ed because of the plague and the fire and were not
resumed. Its commission was not revoked and it certainly had a nominal
existence until 1667. That it had no actual existence in April, 1665,
seems likely from a letter sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury at that
time, begging that the King appoint a council of trade to find out the
cause of the decay in the coal trade.[26] By the summer of 1665 trade
was reported dead and money scarce and to the plague was ascribed "an
infinite interruption to the whole trade of the Nation." The fire and
the Dutch war completed the demoralization of commerce and in 1666 the
plantations were deemed in great want of necessaries on account of the
obstructions of trade by the war. Though in that year many questions
arose that might naturally have been referred to such a council had
it been in session, no such references appear among the records. The
advancement of trade was looked after by the Privy Council and its trade
committee, and particularly by the Committee of Trade appointed by
Parliament. The latter body had been named as early as March, 1664,
to investigate the export of wool, wool-fells, and fullers' earth.
A few weeks later it was entrusted with the duty of inquiring into the
reasons for the general decay of trade. As this function was conferred
on the Parliamentary Committee at a time when the Select Council was
still holding its sessions, it is reasonable to suppose that the work
of the latter body had not proved satisfactory. There is some slight
evidence to show that the meetings of the Council were at this time but
little attended and that its members were not working in harmony.[27]
The Parliamentary Committee, acting as a Council of Trade, ordered
representatives from all the merchant companies to prepare an account
of the causes of obstruction in their different branches, and when the
latter, among other obstacles, named the Dutch as the chief enemies of
English trade, resolved that the wrongs inflicted by the Dutch were the
greatest obstructions to foreign trade, and recommended that the King
should seek redress. Other causes were considered and debated.[28]

An excellent idea of procedure can be obtained from studying the history
of trade relations with Scotland during this decade. Immediately after
the passage of the Navigation Act of 1660, the Scots petitioned that the
Act might be dispensed with for Scotland, and special deputies were sent
from the Scottish to the