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