[Footnote 9:  The Duke of Grafton.  Walpole called him “a fair-weather pilot, that knew not what he had to do, when the first storm arose.”  Charles, second Duke of Grafton (1683-1757), was the grandfather of the third duke, so virulently attacked by Junius in his famous letters. [T.  S.]]

It is allowed by the Report that this patent was passed without the knowledge of the chief governor or officers of Ireland; and it is there elaborately shewn, that “former patents have passed in the same manner, and are good in law.”  I shall not dispute the legality of patents, but am ready to suppose it in His Majesty’s power to grant a patent for stamping round bits of copper to every subject he hath.  Therefore to lay aside the point of law, I would only put the question, whether in reason and justice it would not have been proper, in an affair upon which the welfare of a kingdom depends, that the said kingdom should have received timely notice, and the matter not be carried on between the patentee and the officers of the Crown, who were to be the only gainers by it.

The Parliament, who in matters of this nature are the most able and faithful counsellors, did represent this grant to be “destructive of trade, and dangerous to the properties of the people,” to which the only answer is, that “the King hath a prerogative to make such a grant.”

It is asserted that in the patent to Knox, his “halfpence, are made and declared the current coin of the kingdom,” whereas in this to Wood, there is only a “power given to issue them to such as will receive them.”  The authors of the Report, I think, do not affirm that the King can by law declare anything to be current money by his letters-patents.  I dare say they will not affirm it, and if Knox’s patent contained in it powers contrary to law, why is it mentioned as a precedent in His Majesty’s just and merciful reign:[10] But although that clause be not in Wood’s patent, yet possibly there are others, the legality whereof may be equally doubted, and particularly that, whereby “a power is given to William Wood to break into houses in search of any coin made in imitation of his.”  This may perhaps be affirmed to be illegal and dangerous to the liberty of the subject.  Yet this is a precedent taken from Knox’s patent, where the same power is granted, and is a strong instance what uses may be sometimes made of precedents.

[Footnote 10:  Knox’s patent, as Monck Mason points out, did not contain the right to have his coins pass as the current coin of the realm; that was permitted by a proclamation of the lord lieutenant, and could in the same manner be withdrawn.  Knox’s patent differed materially from that granted to Wood, since he was obliged to take back his coins and give gold or silver for them, and no one was compelled to take more than five shillings in the payment of each L100.  See note, p. 66. [T.S.]]