This statement throws a light on the somewhat equivocal reputation enjoyed by Irish glass until well on in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, and also shows that at that time the Waterford makers considered that they had entirely freed their metal from the dark tone formerly characterising it. It is indeed a curious irony of human endeavour that the makers of Waterford glass, now deservedly famous for its beautiful and dark grey-blue tone, tried to eradicate it from quite an early date. They endeavoured to make their glass whiter and clearer, like that of Bristol, and in this they succeeded after 1830. The _late_ glass of Waterford, _i.e._, made 1835 or afterwards, was actually whiter than that of Dublin. _Little did these glass artists think that a century later people in all parts of the world would be trying to reproduce the early dark colour without success._ The poor reputation for colour that Irish glass suffered under during the eighteenth century must in itself have greatly interfered with the export trade in the finer pieces. That there was an immense export trade during that period is shown from contemporary statistics, but this appears to have been largely confined to commoner wares, such as bottles, glasses, vials, and other articles in constant use and requiring frequent renewal. The finer and more fragile pieces were generally kept at home. The country gentry considered it the proper thing to support local factories by buying the wares made at them, though they did not always appreciate their purchases, and in many instances supplemented them with imported English glass, which they used in preference. Thus it happens that in many old Irish country houses choice specimens of Irish glass have been discovered stored away in garrets and cupboards practically unused since they were made. There is little or no documentary evidence to establish the origin of these pieces, for, as a race, Irish land-owners are not addicted to keeping receipts of century-old bills, but tradition and the appearance of the surviving pieces confirm the fact that they were originally of Irish manufacture. It must be remembered that the tradition is the more likely to be true because until comparatively recently Irish glass was only lightly valued, so that it was more to the interest of the owner to consider it of English rather than of native manufacture. The tradition, however, is confirmed by the colour and other characteristics of the pieces. It is interesting to note that in many instances missing pieces in sets have been replaced by later productions of English manufacture. The differences between these and their originals are generally easily discernible, the rich depth of tone, which is such a beautiful characteristic of Irish work, being almost altogether absent from the former.