Chapter IV (2)

The fall of Clarendon, at the end of the year 1667, led to important changes in the organization of the government, and the widespread demoralization in trade demanded an improvement of the system of trade and plantation control. The year 1668 is significant as the starting point for a number of attempted remedies in matters of finance and trade supervision. We have no opportunity here to examine the political aspects of these changes or to determine how far they were effected in the interest of mere political control. Suffice it to say that too many conditions of the reign of Charles II have been attributed to extravagance and political intrigue, and too few to an honest desire on the part of those concerned to restore the realm to a condition of solvency and prosperity. Heavily burdened with debt at the outset of the reign, distracted by plague, fire, and foreign war during the years from 1665 to 1668, the kingdom needed the services of all its statesmen, and even the most selfish politician must have realized the need of reorganization. Acting upon a suggestion which Clarendon himself had made to the King, the Privy Council in 1667 began by strengthening its own committee system, and on January 31, 1668, established four standing committees--for foreign affairs, military affairs, trade and plantations, and petitions and grievances. These committees had almost the character of state departments, though they had no final authority of their own, all orders emanating from the Privy Council only. They became, however, more independent than had been previous committees by virtue of the fact that no order was to be issued by the Council until it had been "first perused by the Reporter of each Committee respectively," The following is a copy of the regulations:

His Ma^{tie} among other the important parts of his Affairs
having taken into his princely consideration the way & method
of managing matters at the Council Board, And reflecting that
his Councills would have more reputation if they were put into
a more settled & established course, Hath thought it fit to
appoint certaine Standing Comitties of the Council for several
Businesses together with regular days & places for their
assembling in such sort as followeth:

1. The Committee of FORRAINE AFFAIRES is already settled to
consist of these Persons following (besides his Royall Highness,
who is understood to be of all comittees, where he pleases to be)
vizt. Prince Rupert, L^{d} Keeper [Sir Orlando Bridgeman], Lord
Privy Scale [Lord Robartes], Duke of Buckingham, Lord General
[Duke of Albemarle], L^{d} Arlington, & M^{r} Sec^{ry} Morice,
To which Committee His Ma^{tie} doth also hereby referr the
corresponding w^{th} Justices of peace & other officers & ministers
in the Severall Countys of the Kingdome, concerning the Temper of
the Kingdome &c. The constant day for this Committee to meete to be
every Monday besides such other dayes wherein any extraordinary
Action shall oblige them to assemble, And the place for their
meeting to be at the Lord Arlington's Lodgings in Whitehall.

2. Such matters as concerne the Admiralty & Navy as also all
Military matters, Fortifications &c, so far as they are fit to
be brought to the Councill Board, without intermedling in what
concernes the proper officers (unlesse it shall by them be
desired). If his Ma^{tie} is pleased to appoint that they be
und^{r} the consideracon of this following Committee, vizt,
Prince Rupert, L^{d} General [Duke of Albemarle], E. of Anglesy,
Ea. of Carlisle, Ea. of Craven, Lord Arlington, Lord Berkeley,
M^{r} Comptroller [Sir Thomas Clifford], M^{r} Sec^{ry} Morice,
S^{r} W^{m} Coventry & S^{r} John Duncombe. The usuall day of
meeting to be Wensdays, & oftner, as he that presides shall
direct, & the place to be the Councill Chamber, and hereof
Three or more of them to be a Quorum.

3. Another Committee his Ma^{tie} is pleased to constitute for
the Business of Trade under whose consideration is to come
whatsoever concernes his Ma^{ts}: FORRAINE PLANTATIONS, as also
what relates to his Kingdomes of Ireland or Scotland, the Isles
of Jersey & Guernsey, which is to consist of the Lord Privy
Scale [Lord Robartes], Duke of Buckingham, Earle of Ossory,
Ea. of Bridgewater, Ea: of Lauderdail, L^{d}: Arlington,
L^{d}: Holles, L^{d}: Ashley, M^{r}. Comptroller [Sir Thomas
Clifford], M^{r} Vice Chamberlain [Sir George Carteret],
M^{r} Sec^{ry}. Morice, & S^{r} W^{m} Coventry. The usuall day
of meeting to be every Thursday in the Councill Chamber, or
oftner as he that presides shall direct, and hereof 3 or more
of them to be a Quorum.

4. His Ma^{tie} is pleased to appoint one other Committee to
whom all PETITIONS of COMPLAINT & GREIVANCE are to be referred in
which His Ma^{tie} hath thought fit hereby particularly to
prescribe not to meddle w^{th} Property or what relates to
Meum & Tuum. And to this Committee his Ma^{tie} is pleased
that all matters which concerne Acts of State or of the
Councill be referred. The persons to be the Arch. B^{p}: of
Canterbury, Lord Keeper [Sir Orlando Bridgeman], L^{d}: Privy
Seale [Lord Robartes], L^{d}: Great Chamberlain [?], L^{d}
Chamberlain [Edward, Earl of Manchester], Ea: of Bridgewater,
Ea: of Anglesey, Ea: of Bathe, Ea: of Carbery, Viscount
Fitzharding, L^{d}: Arlington, L^{d}: Holles, L^{d}: Ashley,
M^{r} Sec^{ry}: Morice, M^{r}: Chancellor of the Dutchy
[of Lancaster, Sir Thomas Ingram], and S^{r}: John Duncombe.
The constant day of meeting to be Friday in the Councill
Chamber. And his Ma^{ts} further meaning is, that to these
two last committees, any of the Councill may have Liberty to
come & vote and that his two principall Sec^{ries}: of State
[at this time Lord Arlington and Sir William Morrice] be ever
understood to be of all Com^{tees}:, And hereof 3 or more of
them to be a Quorum.

And for the better carrying on of Business at those severall
Comittees, his Ma^{tie}: thinks fit, and accordingly is pleased
to appoint, That each of these Committees be assigned to the
particular care of some one person, who is constantly to attend
it. In that of the Navy & Military matters his Royal Highness
may p^{r}side, if he so please, or else the Lord Generall [Duke
of Albemarle]. In Forraine matters the L^{d} Arlington. In Trade
& Plantations the L^{d}: Privy Seale [Lord Robartes]. In matters
of State & Greivances, the Lord Keeper [Sir Orlando Bridgeman].

Besides which fixt & established Committees, if there shall
happen anything extraordinary that requires Advice, whether in
matters relating to the Treasury, or of any other mixt nature
other than what is afore determined His Ma^{ties} meaning and
intention is, that particular Committees be in such Cases
appointed for them, as hath been accustomed. And that such
Committees do make their Report in Writing, to be offered to
his Ma^{tie}: the next Councill day following, in which, if any
Debate arise, the old Rule is ever strictly to be observed, that
the youngest Councell^{r}: do begin, and not to speake a second
time without Leave first obteyned. And that as on the one side
nothing is hereafter to be resolved in Councill, till the matter
hath been first examined, And have received the Opinion of
some Committee or other, So on the other hand, that nothing be
referred to any Committee, untill it have been first read at
the Board, except in Forraine Affaires. And his Ma^{ts} express
pleasure is, That no Order of Councill be henceforth any time
issued out by the Clerks of the Councill till the same have been
first perused by the Reporter of each Committee respectively.[32]

There is very little evidence to show that the Committee of the Council for Trade and Plantations played any very conspicuous part in regulating either trade or plantations during the years from 1668 to 1675, though a number of petitions were referred to it. Its most important report was that recommending the restoration of the province of Maine to the grandson of Sir Ferdinando Gorges, but even that matter was taken out of its hands by the further reference of the Gorges' petition to the Committee for Foreign Affairs. In 1668, it dealt with the restitution of Surinam to the Dutch and the settlement of Lord Willoughby's claims; with relief for Barbadoes after the disastrous fire which destroyed St. Michaels in April of that year; with the equipment of Sir Tobias Bridges' regiment in the same island; and with the liberty granted to certain Dutch ships of trading to New York despite the Navigation Act. In 1669, it considered a few petitions and reported on Gorges' memorial. After 1670 it did little, as far as actual evidence of its activity is concerned, but it is entirely clear that it had to transact a great deal more business than is recorded either in the Register or in the Colonial Papers.[33] Many of the questions that were referred to the Select Council of Trade and the Select Council of Trade and Plantations were first passed upon by this committee or were referred to it after the report from the separate body had come in. Furthermore, we know that in the case of this committee, as of similar committees of the Privy Council after 1696, many questions were never allowed to pass out of its hands, except as they were reported to the Council itself. Though not conspicuous, it was potentially active and quite ready in 1675 to take up the burden of colonial control that the King placed upon it.[34]

Even before it had begun the reorganization of its committee system, the Privy Council made known its decision to revive the system of separate and select councils which had probably been in abeyance since 1665. On September 23, 1667, it ordered its Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations to take into consideration the advisability of revoking the commissions of the two councils of 1660,--which councils must, therefore, have been deemed still legally in existence--and of uniting these bodies so as to form a single select council for trade and plantations. To this end it instructed the secretaries of those councils, Philip Frowde and George Duke, to appear before it. For reasons that are nowhere found among the official papers this plan was given up and the decision reached to revoke only the commission of the Council of Trade and to issue a patent for a new body. Roger North, in his _Examen_, published in 1740, a work little to be depended on as far as historical accuracy is concerned, declares that this move was merely a piece of political manoeuvering and never was designed to accomplish anything of importance for the trade or revenue of the kingdom. He says:

"The courtiers, for his Majesty's Ease, moved that there might
be a commission to several of the greatest Traders in _London_
to examine all matters of that kind, and to report their Opinion
to the Council; upon which his Majesty might determine. This
plausible project was put in Execution and the Leaders of the
Fanatic party in the city [especially Alderman Love and Josiah
Child] were the Commissioners; for so it was plotted. The great
House in Queen Street was taken for the use of this Commission.
Mr. Henry Slingsby, sometime Master of the Mint was the Secretary;
and they had a formal Board with Green Cloth and Standishes,
Clerks good store, a tall Porter and Staff, and fitting Attendance
below, and a huge Luminary at the Door. And in Winter Time, when
the Board met, as was two or three Times a Week, or oftener, all
the Rooms were lighted, Coaches at the Door, and great passing in
and out, as if a Council of State in good Earnest had been sitting.
All Cases, Complaints, and Deliberations of Trade were referred
to this Commission, and they reported their opinion."[35]

North's implication that the Council was a contrivance of the enemies of the King to effect a prohibition of trade with France which the government wished to keep open seems deserving of little credence. In the past, facts regarding this Council and its work have not been complete, and even a full list of its members has been wanting. Even now the commission and instructions, which, after considerable delay, were issued on October 20, 1668, have eluded discovery, and we can present little more than the terms of the docket as entered in the books of the Crown Office. The docket reads: "A Commission with instructions annexed establishing a Counsell of Trade, for Keeping a control and super-inspection of his Majesty's Trade and Commerce." From another source we learn that the Council was to take into consideration "the Conditions of your Maj^{tyes} Plantations abroad, in order to the improvement of Trade and increase of Navigation, and for the further encouragement of yo^{r} Maj^{tyes} Subjects in their Trade and Commerce both at home and abroad."[36] A second commission was issued on April 13, 1669, "directed to the same persons in the same form & with the same powers and instructions ... with a confirmation of all Acts done in pursuance of the said late commission in election of officers and otherwise."[37] The clerical secretary was Peter du Moulin, though Dr. Benjamin Worsley seems to have had some official position on the board. The members of the Council were as follows: Duke of York, Prince Rupert, Lord Keeper, Lord Privy Seal, Duke of Buckingham, Duke of Albemarle, Duke of Ormond, Earl of Bridgewater, Earl of Ossory, Earl of Anglesey, Earl of Carlisle, Earl of Craven, Earl of Lauderdale, Lord Arlington, Lord Berkeley of Stratton, Lord Holles, Lord Ashley, Sir Thomas Clifford, Sir George Carteret, Sir John Trevor, Sir William Morrice, Sir William Coventry, Sir Thomas Osborne, Sir Thomas Littleton, Sir Henry Blount, Sir George Downing, Sir Andrew Riccard, Sir William Thompson, Silas Titus, William Garroway, Henry Slingsby, Thomas Grey, John Birch, William Love, Esq., Benjamin Worsley, Doctor of Physic; John Buckworth, Thomas Papillion, John Page, Josiah Child, Thomas Tyte, Benjamin Albyn, and John Shorter. In 1669 were added the Earl of Devonshire, Earl of Sandwich, Viscount Halifax, and George, Lord Berkeley, making forty-six members in all.[38] This is an extraordinary body of men to be engaged in pulling the wool over the eyes of the King, and though Professor Ashley is inclined to view North's account with approval, we doubt if it will stand the test of examination. Professor Ashley's further belief that from this Council emanated the document called "A Scheme of Trade," is capable of satisfactory disproof, since but few of the signers of that document were members of the Council and the date when it was issued, November 29, 1674, was after the Council as a separate body had been abolished.[39]

The Council lasted from 1668 to 1672 and during that time it did nothing, so far as we can discover, either for or against the trade with France. It considered the granting of patents, foreign trade with Piedmont and elsewhere, the export of wool, disputes among the merchant companies, dispensations from the operation of the Navigation Act, and a few matters relating to home industry, particularly as regards abuses in the baize trade. It took into consideration the order in Council of October 23, 1667, permitting the Dutch to send three or more ships yearly for seven years to trade from Holland to New York, and reported so strongly against it that the Privy Council revoked the order.[40] More important still, it took up the whole question of the operation of the navigation acts in the colonies, called upon the merchants and the farmers of the customs for information, and made a careful report to the Privy Council, which the latter, on January 20,1669, embodied in the following order:

"His Ma^{tie} this day taking into consideration the great
importance the Trade of his severall plantations is to his
Ma^{tie} & his Kingdome, and being informed that severall
Governments of the s^{d} Plantations have been wanting to
their duty in the following particulars, viz:

1. That Governors have not taken the oath enjoined by law,

2. That shipps have been permitted to trade to and from the
Plantations not qualified according to law,

3. That there has been omission in taking Bond and Security
and returning those Bonds according as directed by the severall
Acts of Parliament.

For redresse it is ordered, that the Farmers of the Customs do
and are hereby required (at their owne charge) to send over and
make choice of upon the place & from time to time commissionate
& maynteyne one or more persons in each Plantation (whom his
Ma^{tie} shall approve & authorize) to administer the usual oaths
to the severall Governors, that no vessels be admitted to trade
there till said officer has the perusal of the passes and
certificates and certifies that they may trade there, and that
no Bond or security be admitted without the allowance of said
officer,

That letters be written to all said Governors to take said
oaths before said officer and also to give them countenance and
assistance,

That Directions be given to the Commanders of his Ma^{ties} ships
and to any merchant shipps to arrest any ship trading to His
Ma^{ties} Plantations contrary to the law."[41]

Under this order Edward Digges, former governor of Virginia and a London merchant well known to us, was appointed by the farmers of the customs as a fit person to execute for the colony of Virginia the articles and instructions contained in this order. No other appointments, however, appear to have been made at this time.[42]

After 1670 activities of the Council of Trade, as far as they are recorded, are very few. It considered the trade of the Eastland Company, provided for a supply of coal for London at reasonable rates, and discussed a few minor petitions, but as compared with its contemporary, the Council for Foreign Plantations, it accomplished little.[43]

* * * * *

[Footnote 1: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1514-1660, pp. 482, 483; P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. II, p. 63; New York Colonial Docts., III, p. 30.]

[Footnote 2: P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. II, p. 37; Bodleian, Rawlinson A., 117, No. 20.]

[Footnote 3: Professor Osgood thinks that a part of Noell's fortune was made in the slave trade. Beyond the fact that he was a member of the Royal African Company, I cannot find any evidence whatever to prove this statement. Noell certainly was not a slave trader before 1660.]

[Footnote 4: Bodleian, Clarendon Papers, _passim_, New York Hist. Soc. Collections, 1869; Brit. Museum, Add. MSS., 11410, ff. 18 et seq. Clarendon had an agent in Jamaica, Major Ivy, who was considering the setting up of plantations and planting cocoa walks in the interest of the King's revenue. Clarendon's policy toward the continental colonies overshadows somewhat his policy toward the West Indies and in consequence this phase of the subject has been neglected by those who have dealt with Clarendon's colonial relations.]

[Footnote 5: P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. II, pp. 131-132; printed in part in Analytical Index to the Series of Records known as the Remembrancia, preserved among the Archives of the City of London, 1579-1664. (Privately printed, 1878); and in very much abbreviated form in Bannister, Writings of William Patterson, III, 251-252, from whom it has been copied by both Egerton and Cunningham. It seems somewhat strange that there should be no entry of the receipt of this letter in the journal of the court of Aldermen nor any draft of an answer among the Remembrancia or elsewhere. A careful search has failed to disclose any reference to action taken upon this letter among the papers in the Town Clerk's office at the Guildhall.]

[Footnote 6: Bodleian, Clarendon Papers, 73, f. 232.]

[Footnote 7: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1660-1661, p. 319.]

[Footnote 8: Public Record Office, Chancery, Crown Dockets, 6, p. 50. On the docket for the commission of the council of trade the names of the members are inserted; but on that of the commission for the council for foreign plantations the place is left blank. A marginal note on the latter docket gives the explanation noted above.]

[Footnote 9: There is a list of the members in 1661, containing but forty-seven names with some omissions and additions.]

[Footnote 10: Egerton, 2395, ff. 268, 269; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1660-1661, pp. 353-354; P.R.O. State Papers, Domestic, XXI, No. 27; Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce, 4 ed., Appendix.]

[Footnote 11: The journal of the Council of Plantations is among the Colonial Papers in the Public Record Office, XIV, No. 59, ff. 1-57, December 1, 1660-August 4, 1664, entitled "Orders and Proceedings at his Ma^{ts} Counsell for Forraigne Plantacons." There is no journal of the Council of Trade known to exist, but minutes of one or two meetings, which have been preserved, show that a journal must have been kept. An entry-book for patents is mentioned, Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec. 15, and an entry-book of petitions and reports, November 13, 1660-March 12, 1662, is in Brit. Mus. Add. MSS., 25115.

Regarding the history of the papers of the Council of Trade the following information may be of interest. The records probably remained in the possession of George Duke, secretary to the Council, and were called for by Dr. Worsley, secretary of the Council of 1672 in a letter dated November 28, 1672 (Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1672-1673, pp. 213-214). No answer was received from Duke and evidently the papers were not handed over, for when in 1698 the Board of Trade applied for them to Col. Duke's son-in-law, Henry Crispe, it was informed by Mr. Crispe that he had never even seen any of the papers but had heard that some of them were burnt in the Temple when in Col. Duke's possession (Journal of the Board of Trade, XI, p. 55, May 10, 1698). In June and July, 1707, the Board of Trade attempted again to get hold of the papers and wrote to Crispe on June 30. Crispe's reply is worth printing:

"If I am rightly informed there are divers original books and papers relating to the Royal Fishery and the establishing thereof from the year 1660 for divers successive years in which are contained several projections concerning the promoting the same. And there are also books and minutes of the proceedings of the Council of Trade from the year 1660 to 1668, which also contain several material things in relation to Trade and the improvement thereof, which I understand are in the power of a friend of mine.

"These books and papers will be disposed of as the Hon^{ble} Board the Council of Trade shall direct or order.

"But it is humbly desired that consideration be allowed the party that shall produce these Books and Papers. And that it may be ascertained what that consideration shall be and by whom it shall be given.

"I was desired to inform you of this to the end you may take such steps therein as you in your great prudence shall judge most proper.

"If any orders or commands shall be given about this affair that I can be useful or serviceable therein & they be transmitted for me or be left at Johns Coffee House in Bedford St. near the Church in Convent Garden such orders will be faithfully observed by

"S^{rs} Your faithfull humble Servant
"H. CRISPE."

Crispe sent a list of the books with his letter, but that list is missing. The Board answered that it would not buy the books without seeing them first, but as we find no further mention of the matter in the Journal and as the books and papers are not to be found to-day the probabilities are that the negotiations fell through. Journal, XIX, p. 296; Board of Trade Papers, Trade, H Nos. 74, 76.]

[Footnote 12: This may be inferred from the following note attached to one of the reports: "The council conceiving themselves to be in noe capacitie of giving any judgment therein having heard but one side." Egerton, 2395, f. 299.]

[Footnote 13: See Cal. State Papers, Col., 1675-1676, Sec.Sec. 338, 339, where he is called "Secretary for Foreign Plantations."]

[Footnote 14: Egerton, 2395, ff. 286, 291, 299, 335, 336.]

[Footnote 15: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec.Sec. 790, 833; Dom., 1664-1665, p. 4.]

[Footnote 16: In December, 1665, he wrote of "an uncomfortable journey on unfrequented roads, with none to break the ice, in a hackney coach which receives the wind in all parts." Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1665, p. 105.]

[Footnote 17: P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. VI, p. 231; Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec. 1685.]

[Footnote 18: Egerton, 2395, ff. 449, 451, 452, 453; Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec.Sec. 1598-1600.]

[Footnote 19: Brit. Mus., Add. MSS., 25115, f. 156; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1661-1662, pp. 411-412.]

[Footnote 20: Brit. Mus., Add. MSS., 25115; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1660-1661, pp. 356, 359, 363, 372, 412; 1661-1662 pp. 28, 80.]

[Footnote 21: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1660-1661, pp. 383, 532; 1661-1662, pp. 111, 277, 529, 446; Bodleian, Rawlinson MSS., A. 478, f. 81.]

[Footnote 22: Brit. Mus., Add. MSS., 25115, ff. 133-140; Cal. State Papers, Treasury Books, 1660-1667, pp. 245-247, containing the list of convoys, a duplicate of that in the British Museum volume; p. 250, the Treasurer's report.]

[Footnote 23: Brit. Mus., Egerton, 2543, ff. 137-139.]

[Footnote 24: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1663-1664, pp. 515, 549. The Fishing Commission, appointed in 1661, had proved a failure, but the council borrowed from the patent of that commission many of the suggestions which it recommended. Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1661-1662, p. 83.]

[Footnote 25: Cf. Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1661-1662, p. 83.]

[Footnote 26: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1665-1666, p. 330. Yet Crispe's letter (_ante_, p. 75, note) certainly speaks as if the Council had a continuous existence from 1660 to 1668, and the mention of Exeter House as its place of meeting after 1667 points in the same direction.]

[Footnote 27: "Some considerations about the commission for trade," P.R.O. Shaftesbury MSS., Div. X, 8(1).]

[Footnote 28: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1663-1664, pp. 528, 531, 543, 572, 573, 588.]

[Footnote 29: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1661-1662, pp. 75, 135-136, 149.]

[Footnote 30: 19 Charles II, c. 13.]

[Footnote 31: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1667-1668, pp. 156, 158, 165, 173, 180, 187, 191, 247, 321, 433, 444, 452, 511, 593, 594; 1668-1669, pp. 35, 40.]

[Footnote 32: Brit. Mus., Egerton MSS., 2543, ff. 205-205^{b}. Endorsed "Regulation of Committees of the Councill. Read & Ordered in Councill the 31^{st} January, 1667^{b}." For reasons that cannot be explained this regulation is not entered in the Privy Council Register. It is referred to in a similar order of February 12, 1668, P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. VII, pp. 176-177, but otherwise omitted. For this reason the document is here printed in full. Cf. Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1667-1668, p. 261.]

[Footnote 33: For instance, there are among the Colonial Papers memoranda of proceedings at various sittings of this committee held between April 7, 1668, and February 18, 1669, relative to domestic, colonial, and foreign trade, that are not recorded elsewhere.]

[Footnote 34: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec.Sec. 1685, 1712, 1759, 1769, 1791, 1870, 1883; 1660-1674, Sec.Sec. 30, 66, 150, 184-186, 751, 837, 1226, I, II, III; 1320, 1353, 1390. Dom., 1668-1669, pp. 62, 201.]

[Footnote 35: Roger North, Examen, p. 461, quoted by Prof. Ashley in Surveys, Historic and Economic, pp. 274-275.]

[Footnote 36: New York Colonial Docts., III, p. 175.]

[Footnote 37: P.R.O. Chancery, Crown Office, Docket Books, 7, pp. 335, 344; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1668-1669, pp. 6, 18, 224-225.]

[Footnote 38: Bodleian, Rawlinson MSS. A, 478, f. 77; Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1668-1669, pp. 224-225, 651.]

[Footnote 39: Ashley, Surveys, pp. 275-276.]

[Footnote 40: New York Colonial Docts., III, pp. 175-178; Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec.Sec. 1874, 1875.]

[Footnote 41: P.C.R., Charles II, Vol. VIII, p. 169; Cal. State Papers, Col., 1661-1668, Sec. 1884, 1669-1674, Sec.Sec. 6, 9.]

[Footnote 42: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1669-1674, Sec.Sec. 104, 696.]

[Footnote 43: Cal. State Papers, Dom., 1671, p. 210; 1671-1672, pp. 450-451.]