1/4 copper, and the collectors paid nothing else.  The country being thus overcharged with a base coin, everyone tendered it to Col.  Moore to be changed.  This he refused, on pretence they were counterfeits....  On this he quitted coining in 1698, but left us in a miserable condition, which is lively represented in a Memorial presented by Will.  Trench, Esq. to the Lords of the Treasury, on Mr. Wood’s obtaining his patent, and which our Commissioners referred to....  Col.  Moore finding the sweet of such a patent, applied to King William for a renewal of it; but his petition being referred to the government of Ireland, the affair was fairly represented to the king, whereby his designs were frustrated.

“In the reign of the late Queen, application was made by Robert Baird and William Harnill, Trustees for the garrison which defended Londonderry, for a patent to coin base money for Ireland ... their petition was rejected....  Since this time there have been many applications made for such patents.” [T.S.]]

Put the case, that the two Houses of Lords and Commons of England, and the Privy-council there should address His Majesty to recall a patent, from whence they apprehend the most ruinous consequences to the whole kingdom:  And to make it stronger if possible, that the whole nation, almost to a man, should thereupon discover the “most dismal apprehensions” (as Mr. Wood styles them) would His Majesty debate half an hour what he had to do?  Would any minister dare advise him against recalling such a patent?  Or would the matter be referred to the Privy-Council or to Westminster-hall, the two Houses of Parliament plaintiffs, and William Wood defendant?  And is there even the smallest difference between the two cases?

Were not the people of Ireland born as free as those of England?  How have they forfeited their freedom?  Is not their Parliament as fair a representative of the people as that of England?  And hath not their Privy-council as great or a greater share in the administration of public affairs?  Are they not subjects of the same King?  Does not the same sun shine on them?  And have they not the same God for their protector?  Am I a freeman in England, and do I become a slave in six hours by crossing the Channel?  No wonder then, if the boldest persons were cautious to interpose in a matter already determined by the whole voice of the nation, or to presume to represent the representatives of the kingdom, and were justly apprehensive of meeting such a treatment as they would deserve at the next session.  It would seem very extraordinary if an inferior court in England, should take a matter out of the hands of the high court of Parliament, during a prorogation, and decide it against the opinion of both Houses.

It happens however, that, although no persons were so bold, as to go over as evidences, to prove the truth of the objections made against this patent by the high court of Parliament here, yet these objections stand good, notwithstanding the answers made by Wood and his Council.