tent can oblige the subject against law; unless an illegal patent passed in one kingdom, can bind another, and not itself.
Lastly, it is added, that such patents are in no manner derogatory, or invasive of any liberty or privilege of the king's subjects of Ireland. If this proposition be true, as it is here laid down, without any limitation either expressed or implied, it must follow, that a king of England may at any time coin copper money for Ireland, and oblige his subjects here to take a piece of copper under the value of half a farthing, for half a crown, as was practised by the late king James; and even without that arbitrary prince's excuse, from the necessity and exigencies of his affairs. If this be in no manner derogatory, nor invasive of any liberties or privileges of the subjects of Ireland, it ought to have been expressed what our liberties and privileges are, and whether we have any at all; for, in specifying the word Ireland, instead of saying his majesty's subjects, it would seem to insinuate, that we are not upon the same foot with our fellow-subjects in England; which, however the practice may have been, I hope will never be directly asserted; for I do not understand that Poining's act deprived us of our liberty, but only changed the manner of passing laws here (which however was a power most indirectly obtained) by leaving the negative to the two houses of parliament. But, waving all controversies relating to the legislature, no person, I believe, was ever yet so bold as to affirm, that the people of Ireland have not the same title to the benefits of the common law, with the rest of his majesty's subjects; and therefore, whatever liberties or privi-
