The Sun.
London, England, 1824-03-24 00:00:00

FOR THE SUN.

MR. EDITOR-1 return you many thanks for
your having given a place to my letter in your
Paper of the 13th, but I perceive that you have
not, in every instance, exactly comprehended mY
meaning.
I did state, and am still of opinion,
that the
only unobjectionable Bounty would be one t°,
encourage the growing of Wool hi Ireland ; and
it were not from the pernicious effects which
have resulted to agriculture, from the Bounty
given upon the inland carriage of corn to Dublin,
and also from the Bounty to promote the growing-
of Flax, and to encourage and extend the Duel!
Manufacture, I should by no means recommend
even that Bounty to be granted. It is with a
view to have an antidote applied to what I
certain has poisoned the very sources of our kV'
culture in Ireland, that I do most urgently re-
commend the adoption of this measure. Butt
though I am thoroughly convinced, that such a
Bounty would be incalcul,bly beneficial to Ire'
land in her present state, yet I am equally cer-
tain, that without its being regulated so as to be
withdrawn gradually as it progressively produces
the effect of increasing the Woollen Manufacturr,
and of finally establishing it, it would ultimati'',
become injurious to the country ; for suppo"'
the happy period had arrived when a itourishiog,
Woollen _Manufacture such as Ireland possessed
about a hundred and thirty years ago were again
restored to her, and that the Bounty for the en:
couragement of the growing of Wool were cony..
nued beyond the time when woollen manufao°
tures were there completely established, it would,
I have no doubt, do much injury by inducing
farmers to rear so great a number of sheep, as to
interfere with, and prevent the increase of gray'
ing and dairy stock. You say that, " the wool'
len manufactures of England are at present cepa;
ble of taking up all the additional quantity °L
wool that can be grown—that in fact the comps'
ratively high price of British wool is occasioned
by the insufficiency of the supply—and that,
therefore, until the home market is abundant"
ly supplied, there is not even a pretext for
seeking an enlarged demand on the con"
tinent." To this I reply, that it appears to rile
to be quite impossible to ascertain, with any de'
gree of correctness, the additional quantity 01
wool which could be grown in the United King'
dom were the cultivators to think it their inter'
est to attend to the rearing of sheep. Neither
can I suppose the manufactories, at present est
blished in England, could possibly work up all
the additional quantity of wool that might be
grown, but doubtless other manufactories would
be established as the quantity increased. Witll
respect to the " insufficient supply and conse-
quent high price of wool" which you speak of,
my opinion is, that such is caused by the farmer
having only a restricted market, he is in perpetual
dread.of growing more wool than the home demand'
(to w hich he is limited), will take off his hands,
and, therefore, he does not grow as much as the,
manufacturers require. Let him but be secure O'
a market for all the wool he can grow by permit'
Ling ham to export it duty free, and he will set
steadily about increasing the number of his
sheep, by which wool will become abundant and
cheap, and there will be a sufficient supply for
the home manufacturers, who will, without doubt/
purchase the whole that is grown. It is quite
clear, therefore, Ali% Editor, that the objections
which the manufacturers are now making to the
free exportation of British Wool are contrary °
their own interests. You say Mr. Editor, that
" I adhere to the restrictive principle in admit-
ting that the live sheep " are not to be exported
under any circumstances." I perceive that I omit'
ted a stop after exported, and put it by mistake
after circumstances, which completely altered
the sense. You were therefore led to sup'
pose, I adhered pertinaciously to the restrte•
tive principle, but, Mr. Editor, I am not an ad'
vocate for either bounties or restrictions, where
that which is required to be done, can be accorn-
plished by any other means.
Restrictions and Bounties, in skilful hands are
powerful and useful engines ; but they work
dreadful mischief when misapplied. They were
made use of to raise up the Linen Manufacture,
and to put down and utterly destroy a flourishing
Woollen Manufacture in Ireland, which they
were not long in effecting ; the same engines malt
and I trust, will be used to restore the Woollen
Manufacture in that kingdom, by gradually ills'
placing that exhausting weed flax, and the mama"
facture of linen, in favour of turnips, and other
root crops, and artificial grasses, and sheep, and
manure for our lands, and the mane facture of zcoch
I must just observe, that to permit the expel'
tation of sheep would be of no benefit to the
farmer, for the consumption of mutton is not great
in France, nor in any other foreign country, and
the price is also lower than with us. But, sal
the manufacturers, " our valuable breed of long
woolled sheep would be put into the possession
of foreigners." Surely, Mr. Editor, if foreigners,
had been anxious to obtain any peculiar breed 0.1
sheep from England, smugglers, for a sufficient
reward, would have found the means of conveyi"P'
almost any number of sheep to the Continel:i•
But sheep without the moist climate of Englani
and Ireland, would not enable foreigners to grb'
wool, to the same extent that we have it in eu%
power to grow it, if we exert ourselves.
I am, Mr. Editor, a sincere friend to the
Manufacturers of Wool, and your
obedient and obliged humble servant,
March 18, 1824. AN IRISH LANDLORD.