nindustry produceth nothing domestic to exchange for them, is not\nso far forth injurious to his country?\n\n58 Whether necessity is not to be hearkened to before\nconvenience, and convenience before luxury?\n\n59 Whether to provide plentifully for the poor be not feeding the\nroot, the substance whereof will shoot upwards into the branches,\nand cause the top to flourish?\n\n60 Whether there be any instance of a State wherein the people,\nliving neatly and plentifully, did not aspire to wealth?\n\n61 Whether nastiness and beggary do not, on the contrary,\nextinguish all such ambition, making men listless, hopeless, and\nslothful?\n\n62 Whether a country inhabited by people well fed, clothed and\nlodged would not become every day more populous? And whether a\nnumerous stock of people in such circumstances would? and how far\nthe product of not constitute a flourishing nation; our own\ncountry may suffice for the compassing of this end?\n\n63 Whether a people who had provided themselves with the\nnecessaries of life in good plenty would not soon extend their\nindustry to new arts and new branches of commerce?\n\n64 Whether those same manufactures which England imports from\nother countries may not be admitted from Ireland? And, if so,\nwhether lace, carpets, and tapestry, three considerable articles\nof English importation, might not find encouragement in Ireland?\nAnd whether an academy for design might not greatly conduce to\nthe perfecting those manufactures among us?\n\n65 Whether France and Flanders could have drawn so much money\nfrom England for figured silks, lace, and tapestry, if they had\nnot had academies for designing?\n\n66 Whether, when a room was once prepared, and models in plaster\nof Paris, the annual expense of such an academy need stand the\npublic in above two hundred pounds a year?\n\n67 Whether our linen-manufacture would not find the benefit of\nthis institution? And whether there be anything that makes us\nfall short of the Dutch in damasks, diapers, and printed linen,\nbut our ignorance in design?\n\n68 Whether those who may slight this affair as notional have\nsufficiently considered the extensive use of the art of design,\nand its influence in most trades and manufactures, wherein the\nforms of things are often more regarded than the materials?\n\n69 Whether there be any art sooner learned than that of making\ncarpets? And whether our women, with little time and pains, may\nnot make more beautiful carpets than those imported from Turkey?\nAnd whether this branch of the woollen manufacture be not open to\nus?\n\n70 Whether human industry can produce, from such cheap materials,\na manufacture of so great value by any other art as by those of\nsculpture and painting?\n\n71 Whether pictures and statues are not in fact so much treasure?\nAnd whether Rome and Florence would not be poor towns without\nthem?\n\n72 Whether they do not bring ready money as well as jewels?\nWhether in Italy debts are not paid, and children portioned with\nthem, as with gold and silver?\n\n73 Whether it would not be more prudent, to strike out and exert\nourselves in permitted branches of trade, than to fold our hands,\nand repine that we are not allowed the woollen?\n\n74 Whether it be true that two millions are yearly expended by\nEngland in foreign lace and linen?\n\n75 Whether immense sums are not drawn yearly into the Northern\ncountries, for supplying the British navy with hempen\nmanufactures?\n\n76 Whether there be anything more profitable than. hemp? And\nwhether there should not be great premiums for encouraging our\nhempen trade? What advantages may not Great Britain make of a\ncountry where land and labour are so cheap?\n\n77 Whether Ireland alone might not raise hemp sufficient for the\nBritish navy? And whether it would not be vain to expect this\nfrom the British Colonies in America, where hands are so scarce,\nand labour so excessively dear?\n\n78 Whether, if our own people want will or capacity for such an\nattempt, it might not be worth while for some undertaking spirits\nin England to make settlements, and raise hemp in the counties of\nClare and Limerick, than which, perhaps, there is not fitter land\nin the world for that purpose? And whether both nations would not\nfind their advantage therein?\n\n79 Whether if all the idle hands in this kingdom were employed on\nhemp and flax, we might not find sufficient vent for these\nmanufactures?\n\n80 How far it may be in our own power to better our affairs,\nwithout interfering with our neighbours?\n\n81 Whether the prohibition of our woollen trade ought not\nnaturally to put us on other methods which give no jealousy?\n\n82 Whether paper be not a valuable article of commerce? And\nwhether it be not true that one single bookseller in London\nyearly expended above four thousand pounds in that foreign\ncommodity?\n\n83 How it comes to pass that the Venetians and Genoese, who wear\nso much less linen, and so much worse than we do, should yet make\nvery good paper, and in great quantity, while we make very\nlittle?\n\n84 How long it will be before my countrymen find out that it is\nworth while to spend a penny in order to get a groat?\n\n85 If all the land were tilled that is fit for tillage, and all\nthat sowed with hemp and flax that is fit for raising them,\nwhether we should have much sheep-walk beyond what was sufficient\nto supply the necessities of the kingdom?\n\n86 Whether other countries have not flourished without the\nwoollen trade?\n\n87 Whether it be not a sure sign or effect of a country's\ninhabitants? And, thriving, to see it well cultivated and full\nof; if so, whether a great quantity of sheep-walk be not ruinous\nto a country, rendering it waste and thinly inhabited?\n\n88 Whether the employing so much of our land under sheep be not\nin fact an Irish blunder?\n\n89 Whether our hankering after our woollen trade be not the true\nand only reason which hath created a jealousy in England towards\nIreland? And whether anything can hurt us more than such\njealousy?\n\n90 Whether it be not the true interest of both nations to become\none people? And whether either be sufficiently apprised of this?\n\n91 Whether the upper part of this people are not truly English,\nby blood, language, religion, manners, inclination, and interest?\n\n92 Whether we are not as much Englishmen as the children of old\nRomans, born in Britain, were still Romans?\n\n93 Whether it be not our true interest not to interfere with\nthem; and, in every other case, whether it be not their true\ninterest to befriend us?\n\n94 Whether a mint in Ireland might not be of great convenience to\nthe kingdom; and whether it could be attended with any possible\ninconvenience to Great Britain? And whether there were not mints\nin Naples and Sicily, when those kingdoms were provinces to Spain\nor the house of Austria?\n\n95 Whether anything can be more ridiculous than for the north of\nIreland to be jealous of a linen manufacturer in the south?\n\n96 Whether the county of Tipperary be not much better land than\nthe county of Armagh; and yet whether the latter is not much\nbetter improved and inhabited than the former?\n\n97 Whether every landlord in the kingdom doth not know the cause\nof this? And yet how few are the better for such their knowledge?\n\n98 Whether large farms under few hands, or small ones under many,\nare likely to be made most of? And whether flax and tillage do\nnot naturally multiply hands, and divide land into small\nholdings, and well-improved?\n\n99 Whether, as our exports are lessened, we ought not to lessen\nour imports? And whether these will not be lessened as our\ndemands, and these as our wants, and these as our customs or\nfashions? Of how great consequence therefore are fashions to the\npublic?\n\n100 Whether it would not be more reasonable to mend our state\nthan to complain of it; and how far this may be in our own power?\n\n101 What the nation gains by those who live in Ireland upon the\nproduce of foreign Countries?\n\n102 How far the vanity of our ladies in dressing, and of our\ngentlemen in drinking, contributes to the general misery of the\npeople?\n\n103 Whether nations, as wise and opulent as ours, have not made\nsumptuary laws; and what hinders us from doing the same?\n\n104 Whether those who drink foreign liquors, and deck themselves\nand their families with foreign ornaments, are not so far forth\nto be reckoned absentees?\n\n105 Whether, as our trade is limited, we ought not to limit our\nexpenses; and whether this be not the natural and obvious remedy?\n\n106 Whether the dirt, and famine, and nakedness of the bulk of\nour people might not be remedied, even although we had no foreign\ntrade? And whether this should not be our first care; and\nwhether, if this were once provided for, the conveniences of the\nrich would not soon follow?\n\n107 Whether comfortable living doth not produce wants, and wants\nindustry, and industry wealth?\n\n108 Whether there is not a great difference between Holland and\nIreland? And whether foreign commerce, without which the one\ncould not subsist, be so necessary for the other?\n\n109 Might we not put a hand to the plough, or the spade, although\nwe had no foreign commerce?\n\n110 Whether the exigencies of nature are not to be answered by\nindustry on our own soil? And how far the conveniences and\ncomforts of life may be procured by a domestic commerce between\nthe several parts of this kingdom?\n\n111 Whether the women may not sew, spin, weave, embroider\nsufficiently for the embellishment of their persons, and even\nenough to raise envy in each other, without being beholden to\nforeign countries?\n\n112 Suppose the bulk of our inhabitants had shoes to their feet,\nclothes to their backs, and beef in their bellies, might not such\na state be eligible for the public, even though the squires were\ncondemned to drink ale and cider?\n\n113 Whether, if drunkenness be a necessary evil, men may not as\nwell drink the growth of their own country?\n\n114 Whether a nation within itself might not have real wealth,\nsufficient to give its inhabitants power and distinction, without\nthe help of gold and silver?\n\n115 Whether, if the arts of sculpture and painting were\nencouraged among us, we might not furnish our houses in a much\nnobler manner with our own manufactures?\n\n116 Whether we have not, or may not have, all the necessary\nmaterials for building at home?\n\n117 Whether tiles and plaster may not supply the place of Norway\nfir for flooring and wainscot?\n\n118 Whether plaster be not warmer, as well as more secure, than\ndeal? And whether a modern fashionable house, lined with fir,\ndaubed over with oil and paint, be not like a fire-ship, ready to\nbe lighted up by all accidents?\n\n119 Whether larger houses, better built and furnished, a greater\ntrain of servants, the difference with regard to equipage and\ntable between finer and coarser, more and less elegant, may not\nbe sufficient to feed a reasonable share of vanity, or support\nall proper distinctions? And whether all these may not be\nprocured by domestic industry out of the four elements, without\nransacking the four quarters of the globe?\n\n120 Whether anything is a nobler ornament, in the eye of the\nworld, than an Italian palace, that is, stone and mortar\nskilfully put together, and adorned with sculpture and painting;\nand whether this may not be compassed without foreign trade?\n\n121 Whether an expense in gardens and plantations would not be an\nelegant distinction for the rich, a domestic magnificence\nemploying many hands within, and drawing nothing from abroad?\n\n122 Whether the apology which is made for foreign luxury in\nEngland, to wit, that they could not carry on their trade without\nimports as well as exports, will hold in Ireland?\n\n123 Whether one may not be allowed to conceive and suppose a\nsociety or nation of human creatures, clad in woollen cloths and\nstuffs, eating good bread, beef and mutton, poultry and fish, in\ngreat plenty, drinking ale, mead, and cider, inhabiting decent\nhouses built of brick and marble, taking their pleasure in fair\nparks and gardens, depending on no foreign imports either for\nfood or raiment? And whether such people ought much to be pitied?\n\n124 Whether Ireland be not as well qualified for such a state as\nany nation under the sun?\n\n125 Whether in such a state the inhabitants may not contrive to\npass the twenty-four hours with tolerable ease and cheerfulness?\nAnd whether any people upon earth can do more?\n\n126 Whether they may not eat, drink, play, dress, visit, sleep in\ngood beds, sit by good fires, build, plant, raise a name, make\nestates, and spend them?\n\n127 Whether, upon the whole, a domestic trade may not suffice in\nsuch a country as Ireland, to nourish and clothe its inhabitants,\nand provide them with the reasonable conveniences and even\ncomforts of life?\n\n128 Whether a general habit of living well would not produce\nnumbers and industry' and whether, considering the tendency of\nhuman kind, the consequence thereof would not be foreign trade\nand riches, how unnecessary soever?\n\n129 Whether, nevertheless, it be a crime to inquire how far we\nmay do without foreign trade, and what would follow on such a\nsupposition?\n\n130 Whether the number and welfare of the subjects be not the\ntrue strength of the crown?\n\n131 Whether in all public institutions there should not be an end\nproposed, which is to be the rule and limit of the means? Whether\nthis end should not be the well-being of the whole? And whether,\nin order to this, the first step should not be to clothe and feed\nour people?\n\n132 Whether there be upon earth any Christian or civilized people\nso beggarly, wretched, and destitute as the common Irish?\n\n133 Whether, nevertheless, there is any other people whose wants\nmay be more easily supplied from home?\n\n134 Whether, if there was a wall of brass a thousand cubits high\nround this kingdom, our natives might not nevertheless live\ncleanly and comfortably, till the land, and reap the fruits of\nit?\n\n135 What should hinder us from exerting ourselves, using our\nhands and brains, doing something or other, man, woman, and\nchild, like the other inhabitants of God's earth?\n\n136 Be the restraining our trade well or ill advised in our\nneighbours, with respect to their own interest, yet whether it be\nnot plainly ours to accommodate ourselves to it?\n\n137 Whether it be not vain to think of persuading other people to\nsee their interest, while we continue blind to our own?\n\n138 Whether there be any other nation possessed of so much good\nland, and so many able hands to work it, which yet is beholden\nfor bread to foreign countries?\n\n139 Whether it be true that we import corn to the value of two\nhundred thousand pounds in some years?\n\n140 Whether we are not undone by fashions made for other people?\nAnd whether it be not madness in a poor nation to imitate a rich\none?\n\n141 Whether a woman of fashion ought not to be declared a public\nenemy?\n\n142 Whether it be not certain that from the single town of Cork\nwere exported, in one year, no less than one hundred and seven\nthousand one hundred and sixty-one barrels of beef; seven\nthousand three hundred and seventy-nine barrels of pork; thirteen\nthousand four hundred and sixty-one casks, and eighty-five\nthousand seven hundred and twenty-seven firkins of butter? And\nwhat hands were employed in this manufacture?\n\n143 Whether a foreigner could imagine that one half of the people\nwere starving, in a country which sent out such plenty of\nprovisions?\n\n144 Whether an Irish lady, set out with French silks and Flanders\nlace, may not be said to consume more beef and butter than a\nhundred of our labouring peasants?\n\n145 Whether nine-tenths of our foreign trade be not carried on\nsingly to support the article of vanity?\n\n146 Whether it can be hoped that private persons will not indulge\nthis folly, unless restrained by the public?\n\n147 How vanity is maintained in other countries? Whether in\nHungary, for instance, a proud nobility are not subsisted with\nsmall imports from abroad?\n\n148 Whether there be a prouder people upon earth than the noble\nVenetians, although they all wear plain black clothes?\n\n149 Whether a people are to be pitied that will not sacrifice\ntheir little particular vanities to the public. good? And yet,\nwhether each part would not except their own foible from this\npublic sacrifice, the squire his bottle, the lady her lace?\n\n150 Whether claret be not often drank rather for vanity than for\nhealth, or pleasure?\n\n151 Whether it be true that men of nice palates have been imposed\non, by elder wine for French claret, and by mead for palm sack?\n\n152 Do not Englishmen abroad purchase beer and cider at ten times\nthe price of wine?\n\n153 How many gentlemen are there in England of a thousand pounds\nper annum who never drink wine in their own houses? Whether the\nsame may be said of any in Ireland who have even? one hundred\npounds per annum.\n\n154 What reasons have our neighbours in England for discouraging\nFrench wines which may not hold with respect to us also?\n\n155 How much of the necessary sustenance of our people is yearly\nexported for brandy?\n\n156 Whether, if people must poison themselves, they had not\nbetter do it with their own growth?\n\n157 If we imported neither claret from France, nor fir from\nNorway, what the nation would save by it?\n\n158 When the root yieldeth insufficient nourishment, whether men\ndo not top the tree to make the lower branches thrive?\n\n159 Whether, if our ladies drank sage or balm tea out of Irish\nware, it would be an insupportable national calamity?\n\n160 Whether it be really true that such wine is best as most\nencourages drinking, i.e., that must be given in the largest dose\nto produce its effect? And whether this holds with regard to any\nother medicine?\n\n161 Whether that trade should not be accounted most pernicious\nwherein the balance is most against us? And whether this be not\nthe trade with France?\n\n162 Whether it be not even madness to encourage trade with a\nnation that takes nothing of our manufacture?\n\n163 Whether Ireland can hope to thrive if the major part of her\npatriots shall be found in the French interest?\n\n164 Whether great plenty and variety of excellent wines are not\nto be had on the coasts of Italy and Sicily? And whether those\ncountries would not take our commodities of linen, leather,\nbutter, etc. in exchange for them?\n\n165 Particularly, whether the Vinum Mamertinum, which grows on\nthe mountains about Messina, a red generous wine, highly esteemed\n(if we may credit Pliny) by the ancient Romans, would not come\ncheap, and please the palates of our Islanders?\n\n166 Why, if a bribe by the palate or the purse be in effect the\nsame thing, they should not be alike infamous?\n\n167 Whether the vanity and luxury of a few ought to stand in\ncompetition with the interest of a nation?\n\n168 Whether national wants ought not to be the rule of trade? And\nwhether the most pressing wants of. the majority ought not to be\nfirst considered?\n\n169 Whether it is possible the country should be well improved,\nwhile our beef is exported, and our labourers live upon potatoes?\n\n170 If it be resolved that we cannot do without foreign trade,\nwhether, at least, it may not be worth while to consider what\nbranches thereof deserve to be entertained, and how far we may be\nable to carry it on under our present limitations?\n\n171 What foreign imports may be necessary for clothing and\nfeeding the families of persons not worth above one hundred\npounds a year? And how many wealthier there are in the kingdom,\nand what proportion they bear to the other inhabitants?\n\n172 Whether trade be not then on a right foot, when foreign\ncommodities are imported in exchange only for domestic\nsuperfluities?\n\n173 Whether the quantities of beef, butter, wool, and leather,\nexported from this island, can be reckoned the superfluities of a\ncountry, where there are so many natives naked and famished?\n\n174 Whether it would not be wise so to order our trade as to\nexport manufactures rather than provisions, and of those such as\nemploy most hands?\n\n175 Whether she would not be a very vile matron, and justly\nthought either mad or foolish, that should give away the\nnecessaries of life from her naked and famished children, in\nexchange for pearls to stick in her hair, and sweetmeats to\nplease her own palate?\n\n176 Whether a nation might not be considered as a family?\n\n177 Whether the remark made by a Venetian ambassador to Cardinal\nRichelieu -- 'That France needed nothing to be rich and easy, but\nto know how to spend what she dissipates' may not be of use also\nto other people?\n\n178 Whether hungry cattle will not leap over bounds? And whether\nmost men are not hungry in a country where expensive fashions\nobtain?\n\n179 Whether there should not be published yearly, schedules of\nour trade, containing an account of the imports and exports of\nthe foregoing year?\n\n180 Whether other methods may not be found for supplying the\nfunds, besides the custom on things imported?\n\n181 Whether any art or manufacture be so difficult as the making\nof good laws?\n\n182 Whether our peers and gentlemen are born legislators? Or,\nwhether that faculty be acquired by study and reflection?\n\n183 Whether to comprehend the real interest of a people, and the\nmeans to procure it, doth not imply some fund of knowledge,\nhistorical, moral, and political, with a faculty of reason\nimproved by learning?\n\n184 Whether every enemy to learning be not a Goth? And whether\nevery such Goth among us be not an enemy to the country?\n\n185 Whether, therefore, it would not be an omen of ill presage, a\ndreadful phenomenon in the land, if our great men should take it\nin their heads to deride learning and education?\n\n186 Whether, on the contrary, it should not seem worth while to\nerect a mart of literature in this kingdom, under wiser\nregulations and better discipline than in any other part of\nEurope? And whether this would not be an infallible means of\ndrawing men and money into the kingdom?\n\n187 Whether the governed be not too numerous for the governing\npart of our college? And whether it might not be expedient to\nconvert thirty natives-places into twenty fellowships?\n\n188 Whether, if we had two colleges, there might not spring a\nuseful emulation between them? And whether it might not be\ncontrived so to divide the fellows, scholars, and revenues\nbetween both, as that no member should be a loser thereby?\n\n189 Whether ten thousand pounds well laid out might not build a\ndecent college, fit to contain two hundred persons; and whether\nthe purchase money of the chambers would not go a good way\ntowards defraying the expense?\n\n190 Where this college should be situated?\n\n191 Whether, in imitation of the Jesuits at Paris, who admit\nProtestants to study in their colleges, it may not be right for\nus also to admit Roman Catholics into our college, without\nobliging them to attend chapel duties, or catechisms, or divinity\nlectures? And whether this might not keep money in the kingdom,\nand prevent the prejudices of a foreign education?\n\n192 Whether it is possible a State should not thrive, whereof the\nlower part were industrious, and the upper wise?\n\n193 Whether the collected wisdom of ages and nations be not found\nin books?\n\n194 Whether Themistocles his art of making a little city, or a\nlittle people, become a great one be learned anywhere so well as\nin the writings of the ancients?\n\n195 Whether a wise State hath any interest nearer heart than the\neducation of youth?\n\n196 Whether the mind, like soil, doth not by disuse grow stiff\nand whether reasoning and study be not like stirring and dividing\nthe glebe?\n\n197 Whether an early habit of reflexion, although obtained by\nspeculative sciences, may not have its use in practical affairs?\n\n198 Whether even those parts of academical learning which are\nquite forgotten may not have improved and enriched the soil, like\nthose vegetables which are raised, not for themselves, but\nploughed in for a dressing of land?\n\n199 Whether it was not an Irish professor who first opened the\npublic schools at Oxford? Whether this island hath not been\nanciently famous for learning? And whether at this day it hath\nany better chance for being considerable?\n\n200 Whether we may not with better grace sit down and complain,\nwhen we have done all that lies in our power to help ourselves?\n\n201 Whether the gentleman of estate hath a right to be idle; and\nwhether he ought not to be the great promoter and director of\nindustry among his tenants and neighbours?\n\n202 Whether in the cantons of Switzerland all under thirty years\nof age are not excluded from their great councils?\n\n203 Whether Homer's compendium of education, would not be a good\nrule for modern educators of youth? And whether half the learning\nand study of these kingdoms is not useless, for want of a proper\ndelivery and punctuation being taught in our schools and\ncolleges?\n\n204 Whether in any order a good building can be made of bad\nmaterials? Or whether any form of government can make a happy\nState out of bad individuals?\n\n205 What was it that Solomon compared to a jewel of gold in a\nswine's snout?\n\n206 Whether the public is more concerned in anything than in the\nprocreation of able citizens?\n\n207 Whether to the multiplying of human kind, it would not much\nconduce if marriages were made with good-liking?\n\n208 Whether, if women had no portions, we should then see so many\nunhappy and unfruitful marriages?\n\n209 Whether the laws be not, according to Aristotle, a mind\nwithout appetite or passion? And consequently without respect of\npersons?\n\n210 Suppose a rich man's son marries a poor man's daughter,\nsuppose also that a poor man's daughter is deluded and debauched\nby the son of a rich man; which is most to be pitied?\n\n211 Whether the punishment sh ould be placed on the seduced or\nthe seducer?\n\n212 Whether a promise made before God and man in the most solemn\nmanner ought to be violated?\n\n213 Whether it was Plato's opinion that, 'for the good of the\ncommunity, rich should marry with rich?' - De Leg. lib. iv.\n\n214 Whether, as seed equally scattered produceth a goodly\nharvest, even so an equal distribution of wealth doth not cause a\nnation to flourish?\n\n215 Whence is it that Barbs and Arabs are so good horses? And\nwhether in those countries they are not exactly nice in admitting\nnone but males of a good kind to their mares?\n\n216 What effects would the same care produce in families?\n\n217 Whether the real foundation for wealth must not be laid in\nthe numbers, the frugality, and the industry of the people? And\nwhether all attempts to enrich a nation by other means, as\nraising the coin, stock-jobbing, and such arts are not vain?\n\n218 Whether a door ought not to be shut against all other methods\nof growing rich, save only by industry and. merit? And whether\nwealth got otherwise would not be ruinous to the public?\n\n219 Whether the abuse of banks and paper-money is a just\nobjection against the use thereof? And whether such abuse might\nnot easily be prevented?\n\n220 Whether national banks are not found useful in Venice,\nHolland, and Hamburg? And whether it is not possible to contrive\none that may be useful also in Ireland?\n\n221 Whether the banks of Venice and Amsterdam are not in the\nhands of the public?\n\n222 Whether it may not be worth while to inform ourselves in the\nnature of those banks? And what reason can be assigned why\nIreland should not reap the benefit of such public banks as well\nas other countries?\n\n223 Whether a bank of national credit, supported by public funds\nand secured by Parliament, be a chimera or impossible thing? And\nif not, what would follow from the supposal of such a bank?\n\n224 Whether the currency of a credit so well secured would not be\nof great advantage to our trade and manufactures?\n\n225 Whether the notes of such public bank would not have a more\ngeneral circulation than those of private banks, as being less\nsubject to frauds and hazards?\n\n226 Whether it be not agreed that paper hath in many respects the\nadvantage above coin, as being of more dispatch in payments, more\neasily transferred, preserved, and recovered when lost?\n\n227 Whether, besides these advantages, there be not an evident\nnecessity for circulating credit by paper, from the defect of\ncoin in this kingdom?\n\n228 Whether it be rightly remarked by some that, as banking\nbrings no treasure into the kingdom like trade, private wealth\nmust sink as the bank riseth? And whether whatever causeth\nindustry to flourish and circulate may not be said to increase\nour treasure?\n\n229 Whether the ruinous effects of Mississippi, South Sea,1 and\nsuch schemes were not owing to an abuse of paper money or credit,\nin making it a means for idleness and gaming, instead of a motive\nand help to industry?\n\n230 Whether the rise of the bank of Amsterdam was not purely\ncasual, for the security and dispatch of payments? And whether\nthe good effects thereof, in supplying the place of coin, and\npromoting a ready circulation of industry and commerce may not be\na lesson to us, to do that by design which others fell upon by\nchance?\n\n231 Whether plenty of small cash be not absolutely necessary for\nkeeping up a circulation among the people; that is, whether\ncopper be not more necessary than gold?\n\n232 Whether that which increaseth the stock of a nation be not a\nmeans of increasing its trade? And whether that which increaseth\nthe current credit of a nation may not be said to increase its\nstock?\n\n233 Whether the credit of the public funds be not a mine of gold\nto England? And whether any step that should lessen this credit\nought not to be dreaded?\n\n234 Whether such credit be not the principal advantage that\nEngland hath over France? I may add, over every other country in\nEurope?\n\n235 Whether by this the public is not become possessed of the\nwealth of foreigners as well as natives? And whether England be\nnot in some sort the treasury of Christendom?\n\n236 Whether, as our current domestic credit grew, industry would\nnot grow likewise; and if industry, our manufactures; and if\nthese, our foreign credit?\n\n237 Whether foreign demands may not be answered by our exports\nwithout drawing cash out of the kingdom?\n\n238 Whether as industry increased, our manufactures would not\nflourish; and as these flourished, whether better returns would\nnot be made from estates to their landlords, both within and\nwithout the kingdom?\n\n239 Whether the sure way to supply people with tools and\nmaterials, and to set them at work, be not a free circulation of\nmoney, whether silver or paper?\n\n240 Whether in New England all trade and business is not as much\nat a stand, upon a scarcity of paper-money, as with us from the\nwant of specie?\n\n241 Whether it be certain that the quantity of silver in the bank\nof Amsterdam be greater now than at first; but whether it be not\ncertain that there is a greater circulation of industry and\nextent of trade, more people, ships, houses, and commodities of\nall sorts, more power by sea and land?\n\n242 Whether money, lying dead in the bank of Amsterdam, would not\nbe as useless as in the mine?\n\n243 Whether our visible security in land could be doubted? And\nwhether there be anything like this in the bank of Amsterdam?\n\n244 Whether it be just to apprehend danger from trusting a\nnational bank with power to extend its credit, to circulate notes\nwhich it shall be felony to counterfeit, to receive goods on\nloans, to purchase lands, to sell also or alienate them, and to\ndeal in bills of exchange; when these powers are no other than\nhave been trusted for many years with the bank of England,\nalthough in truth but a private bank?\n\n245 Whether the objection from monopolies and an overgrowth of\npower, which are made against private banks, can possibly hold\nagainst a national one?\n\n246 Whether the evil effects which of late years have attended\npaper-money and credit in Europe did not spring from\nsubscriptions, shares, dividends, and stock-jobbing?\n\n247 Whether the great evils attending paper-money in the British\nPlantations of America have not sprung from the overrating their\nlands, and issuing paper without discretion, and from the\nlegislators breaking their own rules in favour of themselves,\nthus sacrificing the public to their private benefit? And whether\na little sense and honesty might not easily prevent all such\ninconveniences?\n\n248 Whether the subject of free-thinking in religion be not\nexhausted? And whether it be not high time for our freethinkers\nto turn their thoughts to the improvement of their country?\n\n249 Whether it must not be ruinous for a nation to sit down to\ngame, be it with silver or with paper?\n\n250 Whether, therefore, the circulating paper, in the late\nruinous schemes of France and England, was the true evil, and not\nrather the circulating thereof without industry? And whether the\nbank of Amsterdam, where industry had been for so many years\nsubsisted and circulated by transfers on paper, doth not clearly\ndecide this point?\n\n251 Whether there are not to be seen in America fair, towns,\nwherein the people are well lodged, fed, and clothed, without a\nbeggar in their streets, although there be not one grain of gold\nor silver current among them?\n\n252 Whether these people do not exercise all arts and trades,\nbuild ships and navigate them to all parts of the world, purchase\nlands, till and reap the fruits of them, buy and sell, educate\nand provide for their children? Whether they do not even indulge\nthemselves in foreign vanities?\n\n253 Whether, whatever inconveniences those people may have\nincurred from not observing either rules or bounds in their paper\nmoney, yet it be not certain that they are in a more flourishing\ncondition, have larger and better built towns, more plenty, more\nindustry, more arts and civility, and a more extensive commerce,\nthan when they had gold and silver current among them?\n\n254 Whether a view of the ruinous effects of absurd schemes and\ncredit mismanaged, so as to produce gaming and madness instead of\nindustry, can be any just objection against a national bank\ncalculated purely to promote industry?\n\n255 Whether a scheme for the welfare of this nation should not\ntake in the whole inhabitants? And whether it be not a vain\nattempt, to project the flourishing of our Protestant gentry,\nexclusive of the bulk of the natives?\n\n256 Whether an oath, testifying allegiance to the king, and\ndisclaiming the pope's authority in temporals, may not be justly\nrequired of the Roman Catholics? And whether, in common prudence\nor policy, any priest should be tolerated who refuseth to take\nit?\n\n257 Whether there is any such thing as a body of inhabitants, in\nany Roman Catholic country under the sun, that profess an\nabsolute submission to the pope's orders in matters of an\nindifferent nature, or that in such points do not think it their\nduty to obey the civil government?\n\n258 Whether since the peace of Utrecht, mass was not celebrated\nand the sacraments administered in divers dioceses of Sicily,\nnotwithstanding the Pope's interdict?\n\n259 Whether a sum which would go but a little way towards\nerecting hospitals for maintaining and educating the children of\nthe native Irish might not go far in binding them out apprentices\nto Protestant masters, for husbandry, useful trades, and the\nservice of families?\n\n260 Whether there be any instance of a people's being converted\nin a Christian sense, otherwise than by preaching to them and\ninstructing them in their own language?\n\n261 Whether catechists in the Irish tongue may not easily be\nprocured and subsisted? And whether this would not be the most\npracticable means for converting the natives?\n\n262 Whether it be not of great advantage to the Church of Rome,\nthat she hath clergy suited to all ranks of men, in gradual\nsubordination from cardinals down to mendicants?\n\n263 Whether her numerous poor clergy are not very useful in\nmissions, and of much influence with the people?\n\n264 Whether, in defect of able missionaries, persons conversant\nin low life, and speaking the Irish tongue, if well instructed in\nthe first principles of religion, and in the popish controversy,\nthough for the rest on a level with the parish clerks, or the\nschool-masters of charity-schools, may not be fit to mix with and\nbring over our poor illiterate natives to the Established Church?\nWhether it is not to be wished that some parts of our liturgy and\nhomilies were publicly read in the Irish language? And whether,\nin these views, it may not be right to breed up some of the\nbetter sort of children in the charity-schools, and qualify them\nfor missionaries, catechists, and readers?\n\n265 Whether a squire possessed of land to the value of a thousand\npounds per annum, or a merchant worth twenty thousand pounds in\ncash, would have most power to do good or evil upon any\nemergency? And whether the suffering Roman Catholics to purchase\nforfeited lands would not be good policy, as tending to unite\ntheir interest with that of the government?\n\n266 Whether the sea-ports of Galway, Limerick, Cork, and\nWaterford are not to be looked on as keys of this kingdom? And\nwhether the merchants are not possessed of these keys; and who\nare the most numerous merchants in those cities?\n\n267 Whether a merchant cannot more speedily raise a sum, more\neasily conceal or transfer his effects, and engage in any\ndesperate design with more safety, than a landed man, whose\nestate is a pledge for his behaviour?\n\n268 Whether a wealthy merchant bears not great sway among the\npopulace of a trading city? And whether power be not ultimately\nlodged in the people?\n\n269 Whether, as others have supposed an Atlantis or Utopia, we\nalso may not suppose an Hyperborean island inhabited by\nreasonable creatures?\n\n270 Whether an indifferent person, who looks into all hands, may\nnot be a better judge of the game than a party who sees only his\nown?\n\n271 Whether there be any country in Christendom more capable of\nimprovement than Ireland?\n\n272 Whether we are not as far before other nations with respect\nto natural advantages, as we are behind them with respect to arts\nand industry?\n\n273 Whether we do not live in a most fertile soil and temperate\nclimate, and yet whether our people in general do not feel great\nwant and misery?\n\n274 Whether my countrymen are not readier at finding excuses than\nremedies?\n\n275 Whether the wealth and prosperity of our country do not hang\nby a hair, the probity of one banker, the caution of another, and\nthe lives of all?\n\n276 Whether we have not been sufficiently admonished of this by\nsome late events?\n\n277 Whether a national bank would not at once secure our\nproperties, put an end to usury, facilitate commerce, supply the\nwant of coin, and produce ready payments in all parts of the\nkingdom?\n\n278 Whether the use or nature of money, which all men so eagerly\npursue, be yet sufficiently understood or considered by all?\n\n279 What doth Aristotle mean by saying --\n\"Coin seems to be something trivial.\" - De repub., ix. 9?\n\n280 Whether mankind are not governed by Citation rather than by\nreason?\n\n281 Whether there be not a measure or limit, within which gold\nand silver are useful, and beyond which they may be hurtful?\n\n282 Whether that measure be not the circulating of industry?\n\n283 Whether a discovery of the richest gold mine that ever was,\nin the heart of this kingdom, would be a real advantagetous?\n\n284 Whether it would not tempt foreigners to prey upon us?\n\n285 Whether it would not render us a lazy, proud, and dastardly\npeople?\n\n286 Whether every man who had money enough would not be a\ngentleman? And whether a nation of gentlemen would not be a\nwretched nation?\n\n287 Whether all things would not bear a high price? And whether\nmen would not increase their fortunes without being the better\nfor it?\n\n288 Whether the same evils would be apprehended from paper-money\nunder an honest and thrifty regulation?\n\n289 Whether, therefore, a national bank would not be more\nbeneficial than even a mine of gold?\n\n290 Whether without private banks what little business and\nindustry there is would not stagnate? But whether it be not a\nmighty privilege for a private person to be able to create a\nhundred pounds with a dash of his pen?\n\n291 Whether the wise state of Venice was not the first that\nconceived the advantage of a national bank?\n\n292 Whether the great exactness and integrity with which this\nbank is managed be not the chief support of that republic?\n\n293 Whether the bank of Amsterdam was not begun about one hundred\nand thirty years ago, and whether at this day its stock be not\nconceived to amount to three thousand tons of gold, or thirty\nmillions sterling?\n\n294 Whether all payments of contracts for goods in gross, and\nletters of exchange, must not be made by transfers in the\nbank-books, provided the sum exceed three hundred florins?\n\n295 Whether it be not owing to this bank that the city of\nAmsterdam, without the least confusion, hazard, or trouble,\nmaintains and every day promotes so general and quick a\ncirculation of industry?\n\n296 Whether it be not the greatest help and spur to commerce that\nproperty can be so readily conveyed and so well secured by a\ncompte en banc, that is, by only writing one man's name for\nanother's in the bank-book?\n\n297 Whether, at the beginning of the last century, those who had\nlent money to the public during the war with Spain were not\nsatisfied by the sole expedient of placing their names in a\ncompte en banc, with liberty to transfer their claims?\n\n298 Whether the example of those easy transfers in the compte en\nbanc, thus casually erected, did not tempt other men to become\ncreditors to the public, in order to profit by the same secure\nand expeditious method of keeping and transferring their wealth?\n\n299 Whether this compte en banc hath not proved better than a\nmine of gold to Amsterdam?\n\n300 Whether that city may not be said to owe her greatness to the\nunpromising accident of her having been in debt more than she was\nable to Pay?\n\n301 Whether it be known that any State from such small\nbeginnings, in so short a time, ever grew to so great wealth and\npower as the province of Holland hath done; and whether the bank\nof Amsterdam hath not been the real cause of such extraordinary\ngrowth?\n\n302 Whether the success of those public banks in Venice,\nAmsterdam and Hamburg would not naturally produce in other States\nan inclination to the same methods?\n\n303 Whether it be possible for a national bank to subsist and\nmaintain its credit under a French government?\n\n304 Whether our natural appetites, as well as powers, are not\nlimited to their respective ends and uses? But whether artificial\nappetites may not be infinite?\n\n305 Whether the simple getting of money, or passing it from hand\nto hand without industry, be an object worthy of a wise\ngovernment?\n\n306 Whether, if money be considered as an end, the appetite\nthereof be not infinite? But whether the ends of money itself be\nnot bounded?\n\n307 Whether the total sum of all other powers, be it of enjoyment\nor action, which belong to man, or to all mankind together, is\nnot in truth a very narrow and limited quantity? But whether\nfancy is not boundless?\n\n308 Whether this capricious tyrant, which usurps the place of\nreason, doth not most cruelly torment and delude those poor men,\nthe usurers, stockjobbers, and projectors, of content to\nthemselves from heaping up riches, that is, from gathering\ncounters, from multiplying figures, from enlarging denominations,\nwithout knowing what they would be at, and without having a\nproper regard to the use or end or nature of things?\n\n309 Whether the ignis fatuus of fancy doth not kindle immoderate\ndesires, and lead men into endless pursuits and wild labyrinths?\n\n310 Whether counters be not referred to other things, which, so\nlong as they keep pace and proportion with the counters, it must\nbe owned the counters are useful; but whether beyond that to\nvalue or covet counters be not direct folly?\n\n311 Whether the public aim ought not to be, that men's industry\nshould supply their present wants, and the overplus be converted\ninto a stock of power?\n\n312 Whether the better this power is secured, and the more easily\nit is transferred, industry be not so much the more encouraged?\n\n313 Whether money, more than is expedient for those purposes, be\nnot upon the whole hurtful rather than beneficial to a State?\n\n314 Whether the promoting of industry should not be always in\nview, as the true and sole end, the rule and measure, of a\nnational bank? And whether all deviations from that object should\nnot be carefully avoided?\n\n315 Whether it may not be useful, for supplying manufactures and\ntrade with stock, for regulating exchange, for quickening\ncommerce, for putting spirit into the people?\n\n316 Whether we are sufficiently sensible of the peculiar security\nthere is in having a bank that consists of land and paper, one of\nwhich cannot be exported, and the other is in no danger of being\nexported?\n\n317 Whether it be not delightful to complain? And whether there\nbe not many who had rather utter their complaints than redress\ntheir evils?\n\n318 Whether, if 'the crown of the wise be their riches' (Prov.,\nxiv.24), we are not the foolishest people in Christendom?\n\n319 Whether we have not all the while great civil as well as\nnatural advantages?\n\n320 Whether there be any people who have more leisure to\ncultivate the arts of peace, and study the public weal?\n\n321 Whether other nations who enjoy any share of freedom, and\nhave great objects in view, be not unavoidably embarrassed and\ndistracted by factions? But whether we do not divide upon\ntrifles, and whether our parties are not a burlesque upon\npolitics?\n\n322 Whether it be not an advantage that we are not embroiled in\nforeign affairs, that we hold not the balance of Europe, that we\nare protected by other fleets and armies, that it is the true\ninterest of a powerful people, from whom we are descended, to\nguard us on all sides?\n\n323 Whether England doth not really love us and wish well to us,\nas bone of her bone, and flesh of her flesh? And whether it be\nnot our part to cultivate this love and affection all manner of\nways?\n\n324 What sea-ports or foreign trade have the Swisses; and yet how\nwarm are those people, and how well provided?\n\n325 Whether there may not be found a people who so contrive as to\nbe impoverished by their trade? And whether we are not that\npeople?\n\n326 Whether it would not be better for this island, if all our\nfine folk of both sexes were shipped off, to remain in foreign\ncountries, rather than that they should spend their estates at\nhome in foreign luxury, and spread the contagion thereof through\ntheir native land?\n\n327 Whether our gentry understand or have a notion of\nmagnificence, and whether for want thereof they do not affect\nvery wretched distinctions?\n\n328 Whether there be not an art or skill in governing human\npride, so as to render it subservient to the public aim?\n\n329 Whether the great and general aim of the public should not be\nto employ the people?\n\n330 What right an eldest son hath to the worst education?\n\n331 Whether men's counsels are not the result of their knowledge\nand their principles?\n\n332 Whether there be not labour of the brains as well as of the\nhands, and whether the former is beneath a gentleman?\n\n333 Whether the public be more interested to protect the property\nacquired by mere birth than that which is the Mediate fruit of\nlearning and virtue?\n\n334 Whether it would not be a poor and ill-judged project to\nattempt to promote the good of the community, by invading the\nrights of one part thereof, or of one particular order of men?\n\n335 Whether there be a more wretched, and at the same time a more\nunpitied case, than for men to make precedents for their own\nundoing?\n\n336 Whether to determine about the rights and properties of men\nby other rules than the law be not dangerous?\n\n337 Whether those men who move the corner-stones of a\nconstitution may not pull an old house on their own heads?\n\n338 Whether there be not two general methods whereby men become\nsharers in the national stock of wealth or power, industry and\ninheritance? And whether it would be wise in a civil society to\nlessen that share which is allotted to merit and industry?\n\n339 Whether all ways of spending a fortune be of equal benefit to\nthe public, and what sort of men are aptest to run into an\nimproper expense?\n\n340 If the revenues allotted for the encouragement of religion\nand learning were made hereditary in the hands of a dozen lay\nlords and as many overgrown commoners, whether the public would\nbe much the better for it?\n\n341 Whether the Church's patrimony belongs to one tribe alone;\nand whether every man's son, brother, or himself, may not, if he\nplease, be qualified to share therein?\n\n342 What is there in the clergy to create a jealousy in the\npublic? Or what would the public lose by it, if every squire in\nthe land wore a black coat, said his prayers, and was obliged to\nreside?\n\n343 Whether there be anything perfect under the sun? And whether\nit be not with the world as with a particular State, and with a\nState or body politic as with the human body, which lives and\nmoves under various indispositions, perfect health being seldom\nor never to be found?\n\n344 Whether, nevertheless, men should not in all things aim at\nperfection? And, therefore, whether any wise and good man would\nbe against applying remedies? But whether it is not natural to\nwish for a benevolent physician?\n345 Whether the public happiness be not proposed by the\nlegislature, and whether such happiness doth not contain that of\nthe individuals?\n\n346 Whether, therefore, a legislator should be content with a\nvulgar share of knowledge? Whether he should not be a person of\nreflexion and thought, who hath made it his study to understand\nthe true nature and interest of mankind, how to guide men's\nhumours and passions, how to incite their active powers, how to\nmake their several talents co-operate to the mutual benefit of\neach other, and the general good of the whole?\n\n347 Whether it doth not follow that above all things a\ngentleman's care should be to keep his own faculties sound and\nentire?\n\n348 Whether the natural phlegm of this island needs any\nadditional stupefier?\n\n349 Whether all spirituous liquors are not in truth opiates?\n\n350 Whether our men of business are not generally very grave by\nfifty?\n\n351 Whether all men have not faculties of mind or body which may\nbe employed for the public benefit?\n\n352 Whether the main point be not to multiply and employ our\npeople?\n\n353 Whether hearty food and warm clothing would not enable and\nencourage the lower sort to labour?\n\n354 Whether, in such a soil as ours, if there was industry, there\ncould be want?\n\n355 Whether the way to make men industrious be not to let them\ntaste the fruits of their industry? And whether the labouring ox\nshould be muzzled?\n\n356 Whether our landlords are to be told that industry and\nnumbers would raise the value of their lands, or that one acre\nabout the Tholsel is worth ten thousand acres in Connaught?\n\n357 Whether our old native Irish are not the most indolent and\nsupine people in Christendom?\n\n358 Whether they are yet civilized, and whether their habitations\nand furniture are not more sordid than those of the savage\nAmericans?\n\n359 Whether it be not a sad circumstance to live among lazy\nbeggars? And whether, on the other hand, it would not be\ndelightful to live in a country swarming, like China, with busy\npeople?\n\n360 Whether we should not cast about, by all manner of means, to\nexcite industry, and to remove whatever hinders it? And whether\nevery one should not lend a helping hand?\n\n361 Whether vanity itself should not be engaged in this good\nwork? And whether it is not to be wished that the finding of\nemployment for themselves and others were a fashionable\ndistinction among the ladies?\n\n362 Whether idleness be the mother or the daughter of spleen?\n\n363 Whether it may not be worth while to publish the conversation\nof Ischomachus and his wife in Xenophon, for the use of our\nladies?\n\n364 Whether it is true that there have been, upon a time, one\nhundred millions of people employed in China, without the woollen\ntrade, or any foreign commerce?\n\n365 Whether the natural inducements to sloth are not greater in\nthe Mogul's country than in Ireland, and yet whether, in that\nsuffocating and dispiriting climate, the Banyans are not all,\nmen, women, and children, constantly employed?\n\n366 Whether it be not true that the great Mogul's subjects might\nundersell us even in our own markets, and clothe our people with\ntheir stuffs and calicoes, if they were imported duty free?\n\n367 Whether there can be a greater reproach on the leading men\nand the patriots of a country, than that the people should want\nemployment? And whether methods may not be found to employ even\nthe lame and the blind, the dumb, the deaf, and the maimed, in\nsome or other branch of our manufactures?\n\n368 Whether much may not be expected from a biennial consultation\nof so many wise men about the public good?\n\n369 Whether a tax upon dirt would not be one way of encouraging\nindustry?\n\n370 Whether it would be a great hardship if every parish were\nobliged to find work for their poor?\n\n371 Whether children especially should not be inured to labour\nbetimes?\n\n372 Whether there should not be erected, in each province, an\nhospital for orphans and foundlings, at the expense of old\nbachelors?\n\n373 Whether it be true that in the Dutch workhouses things are so\nmanaged that a child four years old may earn its own livelihood?\n\n374 What a folly is it to build fine houses, or establish\nlucrative posts and large incomes, under the notion of providing\nfor the poor?\n\n375 Whether the poor, grown up and in health, need any other\nprovision but their own industry, under public inspection?\n\n376 Whether the poor-tax in England hath lessened or increased\nthe number of the poor?\n\n377 Whether workhouses should not be made at the least expense,\nwith clay floors, and walls of rough stone, without plastering,\nceiling, or glazing?\n\n378 Whether it be an impossible attempt to set our people at\nwork, or whether industry be a habit which, like other habits,\nmay by time and skill be introduced among any people?\n\n379 Whether all manner of means should not be employed to possess\nthe nation in general with an aversion and contempt for idleness\nand all idle folk?\n\n380 Whether it would be a hardship on people destitute of all\nthings, if the public furnished them with necessaries which they\nshould be obliged to earn by their labour?\n\n381 Whether other nations have not found great benefit from the\nuse of slaves in repairing high roads, making rivers navigable,\ndraining bogs, erecting public buildings, bridges, and\nmanufactures?\n\n382 Whether temporary servitude would not be the best cure for\nidleness and beggary?\n\n383 Whether the public hath not a right to employ those who\ncannot or who will not find employment for themselves?\n\n384 Whether all sturdy beggars should not be seized and made\nslaves to the public for a certain term of years?\n\n385 Whether he who is chained in a jail or dungeon hath not, for\nthe time, lost his liberty? And if so, whether temporary slavery\nbe not already admitted among us?\n\n386 Whether a state of servitude, wherein he should be well\nworked, fed, and clothed, would not be a preferment to such a\nfellow?\n\n387 Whether criminals in the freest country may not forfeit their\nliberty, and repair the damage they have done the public by hard\nlabour?\n\n388 What the word 'servant' signifies in the New Testament?\n\n389 Whether the view of criminals chained in pairs and kept at\nhard labour would not be very edifying to the multitude?\n\n390 Whether the want of such an institution be not plainly seen\nin England, where the disbelief of a future state hardeneth\nrogues against the fear of death, and where, through the great\ngrowth of robbers and housebreakers, it becomes every day more\nnecessary?\n\n391 Whether it be not easier to prevent than to remedy, and\nwhether we should not profit by the example of others?\n\n392 Whether felons are not often spared, and therefore\nencouraged, by the compassion of those who should prosecute.\nthem?\n\n393 Whether many that would not take away the life of a thief may\nnot nevertheless be willing to bring him to a more adequate\npunishment?\n\n394 Whether the most indolent would be fond of idleness, if they\nregarded it as the sure road to hard labour?\n\n395 Whether the industry of the lower part of our people doth not\nmuch depend on the expense of the upper?\n\n396 What would be the consequence if our gentry affected to\ndistinguish themselves by fine houses rather than fine clothes?\n\n397 Whether any people in Europe are so meanly provided with\nhouses and furniture, in proportion to their incomes, as the men\nof estates in Ireland?\n\n398 Whether building would not peculiarly encourage all other\narts in this kingdom?\n\n399 Whether smiths, masons, bricklayers, plasterers, carpenters,\njoiners, tilers, plumbers, and glaziers would not all find\nemployment if the humour of building prevailed?\n\n400 Whether the ornaments and furniture of a good house do not\nemploy a number of all sorts of artificers, in iron, wood,\nmarble, brass, pewter, copper, wool, flax, and divers other\nmaterials?\n\n401 Whether in buildings and gardens a great number of\nday-labourers do not find employment?\n\n402 Whether by these means much of that sustenance and wealth of\nthis nation which now goes to foreigners would not be kept at\nhome, and nourish and circulate among our own people?\n\n403 Whether, as industry produced good living, the number of\nhands and mouths would not be increased; and in proportion\nthereunto, whether there would not be every day more occasion for\nagriculture? And whether this article alone would not employ a\nworld of people?\n\n404 Whether such management would not equally provide for the\nmagnificence of the rich, and the necessities of the poor?\n\n405 Whether an expense in building and improvements doth not\nremain at home, pass to the heir, and adorn the public? And\nwhether any of those things can be said of claret?\n\n406 Whether fools do not make fashions, and wise men follow them?\n\n407 Whether, for one who hurts his fortune by improvements,\ntwenty do not ruin themselves by foreign luxury?\n\n408 Whether in proportion as Ireland was improved and beautified\nby fine seats, the number of absentees would not decrease?\n\n409 Whether he who employs men in buildings and manufactures doth\nnot put life in the country, and whether the neighbourhood round\nhim be not observed to thrive?\n\n410 Whether money circulated on the landlord's own lands, and\namong his own tenants, doth not return into his own pocket?\n\n411 Whether every squire that made his domain swarm with busy\nhands, like a bee-hive or ant-hill, would not serve his own\ninterest, as well as that of his country?\n\n412 Whether a gentleman who hath seen a little of the world, and\nobserved how men live elsewhere, can contentedly sit down in a\ncold, damp, sordid habitation, in the midst of a bleak country,\ninhabited by thieves and beggars?\n\n413 Whether, on the other hand, a handsome seat amidst\nwell-improved lands, fair villages, and a thriving neighbourhood\nmay not invite a man to dwell on his own estate, and quit the\nlife of an insignificant saunterer about town for that of a\nuseful country-gentleman?\n\n414 Whether it would not be of use and ornament if the towns\nthroughout this kingdom were provided with decent churches,\ntownhouses, workhouses, market-places, and paved streets, with\nsome order taken for cleanliness?\n\n415 Whether, if each of these towns were addicted to some\npeculiar manufacture, we should not find that the employing many\nhands together on the same work was the way to perfect our\nworkmen? And whether all these things might not soon be provided\nby a domestic industry, if money were not wanting?\n\n416 Whether money could ever be wanting to the demands of\nindustry, if we had a national bank?\n\n417 Whether the fable of Hercules and the carter ever suited any\nnation like this nation of Ireland?\n\n418 Whether it be not a new spectacle under the sun, to behold,\nin such a climate and such a soil, and under such a gentle\ngovernment, so many roads untrodden, fields untilled, houses\ndesolate, and hands unemployed?\n\n419 Whether there is any country in Christendom, either kingdom\nor republic, depending or independent, free or enslaved, which\nmay not afford us a useful lesson?\n\n420 Whether the frugal Swisses have any other commodities but\ntheir butter and cheese and a few cattle, for exportation;\nwhether, nevertheless, the single canton of Berne hath not in her\npublic treasury two millions sterling?\n\n421 Whether that small town of Berne, with its scanty barren\nterritory, in a mountainous corner, without sea-ports, without\nmanufactures, without mines, be not rich by mere dint of\nfrugality?\n\n422 Whether the Swisses in general have not sumptuary laws,\nprohibiting the use of gold, jewels, silver, silk, and lace in\ntheir apparel, and indulging the women only to wear silk on\nfestivals, weddings, and public solemnities?\n\n423 Whether there be not two ways of growing rich, sparing and\ngetting? But whether the lazy spendthrift must not be doubly\npoor?\n\n424 Whether money circulating be not the life of industry; and\nwhether the want thereof doth not render a State gouty and\ninactive?\n\n425 But whether, if we had a national bank, and our present cash\n(small as it is) were put into the most convenient shape, men\nshould hear any public complaints for want of money?\n\n426 Whether all circulation be not alike a circulation of credit,\nwhatsoever medium (metal or paper) is employed, and whether gold\nbe any more than credit for so much power?\n\n427 Whether the wealth of the richest nations in Christendom doth\nnot consist in paper vastly more than in gold and silver?\n\n428 Whether Lord Clarendon doth not aver of his own knowledge,\nthat the Prince of Orange, with the best credit, and the\nassistance of the richest men in Amsterdam, was above ten days\nendeavouring to raise \u00a320,000 in specie, without being able to\nraise half the sum in all that time? (See Clarendon's History,\nBK. XII)\n\n429 Supposing there had been hitherto no such thing as a bank,\nand the question were now first proposed, whether it would be\nsafer to circulate unlimited bills in a private credit, or bills\nto a limited value on the public credit of the community, what\nwould men think?\n\n430 Whether the maxim, 'What is everybody's business is\nnobody's,' prevails in any country under the sun more than in\nIreland?\n\n431 Whether the united stock of a nation be not the best\nsecurity? And whether anything but the ruin of the State can\nproduce a national bankruptcy?\n\n432 Whether the total sum of the public treasure, power, and\nwisdom, all co-operating, be not most likely to establish a bank\nof credit, sufficient to answer the ends, relieve the wants, and\nsatisfy the scruples of all people?\n\n433 Whether London is not to be considered as the metropolis of\nIreland? And whether our wealth (such as it is) doth not\ncirculate through London and throughout all England, as freely as\nthat of any part of his Majesty's dominions?\n\n434 Whether therefore it be not evidently the interest of the\npeople of England to encourage rather than to oppose a national\nbank in this kingdom, as well as every other means for advancing\nour wealth which shall not impair their own?\n\n435 Whether it is not our interest to be useful to them rather\nthan rival them; and whether in that case we may not be sure of\ntheir good offices?\n\n436 Whether we can propose to thrive so long as we entertain a\nwrongheaded distrust of England?\n\n437 Whether, as a national bank would increase our industry, and\nthat our wealth, England may not be a proportionable gainer; and\nwhether we should not consider the gains of our mother-country as\nsome accession to our own?\n438 Whether there be any difficulty in comprehending that the\nwhole wealth of the nation is in truth the stock of a national\nbank? And whether any more than the right comprehension of this\nbe necessary to make all men easy with regard to its credit?\n\n439 Whether the prejudices about gold and silver are not strong,\nbut whether they are not still prejudices?\n\n440 Whether paper doth not by its stamp and signature acquire a\nlocal value, and become as precious and as scarce as gold? And\nwhether it be not much fitter to circulate large sums, and\ntherefore preferable to gold?\n\n441 Whether it doth not much import to have a right conception of\nmoney? And whether its true and just idea be not that of a\nticket, entitling to power, and fitted to record and transfer\nsuch power?\n\n442 Though the bank of Amsterdam doth very rarely, if at all, pay\nout money, yet whether every man possessed of specie be not ready\nto convert it into paper, and act as cashier to the bank? And\nwhether, from the same motive, every monied man throughout this\nkingdom would not be cashier to our national bank?\n\n443 Whether we may not obtain that as friends which it is in vain\nto hope for as rivals?\n\n444 Whether in every instance by which we prejudice England, we\ndo not in a greater degree prejudice ourselves?\n\n445 Whether in the rude original of society the first step was\nnot the exchanging of commodities; the next a substituting of\nmetals by weight as the common medium of circulation; after this\nthe making use of coin; lastly, a further refinement by the use\nof paper with proper marks and signatures? And whether this, as\nit is the last, so it be not the greatest improvement?\n\n446 Whether we are not in fact the only people who may be said to\nstarve in the midst of plenty?\n\n447 Whether there can be a worse sign than that people should\nquit their country for a livelihood? Though men often leave their\ncountry for health, or pleasure, or riches, yet to leave it\nmerely for a livelihood, whether this be not exceeding bad, and\nsheweth some peculiar mismanagement?\n\n448 Whether, in order to redress our evils, artificial helps are\nnot most wanted in a land where industry is most against the\nnatural grain of the people?\n\n449 Whether, although the prepossessions about gold and silver\nhave taken deep root, yet the example of our Colonies in America\ndoth not make it as plain as day-light that they are not so\nnecessary to the wealth of a nation as the vulgar of all ranks\nimagine?\n\n450 Whether it be not evident that we may maintain a much greater\ninward and outward commerce, and be five times richer than we\nare, nay, and our bills abroad be of far greater credit, though\nwe had not one ounce of gold or silver in the whole island?\n\n451 Whether wrongheaded maxims, customs, and fashions are not\nsufficient to destroy any people which hath so few resources as\nthe inhabitants of Ireland.\n\n452 Whether it would not be a horrible thing to see our matrons\nmake dress and play their chief concern?\n\n453 Whether our ladies might not as well endow monasteries as\nwear Flanders lace? And whether it be not true that Popish nuns\nare maintained by Protestant contributions?\n\n454 Whether England, which hath a free trade, whatever she remits\nfor foreign luxury with one hand, doth not with the other receive\nmuch more from abroad? Whether, nevertheless, this nation would\nnot be a gainer, if our women would content themselves with the\nsame moderation in point of expense as the English ladies?\n\n455 But whether it be not a notorious truth that our Irish ladies\nare on a foot, as to dress, with those of five times their\nfortune in England?\n\n456 Whether it be not even certain that the matrons of this\nforlorn country send out a greater proportion of its wealth, for\nfine apparel, than any other females on the whole surface of this\nterraqueous globe?\n\n457 Whether the expense, great as it is, be the greatest evil;\nbut whether this folly may not produce many other follies, an\nentire derangement of domestic life, absurd manners, neglect of\nduties, bad mothers, a general corruption in both sexes?\n\n458 Whether the first beginning of expedients do not always meet\nwith prejudices? And whether even the prejudices of a people\nought not to be respected?\n\n459 Whether a national bank be not the true philosopher's stone\nin a State?\n\n460 Whether all regulations of coin should not be made with a\nview to encourage industry, and a circulation of commerce,\nthroughout the kingdom?\n\n461 Whether to oil the wheels of commerce be not a common\nbenefit? And whether this be not done by avoiding fractions and\nmultiplying small silver?\n\n462 Whether, all things considered, a general raising the value\nof gold and silver be not so far from bringing greater quantities\nthereof into the kingdom that it would produce a direct contrary\neffect, inasmuch as less, in that case, would serve, and\ntherefore less be wanted? And whether men do not import a\ncommodity in proportion to the demand or want of it?\n\n463 Whether the lowering of our gold would not create a fever in\nthe State? And whether a fever be not sometimes a cure, but\nwhether it be not the last cure a man would choose?\n\n464 Whether raising the value of a particular species will not\ntend to multiply such species, and to lessen others in proportion\nthereunto? And whether a much less quantity of cash in silver\nwould not, in reality, enrich the nation more than a much greater\nin gold?\n\n465 Whether, ceteris paribus, it be not true that the prices of\nthings increase as the quantity of money increaseth, and are\ndiminished as that is diminished? And whether, by the quantity of\nmoney is not to be understood the amount of the denominations,\nall contracts being nominal for pounds, shillings, and pence, and\nnot for weights of gold or silver?\n\n466 Whether our exports do not consist of such necessaries as\nother countries cannot well be without?\n\n467 Whether upon the circulation of a national bank more land\nwould not be tilled, more hands employed, and consequently more\ncommodities exported?\n\n468 Whether silver and small money be not that which circulates\nthe quickest, and passeth through all hands, on the road, in the\nmarket, at the shop?\n\n469 Whether, all things considered, it would not be better for a\nkingdom that its cash consisted of half a million in small\nsilver, than of five times that sum in gold?\n\n470 Whether there be not every day five hundred lesser payments\nmade for one that requires gold?\n\n471 Whether Spain, where gold bears the highest value, be not the\nlaziest, and China, where it bears the lowest, be not the most\nindustrious country in the known world?\n\n472 Whether it be not evidently the interest of every State, that\nits money should rather circulate than stagnate?\n\n473 Whether the principal use of cash be not its ready passing\nfrom hand to hand, to answer common occasions of the common\npeople, and whether common occasions of all sorts of people are\nnot small ones?\n\n474 Whether business at fairs and markets is not often at a stand\nand often hindered, even though the seller hath his commodities\nat hand and the purchaser his gold, yet for want of change?\n\n475 As wealth is really power, and coin a ticket conveying power,\nwhether those tickets which are the fittest for that use ought\nnot to be preferred?\n\n476 Whether those tickets which singly transfer small shares of\npower, and, being multiplied, large shares, are not fitter for\ncommon use than those which singly transfer large shares?\n\n477 Whether the public is not more benefited by a shilling that\ncirculates than a pound that lies dead?\n\n478 Whether sixpence twice paid be not as good as a shilling once\npaid?\n\n479 Whether the same shilling circulating in a village may not\nsupply one man with bread, another with stockings, a third with a\nknife, a fourth with paper, a fifth with nails, and so answer\nmany wants which must otherwise have remained unsatisfied?\n\n480 Whether facilitating and quickening the circulation of power\nto supply wants be not the promoting of wealth and industry among\nthe lower people? And whether upon this the wealth of the great\ndoth not depend?\n\n481 Whether, without the proper means of circulation, it be not\nvain to hope for thriving manufacturers and a busy people?\n\n482 Whether four pounds in small cash may not circulate and\nenliven an Irish market, which many four-pound pieces would\npermit to stagnate?\n\n483 Whether a man that could move nothing less than a\nhundred-pound weight would not be much at a loss to supply his\nwants; and whether it would not be better for him to be less\nstrong and more active?\n\n484 Whether the natural body can be in a state of health and\nvigour without a due circulation of the extremities, even? And\nwhether the political body, any in the fingers and toes more than\nthe natural, can thrive without a proportionable circulation\nthrough the minutest and most inconsiderable parts thereof?\n\n485 If we had a mint for coining only shillings, sixpences, and\ncopper-money, whether the nation would not soon feel the good\neffects thereof?\n\n486 Whether the greater waste by wearing of small coins would not\nbe abundantly overbalanced by their usefulness?\n\n487 Whether it be not the industry of common people that feeds\nthe State, and whether it be possible to keep this industry alive\nwithout small money?\n\n488 Whether the want of this be not a great bar to our employing\nthe people in these manufactures which are open to us, and do not\ninterfere with Great Britain?\n\n489 Whether therefore such want doth not drive men into the lazy\nway of employing land under sheep-walk?\n\n490 Whether the running of wool from Ireland can so effectually\nbe prevented as by encouraging other business and manufactures\namong our people?\n\n491 Whatever commodities Great Britain importeth which we might\nsupply, whether it be not her real interest to import them from\nus rather than from any other people?\n\n492 Whether the apprehension of many among us (who for that very\nreason stick to their wool), that England may hereafter prohibit,\nlimit, or discourage our linen trade, when it hath been once,\nwith great pains and expense, thoroughly introduced and settled\nin this land, be not altogether groundless and unjust?\n\n493 Whether it is possible for this country, which hath neither\nmines of gold nor a free trade, to support for any time the\nsending out of specie?\n\n494 Whether in fact our payments are not made by bills? And\nwhether our foreign credit doth not depend on our domestic\nindustry, and our bills on that credit?\n\n495 Whether, in order to mend it, we ought not first to know the\npeculiar wretchedness of our state? And whether there be any\nknowing of this but by comparison?\n\n496 Whether there are not single market towns in England that\nturn more money in buying and selling than whole counties\n(perhaps provinces) with us?\n\n497 Whether the small town of Birmingham alone doth not, upon an\naverage, circulate every week, one way or other, to the value of\nfifty thousand pounds? But whether the same crown may not be\noften paid?\n\n498 Whether any kingdom in Europe be so good a customer at\nBordeaux as Ireland?\n\n499 Whether the police and economy of France be not governed by\nwise councils? And whether any one from this country, who sees\ntheir towns, and manufactures, and commerce, will not wonder what\nour senators have been doing?\n\n500 What variety and number of excellent manufactures are to be\nmet with throughout the whole kingdom of France?\n\n501 Whether there are not everywhere some or other mills for many\nuses, forges and furnaces for iron-work, looms for tapestry,\nglass-houses, and so forth?\n\n502 What quantities of paper, stockings, hats; what manufactures\nof wool, silk, linen, hemp, leather, wax, earthenware, brass,\nlead, tin, &c?\n\n503 Whether the manufactures and commerce of the single town of\nLyons do not amount to a greater value than all the manufactures\nand all the trade of this kingdom taken together?\n\n504 Whether, in the anniversary fair at the small town of\nBeaucaire upon the Rhone, there be not as much money laid out as\nthe current cash of this kingdom amounts to?\n\n505 Whether the very shreds shorn from woollen cloth, which are\nthrown away in Ireland, do not make a beautiful tapestry in\nFrance?\n\n506 Whether there be not French towns subsisted merely by making\npins?\n\n507 Whether the coarse fingers of those very women, those same\npeasants who one part of the year till the ground and dress the\nvineyards, are not another employed in making the finest French\npoint?\n\n508 Whether there is not a great number of idle fingers among the\nwives and daughters of our peasants?\n\n509 Whether the French do not raise a trade from saffron, dyeing\ndrugs, and the like products, which may do with us as well as\nwith them?\n\n510 Whether we may not have materials of our own growth to supply\nall manufactures, as well as France, except silk, and whether the\nbulk of what silk even France manufactures be not imported?\n\n511 Whether it be possible for this country to grow rich, so long\nas what is made by domestic industry is spent in foreign luxury?\n\n512 Whether our natural Irish are not partly Spaniards and partly\nTartars, and whether they do not bear signatures of their descent\nfrom both these nations, which is also confirmed by all their\nhistories?\n\n513 Whether the Tartar progeny is not numerous in this land? And\nwhether there is an idler occupation under the sun than to attend\nflocks and herds of cattle?\n\n514 Whether the wisdom of the State should not wrestle with this\nhereditary disposition of our Tartars, and with a high hand\nintroduce agriculture?\n\n515 Whether once upon a time France did not, by her linen alone,\ndraw yearly from Spain about eight millions of livres?\n\n516 Whether the French have not suffered in their linen trade\nwith Spain, by not making their cloth of due breadth; and whether\nany other people have suffered, and are still likely to suffer,\nthrough the same prevarication?\n\n517 Whether the Spaniards are not rich and lazy, and whether they\nhave not a particular inclination and favour for the inhabitants\nof this island? But whether a punctual people do not love\npunctual dealers?\n\n518 Whether about fourteen years ago we had not come into a\nconsiderable share of the linen trade with Spain, and what put a\nstop to this?\n\n519 Whether, if the linen manufacture were carried on in the\nother provinces as well as in the North, the merchants of Cork,\nLimerick, and Galway would not soon find the way to Spain?\n\n520 Whether the woollen manufacture of England is not divided\ninto several parts or branches, appropriated to particular\nplaces, where they are only or principally manufactured; fine\ncloths in Somersetshire, coarse in Yorkshire, long ells at\nExeter, saies at Sudbury, crapes at Norwich, linseys at Kendal,\nblankets at Witney, and so forth?\n\n521 Whether the united skill, industry, and emulation of many\ntogether on the same work be not the way to advance it? And\nwhether it had been otherwise possible for England to have\ncarried on her woollen manufacture to so great perfection?\n\n522 Whether it would not on many accounts be right if we observed\nthe same course with respect to our linen manufacture; and that\ndiapers were made in one town or district, damasks in another,\nsheeting in a third, fine wearing linen in a fourth, coarse in a\nfifth, in another cambrics, in another thread and stockings, in\nothers stamped linen, or striped linen, or tickings, or dyed\nlinen, of which last kinds there is so great a consumption among\nthe seafaring men of all nations?\n\n523 Whether it may not be worth while to inform ourselves of the\ndifferent sorts of linen which are in request among different\npeople?\n\n524 Whether we do not yearly consume of French wines about a\nthousand tuns more than either Sweden or Denmark, and yet whether\nthose nations pay ready money as we do?\n\n525 Whether it be not a custom for some thousands of Frenchmen to\ngo about the beginning of March into Spain, and having tilled the\nlands and gathered the harvest of Spain, to return home with\nmoney in their pockets about the end of November?\n\n526 Whether of late years our Irish labourers do not carry on the\nsame business in England to the great discontent of many there?\nBut whether we have not much more reason than the people of\nEngland to be displeased at this commerce?\n\n527 Whether, notwithstanding the cash supposed to be brought into\nit, any nation is, in truth, a gainer by such traffic?\n\n528 Whether the industry of our people employed in foreign lands,\nwhile our own are left uncultivated, be not a great loss to the\ncountry?\n\n529 Whether it would not be much better for us, if, instead of\nsending our men abroad, we could draw men from the neighbouring\ncountries to cultivate our own?\n\n530 Whether, nevertheless, we are not apt to think the money\nimported by our labourers to be so much clear gains to this\ncountry, but whether a little reflexion and a little political\narithmetic may not shew us our mistake?\n\n531 Whether our prejudices about gold and silver are not very apt\nto infect or misguide our judgments and reasonings about the\npublic weal?\n\n532 Whether it be not a good rule whereby to judge of the trade\nof any city, and its usefulness, to observe whether there is a\ncirculation through the extremities, and whether the people round\nabout are busy and warm?\n\n533 Whether we had not, some years since, a manufacture of hats\nat Athlone, and of earthenware at Arklow, and what became of\nthose manufactures?\n\n534 Why we do not make tiles of our own, for flooring and\nroofing, rather than bring them from Holland?\n\n535 What manufactures are there in France and Venice of\ngilt-leather, how cheap and how splendid a furniture?\n\n536 Whether we may not, for the same use, manufacture divers\nthings at home of more beauty and variety than wainscot, which is\nimported at such expense from Norway?\n\n537 Whether the use and the fashion will not soon make a\nmanufacture?\n\n538 Whether, if our gentry used to drink mead and cider, we\nshould not soon have those liquors in the utmost perfection and\nplenty?\n\n539 Whether it be not wonderful that with such pastures, and so\nmany black cattle, we do not find ourselves in cheese?\n\n540 Whether great profits may not be made by fisheries; but\nwhether those of our Irish who live by that business do not\ncontrive to be drunk and unemployed one half of the year?\n\n541 Whether it be not folly to think an inward commerce cannot\nenrich a State, because it doth not increase its quantity of gold\nand silver? And whether it is possible a country should? not\nthrive, while wants are supplied, and business goes on?\n\n542 Whether plenty of all the necessaries and comforts of life be\nnot real wealth?\n\n543 Whether Lyons, by the advantage of her midland situation and\nthe rivers Rhone and Saone, be not a great magazine or mart for\ninward commerce? And whether she doth not maintain a constant\ntrade with most parts of France; with Provence for oils and dried\nfruits, for wines and cloth with Languedoc, for stuffs with\nChampagne, for linen with Picardy, Normandy, and Brittany, for\ncorn with Burgundy?\n\n544 Whether she doth not receive and utter all those commodities,\nand raise a profit from the distribution thereof, as well as of\nher own manufactures, throughout the kingdom of France?\n\n545 Whether the charge of making good roads and navigable rivers\nacross the country would not be really repaid by an inward\ncommerce?\n\n546 Whether, as our trade and manufactures increased, magazines\nshould not be established in proper places, fitted by their\nsituation, near great roads and navigable rivers, lakes, or\ncanals, for the ready reception and distribution of all sorts of\ncommodities from and to the several parts of the kingdom; and\nwhether the town of Athlone, for instance, may not be fitly\nsituated for such a magazine, or centre of domestic commerce?\n\n547 Whether an inward trade would not cause industry to flourish,\nand multiply the circulation of our coin, and whether this may\nnot do as well as multiplying the coin itself?\n\n548 Whether the benefits of a domestic commerce are sufficiently\nunderstood and attended to; and whether the cause thereof be not\nthe prejudiced and narrow way of thinking about gold and silver?\n\n549 Whether there be any other more easy and unenvied method of\nincreasing the wealth of a people?\n\n550 Whether we of this island are not from our peculiar\ncircumstances determined to this very commerce above any other,\nfrom the number of necessaries and good things that we possess\nwithin ourselves, from the extent and variety of our soil, from\nthe navigable rivers and good roads which we have or may have, at\na less expense than any people in Europe, from our great plenty\nof materials for manufactures, and particularly from the\nrestraints we lie under with regard to our foreign trade?\n\n551 Whether annual inventories should not be published of the\nfairs throughout the kingdom, in order to judge of the growth of\nits commerce?\n\n552 Whether there be not every year more cash circulated at the\ncard tables of Dublin than at all the fairs of Ireland?\n\n553 Whether the wealth of a country will not bear proportion to\nthe skill and industry of its inhabitants?\n\n554 Whether foreign imports that tend to promote industry should\nnot be encouraged, and such as have a tendency to promote luxury\nshould not be discouraged?\n\n555 Whether the annual balance of trade between Italy and Lyons\nbe not about four millions in favour of the former, and yet,\nwhether Lyons be not a gainer by this trade?\n\n556 Whether the general rule, of determining the profit of a\ncommerce by its balance, doth not, like other general rules,\nadmit of exceptions?\n\n557 Whether it would not be a monstrous folly to import nothing\nbut gold and silver, supposing we might do it, from every foreign\npart to which we trade? And yet, whether some men may not think\nthis foolish circumstance a very happy one?\n\n558 But whether we do not all see the ridicule of the Mogul's\nsubjects, who take from us nothing but our silver, and bury it\nunder ground, in order to make sure thereof against the\nresurrection?\n\n559 Whether he must not be a wrongheaded patriot or politician,\nwhose ultimate view was drawing money into a country, and keeping\nit there?\n\n560 Whether it be not evident that not gold but industry causeth\na country to flourish?\n\n561 Whether it would not be a silly project in any nation to hope\nto grow rich by prohibiting the exportation of gold and silver?\n\n562 Whether there can be a greater mistake in politics than to\nmeasure the wealth of the nation by its gold and silver?\n\n563 Whether gold and silver be not a drug, where they do not\npromote industry? Whether they be not even the bane and undoing\nof an idle people?\n\n564 Whether gold will not cause either industry or vice to\nflourish? And whether a country, where it flowed in without\nlabour, must not be wretched and dissolute like an island\ninhabited by buccaneers?\n\n565 Whether arts and virtue are not likely to thrive, where money\nis made a means to industry? But whether money without this would\nbe a blessing to any people?\n\n566 Whether keeping cash at home, or sending it abroad, just as\nit most serves to promote industry, be not the real interest of\nevery nation?\n\n567 Whether commodities of all kinds do not naturally flow where\nthere is the greatest demand? Whether the greatest demand for a\nthing be not where it is of most use? Whether money, like other\nthings, hath not its proper use? Whether this use be not to\ncirculate? Whether therefore there must not of course be money\nwhere there is a circulation of industry?\n\n568 Whether it is not a great point to know what we would be at?\nAnd whether whole States, as well as private persons, do not\noften fluctuate for want of this knowledge?\n\n569 Whether gold may not be compared to Sejanus's horse, if we\nconsider its passage through the world, and the fate of those\nnations which have been successively possessed thereof?\n\n570 Whether means are not so far useful as they answer the end?\nAnd whether, in different circumstances, the same ends are not\nobtained by different means?\n\n571 If we are a poor nation, abounding with very poor people,\nwill it not follow that a far greater proportion of our stock\nshould be in the smallest and lowest species than would suit with\nEngland?\n\n572 Whether, therefore, it would not be highly expedient if our\nmoney were coined of peculiar values, best fitted to the\ncircumstances and uses of our own country; and whether any other\npeople could take umbrage at our consulting our own convenience,\nin an affair entirely domestic, and that lies within ourselves?\n\n573 Whether every man doth not know, and hath not long known,\nthat the want of a mint causeth many other wants in this kingdom?\n\n574 What harm did England sustain about three centuries ago, when\nsilver was coined in this kingdom?\n\n575 What harm was it to Spain that her provinces of Naples and\nSicily had all along mints of their own?\n\n576 Whether it may not be presumed that our not having a\nprivilege which every other kingdom in the world enjoys, be not\nowing to our want of diligence and unanimity in soliciting for\nit?\n\n577 Whether it be not the interest of England that we should\ncultivate a domestic commerce among ourselves? And whether it\ncould give them any possible jealousy, if our small sum of cash\nwas contrived to go a little further, if there was a little more\nlife in our markets, a little more buying and selling in our\nshops, a little better provision for the backs and bellies of so\nmany forlorn wretches throughout the towns and villages of this\nisland?\n\n578 Whether Great Britain ought not to promote the prosperity of\nher Colonies, by all methods consistent with her own? And whether\nthe Colonies themselves ought to wish or aim at it by others?\n\n579 Whether the remotest parts from the metropolis, and the\nlowest of the people, are not to be regarded as the extremities\nand capillaries of the political body?\n\n580 Whether, although the capillary vessels are small, yet\nobstructions in them do not produce great chronical diseases?\n\n581 Whether faculties are not enlarged and improved by exercise?\n\n582 Whether the sum of the faculties put into act, or, in other\nwords, the united action of a whole people, doth not constitute\nthe momentum of a State?\n\n583 Whether such momentum be not the real stock or wealth of a\nState; and whether its credit be not proportional thereunto?\n\n584 Whether in every wise State the faculties of the mind are not\nmost considered?\n\n585 Whether the momentum of a State doth not imply the whole\nexertion of its faculties, intellectual and corporeal; and\nwhether the latter without the former could act in concert?\n\n586 Whether the divided force of men, acting singly, would not be\na rope of sand?\n\n587 Whether the particular motions of the members of a State, in\nopposite directions, will not destroy each other, and lessen the\nmomentum of the whole; but whether they must not conspire to\nproduce a great effect?\n\n588 Whether the ready means to put spirit into this State, to\nfortify and increase its momentum, would not be a national bank,\nand plenty of small cash?\n\n589 Whether that which employs and exerts the force of a\ncommunity deserves not to be well considered and well understood?\n\n590 Whether the immediate mover, the blood and spirits, be not\nmoney, paper, or metal; and whether the soul or will of the\ncommunity, which is the prime mover that governs and directs the\nwhole, be not the legislature?\n\n591 Supposing the inhabitants of a country quite sunk in sloth,\nor even fast asleep, whether, upon the gradual awakening and\nexertion, first of the sensitive and locomotive faculties, next\nof reason and reflexion, then of justice and piety, the momentum\nof such country or State would not, in proportion thereunto,\nbecome still more and more considerable?\n\n592 Whether that which in the growth is last attained, and is the\nfinishing perfection of a people, be not the first thing lost in\ntheir declension?\n\n593 Whether force be not of consequence, as it is exerted; and\nwhether great force without great wisdom may not be a nuisance?\n\n594 Whether the force of a child, applied with art, may not\nproduce greater effects than that of a giant? And whether a small\nstock in the hands of a wise State may not go further, and\nproduce more considerable effects, than immense sums in the hands\nof a foolish one?\n\n595 Whose fault is it if poor Ireland still continues poor?\n\nQUERIES OMITTED\n\nPart I\n\n29 Whether, nevertheless, the damage would be very considerable,\nif by degrees our money were brought back to the English value\nthere to rest for ever?\n\n30 Whether the English crown did not formerly pass with us for\nsix shillings? And what inconvenience ensued to the public upon\nits reduction to the present value, and whether what hath been\nmay not be?\n\n52 Whether it be not a bull to call that making an interest,\nwhereby a man spendeth much and gaineth nothing?\n\n55 Whether cunning be not one thing and good sense another? and\nwhether a cunning tradesman doth not stand in his own light?\n\n62 Whether, consequently, the fine gentlemen, whose employment is\nonly to dress, drink, and play, be not a public nuisance?\n\n73 Whether those specimens of our own manufacture, hung up in a\ncertain public place, do not sufficiently declare such our\nignorance? and whether for the honour of the nation they ought\nnot to be removed?\n\n201 Whether any nation ever was in greater want of such an\nexpedient than Ireland?\n\n209 Whether the public may not as well save the interest which it\nnow pays?\n\n210 What would happen if two of our banks should break at once?\nAnd whether it be wise to neglect providing against an event\nwhich experience hath shewn us not to be impossible?\n\n211 Whether such an accident would not particularly affect the\nbankers? And therefore whether a national bank would not be a\nsecurity even to private bankers?\n\n212 Whether we may not easily avoid the inconveniencies attending\nthe paper-money of New England, which were incurred by their\nissuing too great a quantity of notes, by their having no silver\nin bank to exchange for notes, by their not insisting upon\nrepayment of the loans at the time prefixed, and especially by\ntheir want of manufactures to answer their imports from Europe?\n\n213 Whether a combination of bankers might not do wonders, and\nwhether bankers know their own strength?\n\n214 Whether a bank in private hands might not even overturn a\ngovernment? and whether this was not the case of the Bank of St.\nGeorge in Genoa?\n\n215 Whether we may not easily prevent the ill effects of such a\nbank as Mr Law proposed for Scotland, which was faulty in not\nlimiting the quantum of bills, and permitting all persons to take\nout what bills they pleased, upon the mortgage of lands, whence\nby a glut of paper, the prices of things must rise? Whence also\nthe fortunes of men must increase in denomination, though not in\nvalue; whence pride, idleness, and beggary?\n\n216 Whether such banks as those of England and Scotland might not\nbe attended with great inconveniences, as lodging too much power\nin the hands of private men, and giving handle for monopolies,\nstock-jobbing, and destructive schemes?\n\n217 Whether the national bank, projected by an anonymous writer\nin the latter end of Queen Anne's reign, might not on the other\nhand be attended with as great inconveniencies by lodging too\nmuch power in the Government?\n\n218 Whether the bank projected by Murray, though it partake, in\nmany useful particulars, with that of Amsterdam, yet, as it\nplaceth too great power in the hands of a private society, might\nnot be dangerous to the public?\n\n221 Whether those effects could have happened had there been no\nstock-jobbing? And whether stock-jobbing could at first have been\nset on foot, without an imaginary foundation of some improvement\nto the stock by trade? Whether, therefore, when there are no such\nprospects, or cheats, or private schemes proposed, the same\neffects can be justly feared?\n\n222 Whether by a national bank, be not properly understood a\nbank, not only established by public authority as the Bank of\nEngland, but a bank in the hands of the public, wherein there are\nno shares: whereof the public alone is proprietor, and reaps all\nthe benefit?\n\n223 Whether, having considered the conveniencies of banking and\npaper-credit in some countries, and the inconveniencies thereof\nin others, we may not contrive to adopt the former, and avoid the\nlatter?\n\n224 Whether great evils, to which other schemes are liable, may\nnot be prevented, by excluding the managers of the bank from a\nshare in the legislature?\n\n226 Whether the bank proposed to be established in Ireland, under\nthe notion of a national bank, by the voluntary subscription of\nthree hundred thousand pounds, to pay off the national debt, the\ninterest of which sum to be paid the subscribers, subject to\ncertain terms of redemption, be not in reality a private bank, as\nthose of England and Scotland, which are national only in name,\nbeing in the hands of particular persons, and making dividends on\nthe money paid in by subscribers?\n\n228 Whether it is not worth while to reflect on the expedients\nmade use of by other nations, paper-money, bank-notes, public\nfunds, and credit in all its shapes, to examine what hath been\ndone and devised to add to our own animadversions, and upon the\nwhole offer such hints as seem not unworthy the attention of the\npublic?\n\n230 Whether it may not be expedient to appoint certain funds or\nstock for a national bank, under direction of certain persons,\none-third whereof to be named by the Government, and one-third by\neach House of Parliament?\n\n231 Whether the directors should not be excluded from sitting in\neither House, and whether they should not be subject to the audit\nand visitation of a standing committee of both Houses?\n\n232 Whether such committee of inspectors should not be changed\nevery two years, one-half going out, and another coming in by\nballot?\n\n233 Whether the notes ought not to be issued in lots, to be let\nat interest on mortgaged lands, the whole number of lots to be\ndivided among the four provinces, rateably to the number of\nhearths in each?\n\n234 Whether it may not be expedient to appoint four\ncounting-houses, one in each province, for converting notes into\nspecie?\n\n235 Whether a limit should not be fixed, which no person might\nexceed, in taking out notes?\n\n236 Whether, the better to answer domestic circulation, it may\nnot be right to issue notes as low as twenty shillings?\n\n237 Whether all the bills should be issued at once, or rather by\ndegrees, that so men may be gradually accustomed and reconciled\nto the bank?\n\n238 Whether the keeping of the cash, and the direction of the\nbank, ought not to be in different hands, and both under public\ncontrol?\n\n239 Whether the same rule should not alway be observed, of\nlending out money or notes, only to half the value of the\nmortgaged land? and whether this value should not alway be rated\nat the same number of years' purchase as at first?\n\n240 Whether care should not be taken to prevent an undue rise of\nthe value of land?\n\n241 Whether the increase of industry and people will not of\ncourse raise the value of land? And whether this rise may not be\nsufficient?\n\n242 Whether land may not be apt to rise on the issuing too great\nplenty of notes?\n\n243 Whether this may not be prevented by the gradual and slow\nissuing of notes, and by frequent sales of lands?\n\n244 Whether interest doth not measure the true value of land; for\ninstance, where money is at five per cent, whether land is not\nworth twenty years' purchase?\n\n245 Whether too small a proportion of money would not hurt the\nlanded man, and too great a proportion the monied man? And\nwhether the quantum of notes ought not to bear proportion to the\npublic demand? And whether trial must not shew what this demand\nwill be?\n\n246 Whether the exceeding this measure might not produce divers\nbad effects, one whereof would be the loss of our silver?\n\n247 Whether interest paid into the bank ought not to go on\naugmenting its stock?\n\n248 Whether it would or would not be right to appoint that the\nsaid interest be paid in notes only?\n\n249 Whether the notes of this national bank should not be\nreceived in all payments into the exchequer?\n\n250 Whether on supposition that the specie should fail, the\ncredit would not, nevertheless, still pass, being admitted in all\npayments of the public revenue?\n\n251 Whether the public can become bankrupt so long as the notes\nare issued on good security?\n\n252 Whether mismanagement, prodigal living, hazards by trade,\nwhich often affect private banks, are equally to be apprehended\nin a public one?\n\n253 Whether as credit became current, and this raised the value\nof land, the security must not of course rise?\n\n255 Whether by degrees, as business and people multiplied, more\nbills may not be issued, without augmenting the capital stock,\nprovided still, that they are issued on good security; which\nfurther issuing of new bills, not to be without consent of\nParliament?\n\n256 Whether such bank would not be secure? Whether the profits\naccruing to the public would not be very considerable? And whether\nindustry in private persons would not be supplied, and a general\ncirculation encouraged?\n\n257 Whether such bank should, or should not, be allowed to issue\nnotes for money deposited therein? And, if not, whether the\nbankers would have cause to complain?\n\n258 Whether, if the public thrives, all particular persons must\nnot feel the benefit thereof, even the bankers themselves?\n\n259 Whether, beside the bank company, there are not in England\nmany private wealthy bankers, and whether they were more before\nthe erecting of that company?\n\n261 Whether we have not paper-money circulating among, whether,\ntherefore, we might not as well have that us already which is\nsecured by the public, and whereof the public reaps the benefit?\n\n262 Whether there are not two general ways of circulating money,\nto wit, play and traffic? and whether stock-jobbing is not to be\nranked under the former?\n\n263 Whether there are more than two things that might draw silver\nout of the bank, when its credit was once well established, to\nwit, foreign demands and small payments at home?\n\n264 Whether, if our trade with France were checked, the former of\nthese causes could be supposed to operate at all? and whether the\nlatter could operate to any great degree?\n\n267 Whether paper-money or notes may not be issued from the\nnational bank, on the security of hemp, of linen, or other\nmanufactures whereby the poor might be supported in their\nindustry?\n\n273 Whether banks raised by private subscription would be as\nadvantageous to the public as to the subscribers? and whether\nrisks and frauds might not be more justly apprehended from them?\n\n276 Whether an argument from the abuse of things, against the use\nof them, be conclusive?\n\n277 Whether he who is bred to a part be fitted to judge of the\nwhole?\n\n278 Whether interest be not apt to bias judgment? and whether\ntraders only are to be consulted about trade, or bankers about\nmoney?\n\n280 Whether any man hath a right to judge, that will not be at\nthe pains to distinguish?\n\n281 Whether there be not a wide difference between the profits\ngoing to augment the national stock, and being divided among\nprivate sharers? And whether, in the former case, there can\npossibly be any gaming or stock-jobbing?\n\n289 Whether, therefore, it doth not greatly concern the State,\nthat our Irish natives should be converted, and the whole nation\nunited in the same religion, the same allegiance, and the same\ninterest? and how this may most probably be effected?\n\n291 Whether there have not been Popish recusants? and, if so,\nwhether it would be right to object against the foregoing oath,\nthat all would take it, and none think themselves bound by it?\n\n292 Whether those of the Church of Rome, in converting the Moors\nof Spain or the Protestants of France, have not set us an example\nwhich might justify a similar treatment of themselves, if the\nlaws of Christianity allowed thereof?\n\n293 Whether compelling men to a profession of faith is not the\nworst thing in Popery, and, consequently, whether to copy after\nthe Church of Rome therein, were not to become Papists ourselves\nin the worst sense?\n\n294 Whether, nevertheless, we may not imitate the Church of Rome,\nin certain places, where Jews are tolerated, by obliging our\nIrish Papists, at stated times, to hear Protestant sermons? and\nwhether this would not make missionaries in the Irish tongue\nuseful?\n\n295 Whether the mere act of hearing, without making any\nprofession of faith, or joining in any part of worship, be a\nreligious act; and, consequently, whether their being obliged to\nhear, may not consist with the toleration of Roman Catholics?\n\n296 Whether, if penal laws should be thought oppressive, we may\nnot at least be allowed to give premiums? And whether it would be\nwrong, if the public encouraged Popish families to become\nhearers, by paying their hearth-money for them?\n\n297 Whether in granting toleration, we ought not to distinguish\nbetween doctrines purely religious, and such as affect the State?\n\n298 Whether the case be not very different in regard to a man who\nonly eats fish on Fridays, says his prayers in Latin, or believes\ntransubstantiation, and one who professeth in temporals a\nsubjection to foreign powers, who holdeth himself absolved from\nall obedience to his natural prince and the laws of his country?\nwho is even persuaded, it may be meritorious to destroy the\npowers that are?\n\n299 Whether, therefore, a distinction should not be made between\nmere Papists and recusants? And whether the latter can expect the\nsame protection from the Government as the former?\n\n300 Whether our Papists in this kingdom can complain, if they are\nallowed to be as much Papists as the subjects of France or of the\nEmpire?\n\n303 Whether every plea of conscience is to be regarded? Whether,\nfor instance, the German Anabaptists, Levellers, or Fifth\nMonarchy men would be tolerated on that pretence?\n\n304 Whether Popish children bred in charity schools, when bound\nout in apprenticeship to Protestant masters, do generally\ncontinue Protestants?\n\n306 Whether if the parents are overlooked, there can be any great\nhopes of success in converting the children?\n\n312 Whether there be any nation of men governed by reason? And\nyet, if there was not, whether this would be a good argument\nagainst the use of reason in public affairs?\n\n315 Whether one, whose end is to make his countrymen think, may\nnot gain his end, even though they should not think as he doth?\n\n316 Whether he, who only asks, asserts? and whether any man can\nfairly confute the querist?\n\n317 Whether the interest of a part will not always be preferred\nto that of the whole?\n\nPart II\n\n5 Whether it can be reasonably hoped, that our state will mend,\nso long as property is insecure among us?\n\n6 Whether in that case the wisest government, or the best laws\ncan avail. us?\n\n7 Whether a few mishaps to particular persons may not throw this\nnation into the utmost confusion?\n\n8 Whether the public is not even on the brink of being undone by\nprivate accidents?\n\n11 Whether therefore it be not high time to open our eyes?\n\n24 Whether private ends are not prosecuted with more attention\nand vigour than the public? And yet, whether all private ends are\nnot included in the public?\n\n25 Whether banking be not absolutely necessary to the public weal?\n\n26 Whether even our private banks, though attended with such\nhazards as we all know them to be, are not of singular use in\ndefect of a national bank?\n\n28 Whether the mystery of banking did not derive its original\nfrom the Italians? Whether this acute people were not, upon a\ntime, bankers over all Europe? Whether that business was not\npractised by some of their noblest families who made immense\nprofits by it, and whether to that the house of Medici did not\noriginally owe its greatness?\n\n30 Whether at Venice all payments of bills of exchange and\nmerchants' contracts are not made in the national or public bank,\nthe greatest affairs being transacted only by writing the names\nof the parties, one as debtor the other as creditor in the\nbank-book?\n\n31 Whether nevertheless it was not found expedient to provide a\nchest of ready cash for answering all demands that should happen\nto be made on account of payments in detail?\n\n32 Whether this offer of ready cash, instead of transfers in the\nbank, hath not been found to augment rather than diminish the\nstock thereof?\n\n33 Whether at Venice, the difference in the value of bank money\nabove other money be not fixed at twenty per cent?\n\n34 Whether the bank of Venice be not shut up four times in the\nyear twenty days each time?\n\n35 Whether by means of this bank the public be not mistress of a\nmillion and a half sterling?\n\n37 Whether we may not hope for as much skill and honesty in a\nProtestant Irish Parliament as in a Popish Senate of Venice?\n\n39 Whether besides coined money, there be not also great\nquantities of ingots or bars of gold and silver lodged in this\nbank?\n\n41 Whether it be not true, that the bank of Amsterdam never makes\npayments in cash?\n\n42 Whether, nevertheless, it be not also true, that no man who\nhath credit in the bank can want money from particular persons,\nwho are willing to become creditors in his stead?\n\n43 Whether any man thinks himself the poorer, because his money\nis in the. bank?\n\n44 Whether the creditors of the bank of Amsterdam are not at\nliberty to withdraw their money when they please, and whether\nthis liberty doth not make them less desirous to use it?\n\n45 Whether this bank be not shut up twice in the year for ten or\nfifteen days, during which time the accounts are balanced?\n\n53 Whether we are by nature a more stupid people than the Dutch?\nAnd yet whether these things are sufficiently considered by our\npatriots?\n\n54 Whether anything less than the utter subversion of those\nRepublics can break the banks of Venice and Amsterdam?\n\n55 Whether at Hamburgh the citizens have not the management of\nthe bank, without the meddling or inspection of the Senate?\n\n56 Whether the directors be not four principal burghers chosen by\nplurality of voices, whose business is to see the rules observed,\nand furnish the cashiers with money?\n\n57 Whether the book-keepers are not obliged to balance their\naccounts every week, and exhibit them to the controllers or\ndirectors?\n\n58 Whether any besides the citizens are admitted to have compte\nen banc at Hamburgh?\n\n59 Whether there be not a certain limit, under which no sum can\nbe entered into the bank?\n\n60 Whether each particular person doth not pay a fee in order to\nbe admitted to a compte en banc at Hamburgh and Amsterdam?\n\n61 Whether the effects lodged in the bank of Hamburgh are liable\nto be seized for debt or forfeiture?\n\n62 Whether this bank doth not lend money upon pawns at low\ninterest and only for half a year, after which term, in default\nof payment, the pawns are punctually sold by auction?\n\n63 Whether the book-keepers of the bank of Hamburgh are not\nobliged upon oath never to reveal what sums of money are paid in\nor out of the bank, or what effects any particular person has\ntherein?\n\n64 Whether, therefore, it be possible to know the state or stock\nof this bank; and yet whether it be not of the greatest\nreputation and most established credit throughout the North?\n\n66 Whether an absolute monarchy be so apt to gain credit, and\nwhether the vivacity of some humours could so well suit with the\nslow steps and discreet management which a bank requires?\n\n67 Whether the bank called the general bank of France, contrived\nby Mr Law, and established by letters patent in May, 1716, was\nnot in truth a particular and not a national bank, being in the\nhands of a particular company privileged and protected by the\nGovernment?\n\n68 Whether the Government did not order that the notes of this\nbank should pass on a par with ready money in all payments of the\nrevenue?\n\n69 Whether this bank was not obliged to issue only such notes as\nwere payable at sight?\n\n70 Whether it was not made a capital crime to forge the notes of\nthis bank?\n\n71 Whether this bank was not restrained from trading either by\nsea or land, and from taking up money upon interest?\n\n72 Whether the original stock thereof was not six millions of\nlivres, divided into actions of a thousand crowns each?\n\n73 Whether the proprietors were not to hold general assemblies\ntwice in the year, for the regulating of their affairs?\n\n74 Whether the accompts of this bank were not balanced twice\nevery year?\n\n75 Whether there were not two chests belonging to this bank, the\none called the general chest containing their specie, their bills\nand their copper plates for the printing of those bills, under\nthe custody of three locks, whereof the keys were kept by the\ndirector, the inspector and treasurer. also another called, the\nordinary chest, containing part of the stock not exceeding two\nhundred thousand crowns, under the key of the treasurer?\n\n76 Whether out of this last mentioned sum, each particular\ncashier was not to be intrusted with a share not exceeding the\nvalue of twenty thousand crowns at a time, and that under good\nsecurity?\n\n77 Whether the Regent did not reserve to himself the power of\ncalling this bank to account, so often as he should think good,\nand of appointing the inspector?\n\n78 Whether in the beginning of the year 1719 the French King did\nnot convert the general bank of France into a Banque Royale,\nhaving himself purchased the stock of the company and taken it\ninto his own hands, and appointed the Duke of Orleans chief\nmanager thereof?\n\n79 Whether from that time, all matters relating to the bank were\nnot transacted in the name, and by the sole authority, of the\nking?\n\n80 Whether his Majesty did not undertake to receive and keep the\ncash of all particular persons, subjects, or foreigners, in his\nsaid Royale Banque, without being paid for that trouble? And\nwhether it was not declared, that such cash should not be liable\nto seizure on any pretext, not even on the king's own account?\n\n81 Whether the treasurer alone did not sign all the bills,\nreceive all the stock paid into the bank, and keep account of all\nthe in-goings and out-goings?\n\n82 Whether there were not three registers for the enregistering\nof the bills kept in the Banque Royale, one by the inspector,\nanother by the controller, and a third by the treasurer?\n\n83 Whether there was not also a fourth register, containing the\nprofits of the bank, which was visited, at least once a week, by\nthe inspector and controller?\n\n84 Whether, beside the general bureau or compter in the city of\nParis, there were not also appointed five more in the towns of\nLyons, Tours, Rochelle, Orleans, and Amiens, each whereof was\nprovided with two chests, one of specie for discharging bills at\nsight, and another of bank bills to be issued as there should be\ndemand?\n\n85 Whether, in the above mentioned towns, it was not prohibited\nto make payments in silver, exceeding the sum of six hundred\nlivres?\n\n86 Whether all creditors were not empowered to demand payment in\nbank bills instead of specie?\n\n87 Whether, in a short compass of time, this bank did not undergo\nmany new changes and regulations by several successive acts of\ncouncil?\n\n88 Whether the untimely, repeated, and boundless fabrication of\nbills did not precipitate the ruin of this bank?\n\n89 Whether it be not true, that before the end of July, 1719,\nthey had fabricated four hundred millions of livres in\nbank-notes, to which they added the sum of one hundred and twenty\nmillions more on the twelfth of September following, also the\nsame sum of one hundred and twenty millions on the twenty-fourth\nof 3 October, and again on the twenty-ninth of December, in the\nsame year, the farther sum of three hundred and sixty millions,\nmaking the whole, from an original stock of six millions, mount,\nwithin the compass of one year, to a thousand millions of livres?\n\n90 Whether on the twenty-eighth of February, 1720, the king did\nnot make an union of the bank with the united company of the East\nand West Indies, which from that time had the administration and\nprofits of the Banque Royale?\n\n91 Whether the king did not still profess himself responsible for\nthe value of the bank bills, and whether the company were not\nresponsible to his Majesty for their management?\n\n92 Whether sixteen hundred millions of livres, lent to his\nmajesty by the company, was not a sufficient pledge to indemnify\nthe king?\n\n93 Whether the new directors were not prohibited to make any more\nbills without an act of council?\n\n94 Whether the chests and books of the Banque were not subjected\nto the joint inspection of a Counsellor of State, and the Prevot\ndes Marchands, assisted by two Echevins, a judge, and a consul,\nwho had power to visit when they would and without warning?\n\n95 Whether in less than two years the actions or shares of the\nIndian Company (first established for Mississippi, and afterwards\nincreased by the addition of other compares and further? and\nwhether this privileges) did not rise to near 2000 per cent must\nbe ascribed to real advantages of trade, or to mere frenzy?\n\n96 Whether, from first to last, there were not fabricated bank\nbills, of one kind or other, to the value of more than two\nthousand and six hundred millions of livres, or one hundred and\nthirty millions sterling?\n\n97 Whether the credit of the bank did not decline from its union\nwith the Indian Company?\n\n98 Whether, notwithstanding all the above-mentioned extraordinary\nmeasures, the bank bills did not still pass at par with gold and\nsilver to May, 1720, when the French king thought fit, by a new\nact of council, to make a reduction of their value, which proved\na fatal blow, the effects whereof, though soon retracted, no\nsubsequent skill or management could ever repair?\n\n99 Whether, what no reason, reflexion, or foresight could do,\nthis simple matter of fact (the most powerful argument with the\nmultitude) did not do at once, to wit, open the eyes of the\npeople?\n\n100 Whether the dealers in that sort of ware had ever troubled\ntheir heads with the nature of credit, or the true use and end of\nbanks, but only considered their bills and actions as things, to\nwhich the general demand gave a price?\n\n101 Whether the Government was not in great perplexity to\ncontrive expedients for the getting rid of those bank bills,\nwhich had been lately multiplied with such an unlimited passion?\n\n102 Whether notes to the value of about ninety millions were not\nsunk by being paid off in specie, with the cash of the Compagnie\ndes Indes, with that of the bank, and that of the Hotels des\nMonnoyes? Whether five hundred and thirty millions were not\nconverted into annuities at the royal treasury? Whether several\nhundred millions more in bank bills were not extinguished and\nreplaced by annuities on the City of Paris, on taxes throughout\nthe provinces, &c., &c?\n\n103 Whether, after all other shifts, the last and grand resource\nfor exhausting that ocean, was not the erecting of a compte en\nbanc in several towns of France?\n\n104 Whether, when the imagination of a people is thoroughly\nwrought upon and heated by their own example, and the arts of\ndesigning men, this doth not produce a sort of enthusiasm which\ntakes place of reason, and is the most dangerous distemper in a\nState?\n\n105 Whether this epidemical madness should not be always before\nthe eyes of a legislature, in the framing of a national bank?\n\n106 Whether, therefore, it may not be fatal to engraft trade on a\nnational bank, or to propose dividends on the stock thereof?\n\n108 Whether it may not be as useful a lesson to consider the bad\nmanagement of some as the good management of others?\n\n109 Whether the rapid and surprising success of the schemes of\nthose who directed the French bank did not turn their brains?\n\n110 Whether the best institutions may not be made subservient to\nbad ends?\n\n111 Whether, as the aim of industry is power, and the aim of a\nbank is to circulate and secure this power to each individual, it\ndoth not follow that absolute power in one hand is inconsistent\nwith a lasting and a flourishing bank?\n\n115 Whether the mistaking of the means for the end was not a\nfundamental error in the French councils?\n\n123 Whether there should not be a constant care to keep the bills\nat par?\n\n124 Whether, therefore, bank bills should at any time be\nmultiplied but as trade and business were also multiplied?\n\n125 Whether it was not madness in France to mint bills and\nactions, merely to humour the people and rob them of their cash?\n\n126 Whether we may not profit by their mistakes, and as some\nthings are to be avoided, whether there may not be others worthy\nof imitation in the conduct of our neighbours?\n\n127 Whether the way be not clear and open and easy, and whether\nanything but the will is wanting to our legislature?\n\n128 Whether jobs and tricks are not detested on all hands, but\nwhether it be not the joint interest of prince and people to\npromote industry?\n\n129 Whether, all things considered, a national bank be not the\nmost practicable, sure, and speedy method to mend our affairs,\nand cause industry to flourish among us?\n\n130 Whether a compte en banc or current bank bills would best\nanswer our occasions?\n\n131 Whether a public compte en banc, where effects are received,\nand accounts kept with particular persons, be not an excellent\nexpedient for a great city?\n\n132 What effect a general compte en banc would have in the\nmetropolis of this kingdom with one in each province subordinate\nthereunto?\n\n133 Whether it may not be proper for a great kingdom to unite\nboth expedients, to wit, bank notes and a compte en banc?\n\n134 Whether, nevertheless, it would be advisable to begin with\nboth at once, or rather to proceed first with the bills, and\nafterwards, as business multiplied, and money or effects flowed\nin, to open the compte en banc?\n\n135 Whether, for greater security, double books of compte en banc\nshould not be kept in different places an d hands?\n\n136 Whether it would not be right to build the compters and\npublic treasuries, where books and bank notes are kept, without\nwood, all arched and floored with brick or stone, having chests\nalso and cabinets of iron?\n\n137 Whether divers registers of the bank notes should not be kept\nin different hands?\n\n138 Whether there should not be great discretion in the uttering\nof bank notes, and whether the attempting to do things per saltum\nbe not often the way to undo them?\n\n139 Whether the main art be not by slow degrees and cautious\nmeasures to reconcile the bank to the public, to wind it\ninsensibly into the affections of men, and interweave it with the\nconstitution?\n\n141 Whether a national bank may not prevent the drawing of specie\nout of the country (where it circulates in small payments), to be\nshut up in the chests of particular persons?\n\n143 Whether tenants or debtors could have cause to complain of\nour monies being reduced to the English value if it were withal\nmultiplied in the same, or in a greater proportion? and whether\nthis would not be the consequence of a nation al bank?\n\n144 If there be an open sure way to thrive, without hazard to\nourselves or prejudice to our neighbours, what should hinder us\nfrom putting it in practice?\n\n145 Whether in so numerous a Senate, as that of this kingdom, it\nmay not be easie to find men of pure hands and clear heads fit to\ncontrive and model a public bank?\n\n146 Whether a view of the precipice be not sufficient, or whether\nwe must tumble headlong before we are roused?\n\n147 Whether in this drooping and dispirited country, men are\nquite awake?\n\n156 Whether, if we do not reap the benefits that may be made of\nour country and government, want of will in the lower people, or\nwant of wit in the upper, be most in fault?\n\n165 Whether an assembly of freethinkers, petit maitres, and smart\nfellows, would not make an admirable Senate?\n\n175 Whether there be really among us any parents so silly, as to\nencourage drinking in their children?\n\n176 Whence it is, that our ladies are more alive, and bear age so\nmuch better than our gentlemen?\n\n185 Whether this be altogether their own fault?\n\n197 Whether it may not be right to appoint censors in every\nparish to observe and make returns of the idle hands?\n\n198 Whether a register or history of the idleness and industry of\na people would be an useless thing?\n\n199 Whether we are apprized, of all the uses that may be made of\npolitical arithmetic?\n\n207 Why the workhouse in Dublin, with so good an endowment,\nshould yet be of so little use? and whether this may not be owing\nto that very endowment?\n\n208 Whether that income might not, by this time, have gone\nthrough the whole kingdom, and erected a dozen workhouses in\nevery county?\n\n210 Whether the tax on chairs or hackney coaches be not paid,\nrather by the country gentlemen, than the citizens of Dublin?\n\n227 Whether there should not be a difference between the\ntreatment of criminals and that of other slaves?\n\n251 Whether when a motion was made once upon a time to establish\na private bank in this kingdom by public authority, divers\ngentlemen did not shew themselves forward to embark in that\ndesign?\n\n252 Whether it may not now be hoped that our patriots will be as\nforward to examine and consider the proposal of a public bank\ncalculated only for the public good?\n\n253 Whether any people upon earth shew a more early zeal for the\nservice of their country, greater eagerness to bear a part in the\nlegislature, or a more general parturiency with respect to\npolitics and public counsels?\n\n254 Whether, nevertheless, a light and ludicrous vein be not the\nreigning humour; but whether there was ever greater cause to be\nserious?\n\nPart III\n\n13 Whether the whole city of Amsterdam would not have been\ntroubled to have brought together twenty thousand pounds in one\nroom?\n\n14 Whether it be not absolutely necessary that there must be a\nbank and must be a trust? And, if so, whether it be not the most\nsafe and prudent course to have a national bank and trust the\nlegislature?\n\n15 Whether objections against trust in general avail, when it is\nallowed there must be a trust, and the only question is where to\nplace this trust, whether in the legislature or in private hands?\n\n16 Whether it can be expected that private persons should have\nmore regard to the public than the public itself?\n\n17 Whether, if there be hazards from mismanagement, those may not\nbe provided against in the framing of a public bank; but whether\nany provision can be made against the mismanagement of private\nbanks that are under no check, control, or inspection?\n\n18 Whatever may be said for the sake of objecting, yet, whether\nit be not false in fact, that men would prefer a private security\nto a public security?\n\n19 Whether a national bank ought to be considered as a new\nexperiment; and whether it be not a motive to try this scheme\nthat it hath been already tried with success in other countries?\n\n20 If power followeth money, whether this can be anywhere more\nproperly and securely placed, than in the same hands wherein the\nsupreme power is already placed?\n\n21 Whether there be more danger of abuse in a private than in a\npublic management?\n\n22 Whether the proper usual remedy for abuses of private banks be\nnot to bring them before Parliament, and subject them to the\ninspection of a committee; and whether it be not more prudent to\nprevent than to redress an evil?\n\n24 Whether experience and example be not the plainest proof; and\nwhether any instance can be assigned where a national bank hath\nnot been attended with great advantage to the public?\n\n25 Whether the evils apprehended from a national bank are not\nmuch more to be apprehended from private banks; but whether men\nby custom are not familiarized and reconciled to common dangers,\nwhich are therefore thought less than they really are?\n\n26 Whether it would not be very hard to suppose all sense,\nhonesty, and public spirit were in the keeping of only a few\nprivate men, and the public was not fit to be trusted?\n\n27 Whether it be not ridiculous to suppose a legislature should\nbe afraid to trust itself?\n\n28 But, whether a private interest be not generally supported and\npursued with more zeal than a public?\n\n30 Whether, nevertheless, the community of danger, which lulls\nprivate men asleep, ought not to awaken the public?\n\n31 Whether there be not less security where there are more\ntemptations and fewer checks?\n\n32 If a man is to risk his fortune, whether it be more prudent to\nrisk it on the credit of private men, or in that of the great\nassembly of the nation?\n\n33 Where is it most reasonable to expect wise and punctual\ndealing, whether in a secret impenetrable recess, where credit\ndepends on secrecy, or in a public management regulated and\ninspected by Parliament?\n\n34 Whether a supine security be not catching, and whether numbers\nrunning the same risk, as they lessen the caution, may not\nincrease the danger?\n\n35 What real objection lies against a national bank erected by\nthe legislature, and in the management of public deputies,\nappointed and inspected by the legislature?\n\n36 What have we to fear from such a bank, which may not be as\nwell feared without it?\n\n37 How, why, by what means, or for what end, should it become an\ninstrument of oppression?\n\n38 Whether we can possibly be on a more precarious foot than we\nare already? Whether it be not in the power of any particular\nperson at once to disappear and convey himself into foreign\nparts? or whether there can be any security in an estate of land\nwhen the demands upon it are unknown?\n\n39 Whether the establishing of a national bank, if we suppose a\nconcurrence of the government, be not very practicable?\n\n40 But, whether though a scheme be never so evidently practicable\nand useful to the public, yet, if conceived to interfere with a\nprivate interest, it be not forthwith in danger of appearing\ndoubtful, difficult, and impracticable?\n\n41 Whether the legislative body hath not already sufficient power\nto hurt, if they may be supposed capable of it, and whether a\nbank would give them any new power?\n\n42 What should tempt the public to defraud itself?\n\n43 Whether, if the legislature destroyed the public, it would not\nbe felo de se; and whether it be reasonable to suppose it bent on\nits own destruction?\n\n44 Whether the objection to a public national bank, from want of\nsecrecy, be not in truth an argument for it?\n\n45 Whether the secrecy of private banks be not the very thing\nthat renders them so hazardous? and whether, without that, there\ncould have been of late so many sufferers?\n\n46 Whether when all objections are answered it be still incumbent\nto answer surmises?\n\n47 Whether it were just to insinuate that gentlemen would be\nagainst any proposal they could not turn into a job?\n\n48 Suppose the legislature passed their word for any private\nbanker, and regularly visited his books, would not money lodged\nin his bank be therefore reckoned more secure?\n\n49 In a country where the legislative body is not fit to be\ntrusted, what security can there be for trusting any one else?\n\n50 If it be not ridiculous to question whether the public can find\ncash to circulate bills of a limited value when private bankers\nare supposed to find enough to circulate them to an unlimited\nvalue?\n\n53 Whether those hazards that in a greater degree attend private\nbanks can be admitted as objections against a public one?\n\n54 Whether that which is an objection to everything be an\nobjection to anything; and whether the possibility of an abuse be\nnot of that kind?\n\n55 Whether, in fact, all things are not more or less abused, and\nyet notwithstanding such abuse, whether many things are not upon\nthe whole expedient and useful?\n\n56 Whether those things that are subject to the most general\ninspection are not the least subject to abuse?\n\n57 Whether, for private ends, it may not be sometimes expedient\nto object novelty to things that have been often tried,\ndifficulty to the plainest things, and hazard to the safest?\n\n58 Whether some men will not be apt to argue as if the question\nwas between money and credit, and not (as in fact it is) which\nought to be preferred, private credit or public credit?\n\n59 Whether they will not prudently overlook the evils felt, or to\nbe feared, on one side?\n\n60 Whether, therefore, those that would make an impartial\njudgment ought not to be on their guard, keeping both prospects\nalways in view, balancing the inconveniencies on each side and\nconsidering neither absolutely?\n\n61 Whether wilful mistakes, examples without a likeness, and\ngeneral addresses to the passions are not often more successful\nthan arguments?\n\n62 Whether there be not an art to puzzle plain cases as well as\nto explain obscure ones?\n\n63 Whether private men are not often an over-match for the\npublic; want of weight being made up for by activity?\n\n64 If we suppose neither sense nor honesty in our leaders or\nrepresentatives, whether we are not already undone, and so have\nnothing further to fear?\n\n65 Suppose a power in the government to hurt the public by means\nof a national bank, yet what should give them the will to do\nthis? Or supposing a will to do mischief, yet how could a\nnational bank, modelled and administered by Parliament, put it in\ntheir power?\n\n66 Whether even a wicked will entrusted with power can be\nsupposed to abuse it for no end?\n\n67 Whether it be not much more probable that those who maketh\nsuch objections do not believe them?\n\n68 Whether it be not vain to object that our fellow-subjects of\nGreat Britain would malign or obstruct our industry when it is\nexerted in a way which cannot interfere with their own?\n\n69 Whether it is to be supposed they should take delight in the\ndirt and nakedness and famine of our people, or envy them shoes\nfor their feet and beef for their belies?\n\n70 What possible handle or inclination could our having a\nnational bank give other people to distress us?\n\n71 Whether it be not ridiculous to conceive that a project for\ncloathing and feeding our natives should give any umbrage to\nEngland?\n\n72 Whether such unworthy surmises are not the pure effect of\nspleen?\n\n78 Whether the Protestant colony in this kingdom can ever forget\nwhat they owe to England?\n\n79 Whether there ever was in any part of the world a country in\nsuch wretched circumstances, and which, at the same time, could\nbe so easily remedied, and nevertheless the remedy not applied?\n\n80 What must become of a people that can neither see the plainest\nthings nor do the easiest?\n\n81 Be the money lodged in the bank what it will, yet whether an\nAct to make good deficiencies would not remove all scruples?\n\n82 If it be objected that a national bank must lower interest,\nand therefore hurt the monied man, whether the same objection\nwould not hold as strong against multiplying our gold and silver?\n\n83 But whether a bank that utters bills, with the sole view of\npromoting the public weal, may not so proportion their quantity\nas to avoid several inconveniencies which might attend private\nbanks?\n\n85 Whether anything be more reasonable than that the public, which\nmakes the whole profit of the bank, should engage to make good\nits credit?\n\n88 Whether, in order to make men see and feel, it be not often\nnecessary to inculcate the same thing, and place it in different\nlights?\n\n90 Whether the managers and officers of a national bank ought to\nbe considered otherwise than as the cashiers and clerks of\nprivate banks? Whether they are not in effect as little trusted,\nhave as little power, are as much limited by rules, and as liable\nto inspection?\n\n91 Whether the mistaking this point may not create some prejudice\nagainst a national bank, as if it depended on the credit, or\nwisdom, or honesty, of private men, rather than on the public,\nwhich is really the sole proprietor and director thereof, and as\nsuch obliged to support it?\n\n93 Whether a national bank would not be the great means and\nmotive for employing our poor in manufactures?\n\n94 Whether money, though lent out only to the rich, would not\nsoon circulate among the poor? And whether any man borrows but\nwith an intent to circulate?\n\n95 Whether both government and people would not in the event be\ngainers by a national bank? And whether anything but wrong\nconceptions of its nature can make those that wish well to either\naverse from it?\n\n96 Whether it may not be right to think, and to have it thought,\nthat England and Ireland, prince and people, have one and the\nsame interest?\n\n97 Whether, if we had more means to set on foot such manufactures\nand such commerce as consists with the interest of England, there\nwould not of course be less sheep-walk, and less wool exported to\nforeign countries? And whether a national bank would not supply\nsuch means?\n\n102 Whether business in general doth not languish among us?\nWhether our land is not untilled? Whether its inhabitants are not\nupon the wing?\n\n104 Whether our circumstances do not call aloud for some present\nremedy? And whether that remedy be not in our power?\n\n106 Whether, of all the helps to industry that ever were\ninvented, there be any more secure, more easy, and more effectual\nthan a national bank?\n\n107 Whether medicines do not recommend themselves by experience,\neven though their reasons be obscure? But whether reason and fact\nare not equally clear in favour of this political medicine?\n\n117 Whether therefore a tax on all gold and silver in apparel, on\nall foreign laces and silks, may not raise a fund for the bank,\nand at the same time have other salutary effects on the public?\n\n118 But, if gentlemen had rather tax themselves in another way,\nwhether an additional tax of ten shillings the hogshead on wines\nmay not supply a sufficient fund for the national bank, all\ndefects to be made good by Parliament?\n\n119 Whether upon the whole it may not be right to appoint a\nnational bank?\n\n120 Whether the stock and security of such bank would not be, in\ntruth, the national stock, or the total sum of the wealth of this\nkingdom?\n\n121 Whether, nevertheless, there should not be a particular fund\nfor present use in answering bills and circulating credit?\n\n122 Whether for this end any fund may not suffice, provided an\nAct be passed for making good deficiencies?\n\n123 Whether the sole proprietor of such bank should not be the\npublic, and the sole director the legislature?\n\n124 Whether the managers, officers, and cashiers should not be\nservants of the public, acting by orders and limited by rules of\nthe legislature?\n\n125 Whether there should not be a standing number of inspectors,\none-third men in great office, the rest members of both houses,\nhalf whereof to go out, and half to come in every session?\n\n126 Whether those inspectors should not, all in a body, visit\ntwice a year, and three as often as they pleased?\n\n127 Whether the general bank should not be in Dubin, and\nsubordinate banks or compters one in each province of Munster,\nUlster, and Connaught?\n\n128 Whether there should not be such provisions of stamps,\nsignatures, checks, strong boxes, and all other measures for\nsecuring the bank notes and cash, as are usual in other banks?\n\n129 Whether these ten or a dozen last queries may not easily be\nconverted into heads of a bill?\n\n130 Whether any one concerns himself about the security or funds\nof the banks of Venice or Amsterdam? And whether in a little time\nthe case would not be the same as to our bank?\n\n133 Whether it be not the most obvious remedy for all the\ninconveniencies we labour under with regard to our coin?\n\n134 Whether it be not agreed on all hands that our coin is on\nvery bad foot, and calls for some present remedy?\n\n135 Whether the want of silver hath not introduced a sort of\ntraffic for change, which is purchased at no inconsiderable\ndiscount to the great obstruction of our domestic commerce?\n\n136 Whether, though it be evident silver is wanted, it be yet so\nevident which is the best way of providing for this want? Whether\nby lowering the gold, or raising the silver, or partly one,\npartly the other?\n\n137 Whether a partial raising of one species be not, in truth,\nwanting a premium to our bankers for importing such species? And\nwhat that species is which deserves most to be encouraged?\n\n138 Whether it be not just that all gold should be alike rated\naccording to its weight and fineness?\n\n139 Whether this may be best done by lowering some certain\nspecies of gold, or by raising others, or by joining both methods\ntogether?\n\n141 Whether the North and the South have not, in truth, one and\nthe same interest in this matter?\n\n143 But, whether a public benefit ought to be obtained by unjust\nmethods, and therefore, whether any reduction of coin should be\nthought of which may hurt the properties of private men?\n\n144 Whether those parts of the kingdom where commerce doth most\nabound would not be the greatest gainers by having our coin\nplaced on a right foot?\n\n145 Whether, in case a reduction of coin be thought expedient,\nthe uttering of bank bills at the same time may not prevent the\ninconveniencies of such a reduction?\n\n146 But, whether any public expediency could countervail a real\npressure on those who are least able to bear it, tenants and\ndebtors?\n\n147 Whether, nevertheless, the political body, as well as the\nnatural, must not sometimes be worse in order to be better?\n\n150 What if our other gold were raised to a par with Portugal\ngold, and the value of silver in general raised with regard to\nthat of gold?\n\n151 Whether the public ends may or may not be better answered by\nsuch augmentation, than by a reduction of our coin?\n\n152 Provided silver is multiplied, be it by raising or\ndiminishing the value of our coin, whether the great end is not\nanswered?\n\n154 Whether, if a reduction be thought necessary, the obvious\nmeans to prevent all hardships and injustice be not a national\nbank?\n\n155 Upon supposition that the cash of this kingdom was five\nhundred thousand pounds, and by lowering the various species each\none-fifth of its value the whole sum was reduced to four hundred\nthousand pounds, whether the difficulty of getting money, and\nconsequently of paying rents, would not be increased in the\nproportion of five to four?\n\n156 Whether such difficulty would not be a great and unmerited\ndistress on all the tenants in the nation? But if at the same\ntime with the aforesaid reduction there were uttered one hundred\nthousand pounds additional to the former current stock, whether\nsuch difficulty or inconvenience would then be felt?\n\n158 Whether in any foreign market, twopence advance in a\nkilderkin of corn could greatly affect our trade?\n\n159 Whether in regard of the far greater changes and fluctuations\nof prices from the difference of seasons and other accidents,\nthat small rise should seem considerable?\n\n162 Whether, setting aside the assistance of a national bank, it\nwill be easy to reduce or lower our coin without some hardship\n(at least for the present) on a great number of particular\npersons?\n\n163 Whether, nevertheless, the scheme of a national bank doth not\nentirely stand clear of this question; and whether such bank may\nnot completely subsist and answer its ends, although there should\nbe no alteration at all made in the value of our coin?\n\n164 Whether, if the ill state of our coin be not redressed, that\nscheme would not be still more necessary, inasmuch as a national\nbank, by putting new life and vigour into our commerce, may\nprevent our feeling the ill effects of the want of such redress?\n\n165 Whether men united by interest are not often divided by\nopinion; and whether such difference in opinion be not an effect\nof misapprehension?\n\n166 Whether two things are not manifest, first, that some\nalteration in the value of our coin is highly expedient,\nsecondly, that whatever alteration is made, the tenderest care\nshould be had of the properties of the people, and even a regard\npaid to their prejudices?\n\n167 Whether our taking the coin of another nation for more than\nit is worth be not, in reality and in event, a cheat upon\nourselves?\n\n168 Whether a particular coin over-rated will not be sure to flow\nin upon us from other countries beside that where it is coined?\n\n169 Whether, in case the wisdom of the nation shall think fit to\nalter our coin, without erecting a national bank, the rule for\nlessening or avoiding present inconvenience should not be so to\norder matters, by raising the silver and depressing the gold, as\nthat the total sum of coined cash within the kingdom shall, in\ndenomination, remain the same, or amount to the same nominal\nvalue, after the change that it did before?\n\n170 Whether all inconvenience ought not to be lessened as much as\nmay be; but after, whether it would be prudent, for the sake of a\nsmall inconvenience, to obstruct a much greater good? And whether\nit may not sometimes happen that an inconvenience which in fancy\nand general discourse seems great shall, when accurately\ninspected and cast up, appear inconsiderable?\n\n171 Whether in public councils the sum of things, here and there,\npresent and future, ought not to be regarded?\n\n176 Money being a ticket which entitles to power and records the\ntitle, whether such power avails otherWise than as it is exerted\ninto act?\n\n180 Whether beside that value of money which is rated by weight,\nthere be not also another value consisting in its aptness to\ncirculate?\n\n204 Whether there be any woollen manufacture in Birmingham?\n\n205 Whether bad management may not be worse than slavery? And\nwhether any part of Christendom be in a more languishing\ncondition than this kingdom?\n\n212 Whether it be not true, that within the compass of one year\nthere flowed from the South Sea, when that commerce was open,\ninto the single town of St. Malo's, a sum in gold and silver\nequal to four times the whole specie of this kingdom? And whether\nthat same part of France doth not at present draw from Cadiz,\nupwards of two hundred thousand pounds per annum?\n\n214 Whether it be true that the Dutch make ten millions of\nlivres, every return of the flota and galleons, by their sales at\nthe Indies and at Cadiz?\n\n215 Whether it be true that England makes at least one hundred\nthousand pounds per annum by the single article of hats sold in\nSpain?\n\n217 Whether the toys of Thiers do not employ five thousand\nfamilies?\n\n218 Whether there be not a small town Or two in France which\nsupply all Spain with cards?\n\n222 Whether, about twenty-five years ago, they did not first\nattempt to make porcelain in France; and whether, in a few years,\nthey did not make it so well, as to rival that which comes from\nChina?\n\n226 Whether part of the profits of the bank should not be\nemployed in erecting manufactures of several kinds, which are not\nlikely to be set on foot and carried on to perfection without\ngreat stock, public encouragement, general regulations, and the\nconcurrence of many hands?\n\n230 Whether it were not to be wished that our people shewed their\ndescent from Spain, rather by their honour and honesty than their\npride, and if so, whether they might not easily insinuate\nthemselves into a larger share of the Spanish trade?\n\n235 Whether we may not, with common industry and common honesty,\nundersell any nation in Europe?\n\n242 Whether they are not the Swiss that make hay and gather in\nthe harvest throughout Alsatia?\n\n269 Whether commissioners of trade or other proper persons should\nnot be appointed to draw up plans of our commerce both foreign\nand domestic, and lay them at the beginning of every session\nbefore the Parliament?\n\n270 Whether registers of industry should not be kept, and the\npublic from time to time acquainted what new manufactures are\nintroduced, what increase or decrease of old ones?\n\n286 Whether therefore Mississippi, South Sea, and such like\nschemes were not calculated for public ruin?\n\n289 Whether all such princes and statesmen are not greatly\ndeceived who imagine that gold and silver, any way got, will\nenrich a country?\n\n292 Whether the effect is not to be considered more than the kind\nor quantity of money?\n\n299 Whether those who have the interests of this kingdom at\nheart, and are concerned in the councils thereof, ought not to\nmake the most humble and earnest representations to his Majesty,\nthat he may vouchsafe to grant us that favour, the want of which\nis ruinous to our domestic industry, and the having of which\nwould interfere with no interest of our fellow-subjects?\n\n301 Whether his most gracious Majesty hath ever been addressed on\nthis head in a proper manner, and had the case fairly stated for\nhis royal consideration, and if not, whether we may not blame\nourselves?\n\n302 If his Majesty would be pleased to grant us a mint, whether\nthe consequences thereof may not prove a valuable consideration\nto the crown?\n\n311 Whether every kind of employment or business, as it implies\nmore skill and exercise of the higher powers, be not more valued?\n\n316 Whether private endeavours without assistance from the public\nare likely to advance our manufactures and commerce to any great\ndegree? But whether, as bills uttered from a national bank upon\nprivate mortgages would facilitate the purchases and projects of\nprivate men, even so the same bills uttered on the public\nsecurity alone may not answer public ends in promoting new works\nand manufactures throughout the kingdom?\n\n323 Whether as many as wish well to their country ought not to\naim at increasing its momentum?\n\nThis work was published before January 1, 1931, and is in the public domain worldwide because the author died at least 100 years ago.\n\nPublic domainPublic domainfalsefalse","title":"The Querist","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":28232}