the King, 8 but such reports failed to halt parliamentary action or the meetings 
of the existing Committee of Trade and Plantations. 9 During January, 1695/6, 
at several meetings of the House of Commons as a committee of the whole the 
matter of a Council of Trade was debated; most important, it was resolved 
by a narrow margin that Parliament rather than the King should nominate 
the commissioners thereon. 10 On January 31 the House, acting as a committee 
of the whole, adopted a series of resolutions concerning the establishment of 
a Council of Trade, and a bill embodying these resolutions was ordered 
brought in. 11 This proposed legislation was regarded by some not only as an 
invasion of the domain of the crown but also as an entering wedge for further 
invasion. l 2 The King ordered his ministers to oppose the bill, 13 but the 
measure seemed destined to passage in both houses, when the discovery of a 
plot to assassinate William and to invade England permanently diverted legislative 
attention to more pressing issues. 14 
The plan for the establishment by the crown of a Council of Trade, which 
please the merchant classes and accomplish 
a necessary reform, but it would cut into the 
domain of the crown, especially in the Treasury 
and the Admiralty (3 Burke, Works 
[1803], 326). 
8 3 Luttrell, op. cit., 562-63. 
9On December 19 the Duke of Shrewsbury 
informed the Clerk of the Council in writing 
that the King having appointed a Commission 
for Trade and Plantations it was unnecessary 
that the Committee for that purpose meet for 
the present (CSP, Col., 1693-96, #2207). 
10 On January 2 in a great debate the court 
party opposed the setting up of a council as 
an infringement of the King's prerogative. The 
vote in favor of Parliament as nominator of 
the commissioners stood at 175 to 174 (3 
Luttrell, op. cit., 568; Lees, op. cit., 49-50, 
53-54). On January 21, in a Committee of 
the Whole House, it was resolved that no commissioners 
be members of the House, that the 
commissioners take an oath recognizing William 
as lawful sovereign, that the commissioners 
have power to appoint, in conjunction 
with the Admiralty, convoys for shipping, to 
decide differences between merchants, and to 
inspect and regulate the manufactures of the 
kingdom (4 Luttrell, op. cit., 7). Cf. Lees, 
op. cit., 48-53, for the effect of these resolutions 
on Parliamentary fervor. 
11 The resolutions adopted provided for the 
establishment by an act of Parliament of a 
Council of Trade with powers for the more 
effectual preservation of English trade; the 
commissioners thereof were to be nominated 
by and could be members of Parliament. The 
Council was (a) to require information and to 
receive applications concerning protection of 
shipping and to send directions therein to 
Admiralty officials; (b) to receive complaints 
in relation to trade, of the misbehavior of 
commanders and officers, to represent the 
same to the King, and to send directions to 
the Admiralty for proceeding against such 
offenders; (c) to consider the plantation trade 
and all trades and manufactures and the best 
methods for securing and improving the same; 
(d) to receive proposals for the employment 
of the poor; (e) to consider the best methods 
of settling a Court-Merchant; (/) to consider 
the encouragement and establishment of the 
fishery (n /. H. of C, 423; cf. Lees, op. cit., 
51-52). 
12 2 Burnet, op. cit., 163; 5 Pari. Hist. Eng., 
977; cf. 3 Burke, Wor\s, 326. 
13 2 Burnet, op. cit., 162-63; 5 Pari. Hist. 
Eng., 977-78. 
14 2 Burnet, op. cit., 164; Jacobsen, William 
Blathwayt (1932), 297-98; Lees, op. cit., 53. 
The bill had passed the second hearing in the 
House of Commons when the plot was revealed 
(n /. H. of C, 440, 454). On March 
3, 1695/6, it was resolved for the second 
time that the bill be committed to a Committee 
of the Whole House (ibid., 488), but the 
Council for Trade received no further legislative 
consideration (2 Stock, Proceedings and Debates 
of the British Parliaments Respecting 
North America [1927], 158).