arles I, Vol. IX, p. 1. The order in Council
of July 3, 1633, regarding Virginia and Lord Baltimore, is headed "Lords
Commissioners for Foreign Plantations." It is evident, however, that
this body is not a separate board of commissioners but the Privy Council
sitting as a committee of the whole for plantations. The membership does
not agree with that of the committee of 1632, that committee did not sit
in the Star Chamber, and such a committee could not issue an order which
the Privy Council alone could send out. There was no separate commission
of this kind in July, 1633, as Tyler, England in America, pp. 122-123
(Amer. Nation Series, IV) seems to think.]

[Footnote 18: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1574-1660, pp. 184, 200, 251,
259.]

[Footnote 19: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1675-1676, Sec. 193.]

[Footnote 20: P.C.R., Charles I, Vol. X, p. 1; XII, p. 1; XV, p. 1; Cal.
State Papers, Col., 1574-1660, pp. 177, 232.]

[Footnote 21: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1574-1660, pp. 9, 140, 151, 158,
211, 258.]

[Footnote 22: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1574-1600, p. 129.]

[Footnote 23: Cal. State Papers, Col., pp. 197-198, 207.]

[Footnote 24: P.C.R., Charles I, Vol. XV, p. 300.]

[Footnote 25: Virginia Magazine, X, p. 428; XI, p. 46.]

[Footnote 26: P.C.R., Charles I, Vol. XV, p. 508.]

[Footnote 27: "Att Whitehall, 8th of March, 1638(9)

Their Lordships do pray and require the subcommittee for foreign
plantations to consider of this petition at their next meeting and to
make report to their Lordships of their opinion concerning the same.

Will. Becher."]

[Footnote 28: P.C.R., Charles I, Vols. XV, p. 343; XVI, pp. 542-543.]

[Footnote 29: P.C.R., Charles I, Vol. XVI, p. 558; Cal. State Papers,
Col., 1574-1660, p. 301.]

[Footnote 30: Cal. State Papers, Col., 1675-1676, Sec. 190.]

[Footnote 31: The commissioners frequently formed a majority of those
present at a Privy Council meeting. For example, in 1638, the Council
wrote a letter to the governor of Virgina. This letter was signed by
eleven councillors, of whom eight were members of the Commission.
It is sometimes difficult to distinguish the different capacities in
which Archbishop Laud acted. A series of minutes drawn up by him in 1638
of the subjects upon which he had prepared reports to the King notes
the following: concerning the six plantations, grants of offices in
reversion, new patent offices and monopolies, the execution of the
King's former directions, and