Page:PettyWilliam1899EconomicWritingsVol2.djvu/277

582 4. What Persons, adjudged nocent, were more innocent, than those whom the said Court did judge to be innocent?

5. What Persons restored by Proviso ex mero Motu, or as Nominees or Letterees, did less deserve the same, than some of those who were never restored at all?

6. What Persons never restored, do deserve to have some Parts of their Estates, under two Thirds; and what Parts?

7. What meritorious Persons should be restored to their former Estates, in specie, or to the Equivalent, out of the Stock according to the Proportions that shall be respectively allow'd them?

8. That they consider what Catholicks have gotten Grants of other Catholic Estates?

9. That all Restorees, how innocent and worthy soever, may retrench Thirds as the Adventurers did.

10. That out of the Premisses there may be made a Common Stock for Remedys and Gratifications in the several Cases abovementioned, and for Reprizing of such Protestant Patentees as have been, or shall be, ejected.

11. That an accurate Valuation be made of all Lands in order to this Work.

12. That no Lands be disposed of out of this Stock, till the Court abovementioned have first stated what every Restoree or Removee is to have.


 * The Seventh Objection. What needs the Monstrous Plantation, the Innovation of Trade, and the General Judicature abovementioned, since Things are so well already in Ireland? And since almost all the Offices and Arms are already (and the Legislature itself may shortly be) in those onely who are of the King's Religion?

Answer

We have set forth the Benefits, which may arise from the Transplantation, Trade, and Judicature abovementioned: We come next, to set forth the Difference between Ireland, as it