should have 1⁄10 more Wealth, if it be possible. For, there may be as well too much money in a Country, as too little[1]. I mean, as to the best advantage of its Trade; onely the Remedy is very easy, it may be soon turn'd into the magnificence of Gold and Silver Vessels.
Lastly, Many think that Ireland is much impoverished, or at least the money thereof much exhausted, by reason of Absentees, who are such as having Lands in Ireland, do live out of the Kingdom, and do therefore think it just that such, according to former Statutes, should lose their said Estates.
Which Opinion I oppose, as both unjust, inconvenient, and frivolous. For 1st. If a man carry Money or other Effects out of England to purchase Lands in Ireland, why should not the Rents, Issues and Profits of the same Land return into England, with the same Reason that the Money of England was diminished to buy it?
2. I[2] suppose ¼ of the Land of Ireland did belong to the Inhabitants of England, and that the same lay all in one place together; why may not the said quarter of the |85| whole Land be cut off from the other three sent[3] into England, were it possible so to do? and if so, why may not the Rents of the same be actually sent, without prejudice to the other three parts of[4] the Interessors thereof?
3. If all men were bound to spend the Proceed of their Lands upon the Land it self; then as all the Proceed of Ireland, ought to be spent in Ireland; so all the Proceed of one County of Ireland, ought to be spent in the same; of one Barony, in the same Barony; and so Parish and Mannor; and at length it would follow, that every eater ought to avoid what he hath eaten upon the same Turf where the same grew. Moreover, this equal spreading of Wealth would destroy all Splendor and Ornament; for if it were not fit that one place should be more splendid than another, so also that no one man should be greater or richer than another; for if so, then the Wealth, suppose of Ireland, being perhaps
