2 Sir Heneage Finch's speechs against the cattle bill, 1665 (T.C.D., MS 1180, p. 15). See also Cal. S.P. Ire., 1666–9, p. 534.

3 Quinn, , Elizabethans & Irish, pp 139–40Google Scholar; Cal. S.P. Ire., 1603–6, pp 118, 580.

4 Quinn, pp 14–19, 141; Grotty, R. D., Irish agricultural production (Gork, 1966), pp 1–3 Google Scholar; Hayes-McCoy, G. A., ‘ Gaelic Society in Ireland in the late sixteenth century ’ in Hist. studies, iv, 45–61 Google Scholar.

5 Moody, Londonderry plantation; Bottigheimer, K. S., English money and Irish land; the ‘ Adventurers ’ in the Cromwellian settlement of Ireland (Oxford, 1971), pp 24–6Google Scholar.

6 Note the increased exploitation of woodlands in seventeenth-century Ireland which was associated with the spread of English control ( McCracken, E., The Irish woods since Tudor times (Newton Abbot, 1971, p. 98 Google Scholar).

7 Moody, Londonderry plantation, pp 185–6, 342; Chart, D. A., An economic history of Ireland (Dublin, 1920; hereafter cited as Chart), p. 39 Google Scholar.

8 H.M.C. rep. 8, app. 1, p. 102; see also P.R.O., S.P dom,, Chas II, vol. 223, no. 125.

9 Cal. S.P Ire., 1611–14, pp 501–2.

10 Reg. privy council Scot., 1625–7, p. 591.

11 Hoskins, W G., Provincial England (London, 1965), pp 131–48Google Scholar, Wilson, C., England's apprenticeship (London, 1965), pp 25–6Google Scholar.

12 C. Edie, The Irish cattle bills; a study in restoration politics (Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc, n.s., vol. 60, pt 2, Philadelphia, 1970; hereafter cited as Edie), p. 5.

13 E.g., O'Donovan, Econ. hist, (hereafter cited as O'Donovan), p., 34.

14 Kent Archives Office (hereafter K.A.O.), Sackville MS ON 4268, H.M.C., Salisbury MS XXI, pp 271, 296, 299, 300; Acts privy council, 1621–3. p. 29; ibid., 1628–9, p. 41; Cal. S.P. Ire., 1611–14, p. 43.

15 Brereton, W., Travels in Holland, the United Provinces, England, Scotland and Ireland, 1634–5 ed. Hawkins, E. (Chetham Soc, Publications, i, 1844), pp 136–7, 161Google Scholar.

16 Leeds City Libraries, Archives Department (hereafter L.C.L.), TN/PO 7/1(23).

17 Smout, T C. Scottish trade on the eve of union 1660–1707 (Edinburgh and London, 1963), p. 214 Google Scholar

18 O'Donovan; Gullen, , Anglo-Ir. trade, pp 29–31 Google Scholar

19 For a list of the port books consulted see Appendices A and B below No further references to these port books are given in the text of this article. Most of the port books cover a year from Christmas.—e.g., Christmas 1606 to Christmas 1607; in such cases a single year is given, viz. 1607.

20 See below, p. 512.

21 O'Donovan, pp 35–6.

22 For a detailed discussion of the port books see Woodward, D., ‘ The port books of England and Wales ’ in Maritime History, iii (1973), pp 147–65Google Scholar.

23 The duty on cattle was raised from 1s. od. per head to 2s. od. in 1627 and to 2s. 6d. in the 1660s: O'Donovan, p. 35; port books for the 1660s. Unfortunately little is known about the price of Irish cattle, especially on the English market, but it is unlikely that the duty was ever a high proportion of the final price., According to William Petty the cost of shipping cattle and driving them in England was much greater than the duty paid. He put the freight at 9s. 6d. a head, driving and grazing at 4s. 6d. a head, and the duty in England and Ireland at 3s. 6d. a head. An estimate of c.1667 put the freight rate at between eight and ten shillings for cattle and one shilling for sheep. ( Marquis of Lansdowne, The Petty papers (London, 1927), p. 215Google Scholar; P.R.O., S.P. dom., Chas II, vol. 223, no. 125.) In his will of 1614 Richard Little of Galdy in the Wirral, master and part owner of a vessel, recorded that he was owed £ 11 4s. od. by Thomas Wright of Belturbet in Ireland for transporting 28 beasts to England at a rate of 8s. od. per head (Cheshire R.O., W.S. Richard Little 1614).

24 The 1614–15 port books for the Ulster ports show that small numbers of cattle were shipped to Workington (L.C.L., TN/PO 7/1 (1–4)). I am grateful to Robert Hunter for allowing me to consult his transcript of these records. For more information on the livestock trade of the Cumberland ports see below pp 497–8.

25 See Appendix A.

26 Gobbett, W., Parliamentary history of England, vol. i (London, 1806), p. 1195 Google Scholar. A bill to prohibit the import of Irish cattle was introduced in 1621 but came to nothing; see Edie, pp 6–10.

27 Based on the following port books—Lancaster 1640. Liverpool 1641, Chester 1639 and 1641, Beaumards 1639, Carnarvon 1640, Mine-head 1641, Ilfracombe 1637, Barnstaple 1640, and St Ives 1639.

28 Numbers of livestock exported from Irish ports in 1616–17 and 1626:

29 Caulfield, R., The council book of the corporation of Youghal (Guildford, 1876), p. 70 Google Scholar.

30 Thirsk, J. (ed.), The agrarian history of England and Wales 1500–1640 (Cambridge, 1967), p. 78 Google Scholar. Based on P.R.O., S.P dom., Jas I, vol. 130, no. 81, dated 15 May 1622. For a similar complaint from Anglesey in 1623 see Cal. S.P. dom., 1619–23, p. 498.

31 Extant port books and customs accounts provide the following information: Milford 1647, 5° cows recorded, place of origin not given, Barnstaple 1647, 12 bullocks from Ireland. No livestock are listed in the following records—Chester 1647, Gloucester 1649, Carnarvon 1647, Minehead 1647, Ilfracombe 1647 (P.R.O., E190/1306/15; Stephens, W. B., ‘ The trade of the port of Barnstaple at the end of the civil war ’ in Devon and Cornwall Notes and Queries, xxxi, 169 Google Scholar, Woodward, D. M., ‘ The overseas trade of Chester, 1600–1650 ’ in Trans, of the Hist. Soc. of Lanvs, and Chesh., 122 (1970), p. 40 Google Scholar, P.R.O., E122/223/27, 222/4. E190/1089/11, 952/2.) The local customs accounts of Minehead record that, in 1648, 1,248 cattle, 1,130 sheep, 355 lambs and 70 pigs were imported. Of these, 30 cows were ‘ out of Ireland ’. The origin of the remaining livestock, except 14 pigs from Tenby, is not given although 123 of the cows were shipped in Youghal vessels. (Somerset Record Office, DD/L p. 30/105.)

32 Prendergast, J. P, The Cromwellian settlement of Ireland (London, 1865), p. 15 Google Scholar. See O'Donovan, p. 39 and Chart, p. 40 for similar statements.

33 Steele, Tudor & Stuart, proclam., ii, no, 500, Dunlop, Commonwealth, ii, 539, O'Donovan, pp 39–40; Cal. S.P. dom., 1651–2, p. 278; Herbert corresp., pp 141–2,

34 Estimate based on the data set out in Appendix A. There are dangers in totalling imports for different ports in different years but this method should give a rough indication of the level of the trade.

35 Imports of Scottish and Irish cattle at Carlisle in 1662–3 were put at 26,440 while imports of Scottish cattle only were put at 18,364. (P.R.O., S.P. dom., Chas II, vols 78, no. 11; 79, no 3.) Cal. S.P. dom., 1663–4, p. 226, gives the latter estimate as 18, 574; this is the total given in the manuscript but it is inaccurate, a product of faulty arithmetic.

36 C. Armour, ‘ The trade of Chester and the state of the Dee Navig ation 1600–1800 ” (Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1956), p. 267; based on P.R.O. 30/24/36. Unfortunately, this manuscript is not to be found at this point in the Shaftesbury papers, nor has a thorough search by myself and Dr Armour in the Shaftesbury papers managed to unearth the original. It is possible that the manuscript has been misplaced or lost; since Dr Armour consulted the Shaftesbury papers they have been bound in volumes. I am grateful to Dr Armour for helping me to try to locate this manuscript.

37 15 Chas II, c. 7 For the debate and background to the livestock clauses of the act see Edie, pp 11–16. Scottish cattle were banned from 24 August to 20 December.

38 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., Eliz.-Geo. III. vol. 322, no. 124.

39 The winter of 1664–5 was hard in Ireland and was followed by a wet summer (P.R.O., S.P Ire., Eliz-Geo. III, vol. 319, nos II. 22, III, 141, 143, 152, Herbert corresp., p. 188; O'Donovan. p. 47).

40 The act had a similar effect on the shipping season at Ilfracombe. For details of the shipping season at Chester in the 1630s see Woodward, ‘ The overseas trade of Chester ’, op., cit., p. 36.

41 18 Chas II, c. 2. For a blow by blow account of the 1665 and 1666 debates see Edie, pp 17–21, 23–4.

42 Steele, , Tudor & Stuart, proclam., iii, no. 2305Google Scholar. Reg. privy council Scot., 1665–9, pp 253–4.

43 P.R.O., S.P. dam., Chas II, vols 206, no. 124, 209, no. 8.

44 Cheshire Record Office, QJF 95/2, nos 36, 38, 39. Partly printed in J. H. E. Bennett and J C. Dewhurst (ed.), Quarter sessions records for Cheshire, 1559–1760 (Rec. Soc. of Lanes, and Chesh., vol. 94 (1940), pp 179–80). See also P.R.O., S.P dom., Chas II, vol. 197, no. 84.

45 P.R.O., S.P. dom., Chas II, vol. 218, no. 51, Steele, i, no. 3507.

46 20 Chas II, c. 12.

47 For smuggling see various references in Cal. S.P. Ire., Cal. S.P. dom., and Reg. privy council Scot.

48 Edie, p. 41.

49 Coke, R., England's improvements (London, 1675), pp 40–2, 78–80Google Scholar, Collins, J, A plea for the bringing in of Irish cattle (London, 1680), pp 6–8 Google Scholar; Temple, W., The works of Sir William Temple (London, 1770), iii, 10–11, 22–3Google Scholar; Britannia languens (1680), in McCulloch, J. R. (ed.), A selection of early English tracts on commerce (Cambridge, 1952), pp 3l8, 351, 403–7Google Scholar; P.R.O. 30/24/39/65; T.C.D., MS 1180, pp 27–32, 45; Chart, pp 42–4; O'Birien, Econ. hist. Ire., 17th cent., pp 153, 157–67; O'Donovan, pp 61–73; Cullen, Anglo-Ir. trade, pp 33–8; Cullen, , An economic history of Ireland since 1660 (London, 1972; hereafter cited as Cullen, Econ. hist.), pp 14–17 Google Scholar, Edie, pp 41–5.

50 Cullen, , Econ. hist., pp 14–16 Google Scholar.

51 Edie, pp 45–7.

52 18 Chas II, c. 2.

53 Edie, p. 47; Powick, F. M. (ed.), Handbook of British chronology (London, 1961), pp 538–9Google Scholar.

54 Edie, pp 47–50.

55 32 Chas II, c. 2. For an account of the debates see Edie, p. 50. It is only recently that historians have become aware that the prohibition on Irish livestock was removed for almost two years during 1679–81, although this is made quite clear by many references in the State Papers and other sources, particularly the port books. Edie, p. 50 was the first modern historian to recognise this development.

56 Edie, ibid., says that ‘. . probably not many Irish cattle breeders took advantage of the lapse in English laws. Ships and fodder were no longer readily available and most breeders had long since adjusted to the new market in provisions ’.

57 See Appendix B.

58 See various letters between July and October 1665. Linen Hall Lib., Letter Book of George Macartney, 1660–67 I am grateful to Bill Crawford of the P.R.O.N.I. for helping me to obtain copies of the letters.

59 Unfortunately no further evidence relating to such a legal opinion has been uncovered. However, it has been suggested to me that the absence of any reference to the short session of March 1679 m the journals of the house of commons meant that the session was not given legal recognition and that the act did not expire until the end of May. But there are references to the first session in the journals of the house of lords, including the king's speech of 6 March and the prorogation on 13 March (Lords’jn., xiii (1675–81), pp 448–59).

60 Linen Hall Lib., Letter book of George Macartney, 1678–81.

61 Custom House, London, Customs 97/74A, p. 115. I was given this reference by Tony Michell. Presumably a similar letter was sent to all ports but no others have survived.

62 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., Eliz.-Geo. Ill, vol. 339, no. 20.

63 Trading conditions were freer than during the years immediately before 1667. Not only had the 1667 act fallen in, but the partial ban imposed by the 1663 act was no longer in force. However the Scottish ban on Irish imports still stood (Reg. privy council Scot., 1678–80, pp 348, 356–9, 594–7).

64 See also Cullen, Econ. hist., p. 15.

65 Britannia languens, pp 407–8.

66 There was a similar high rate of merchant turnover at Minehead and Ilfracombe during the 1660s.

67 At Liverpool in 1665 three merchants, two of whom were important at Chester in 1666, controlled 44 per cent of the cattle and 36 per cent of the sheep. In 1664 at Beaumaris five merchants, four of whom were prominent at Liverpool in 1665 and Chester in 1666, shipped 54 per cent of the cattle and 50 per cent of the sheep. A year later six men, including the five from 1664, controlled 52 per cent of the cattle, but few of the sheep.

68 This process is not without its difficulties. With only names to go on it is sometimes impossible to be certain whether or not a name which appears in more than one place refers to the same man each time. However, it is unlikely that this affects more than a small proportion of the cases dealt with.

69 Based on names appearing in Gaulfield, The council book of Youghal.

70 Based on names appearing in Council bks Waterford.

71 Caulfield, R., The council book of the city of Cork (Guildford, 1876), pp 1174–5Google Scholar.

72 Based on names appearing in Hore, P. H., History of the town and county of Wexford (6 vols, London, 1900–11)Google Scholar, V, and Caulfield, R., The council books of the corporation of Kinsale (Guildford, 1879)Google Scholar.

73 Hancock, F., A history of Minehead (Taunton, 1903), pp 420–7Google Scholar

74 It was also extremely rare for a man who became mayor or sheriff of Dublin or Chester to become involved in the trade.

75 In addition a further butcher from each city shipped a small number of animals in 1639.

76 Three of these butchers handled 16 per cent of the cattle and 20 per cent of the sheep landed at Liverpool in 1665 and two of them were also active at Beaumaris in the same year.

77 The above discussion is based on data taken from Anc. rec. Dublin, iii–iv, and Bennett, Rolls of freemen of Chester.

78 However, the precise relationship between a merchant and a man acting as his factor cannot be discovered from the port books.

79 Bennett, op. cit.; information supplied by Mrs E. Berry, the Chester City Archivist, to whom I am grateful.

80 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., Eliz.-Geo. III, vols 320, nos 49. 57. 59. 96, 98; 321, nos 226, 230, 322. nos 4, 36, 43, 339, nos 20–1. 29, 32, 46, 48. 52, 74, 80, 81, 84, 93, 100. 108. See also the 1666 Chester port book where there are two illegible entries relating to cattle shipped by ‘ Edward Lord Conway ’. The 1680 Chester book records three cargoes for ‘ The Lord Conway ’ comprising 40 cattle. 200 sheep, some cloth and horses. For another example of a landowner shipping cattle directly to England see Herbert corrsp., pp 192–3.

81 P.R.O., S.P Ire., Eliz.-Geo. III. vol. 319. nos 22, 26, 43, 68. 80.

82 Ibid., vol. 321, no. 3.

83 Everitt, A. in Thirsk, J. (ed.), Agrarian hist., p. 580 Google Scholar.

84 The historian of London's food supply in the 17th century does not seem to have found a single example of Irish cattle sales in the metropolis. P. V. McGrath, ‘ The marketing of food, fodder and livestock in the London area in the 17th century ’ (M.A. thesis, University of London, 1948).

85 Collins, Plea, p. 6; P.R.O., S.P. dom., Chas II, vol. 176, no. 130.

86 See Woodward, ‘ Overseas trade ’, op. cit., p. 36 for further details.

87 Calculations based on the following port books: Chester 1634; Ilfracombe 1662, 1666, 1679, 1680; Minehead 1662, 1664, 1665, 1679.

88 However, in 1639 Christopher Lowther discussed the possibility of bringing iron from Ireland in cattle boats ‘ so it may lie under the beasts ’ feet without hindering anything ’ (Record Office, Carlisle, D/Lons/W, p. 57). I am grateful to Mr B. C. Jones for providing me with this information.

89 Brereton, , Travels, p. 155 Google Scholar.

90 Of 80 cattle shipped for the earl of Conway in 1680, 40 were smothered in the vessel, which was driven off course to the Isle of Man and only 36 arrived safely at Conway's seat at Ragley in Warwickshire ( Beckett, M., Sir George Rawdon (Belfast, 1935), p. 67 Google Scholar).

91 P.R.O., S.P. dom., Chas II, vols 189, no. 57; 219, no. 83.

92 For examples see the many references in Cat. S.P. Ire. and Cal. S.P dom.

93 The king's ship Phoenix cruised off the Irish coast between 1614 and 1622, taking many pirates (K.A.O., Sackville MSS, ON 7125, Woodward, D. (ed.), ‘ Sir Thomas Button, the Phoenix and the defence of the Irish coast 1614–22 ‘ in Mariner's Mirror, 59 (1973), pp 343–4Google Scholar). In the 1630s Wentworth made determined efforts to suppress piracy and two or more vessels were kept in the Irish Sea to apprehend pirates and organise convoys of merchantmen; see the many letters on this subject among the Strafford letters in the Archives Dept. of Sheffield City Library.

94 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., Eliz.-Geo. Ill, vol. 319, nos 79, 80, 89.

95 Cullen, , Econ. hist., p. 7 Google Scholar.

96 Hunter, R. J., ‘ Towns in the Ulster plantation ’ in Studia Hib., xi (1971), pp 40–79 Google Scholar.

97 Cullen, Econ. hist., p. 11 states that ‘ The export trade was served by cattle fairs. Cattle fairs drew business interests together and gave to the country its first semblance of effective economic unity ’

98 Cal. S.P. Ire., 1666–9, p. 282.

99 New posts were established at Liverpool and Holyhead in 1680 although the Holyhead post was removed in 1681 after the reimposition of the ban (Cal. treas. bks, 1679–80, pp 403, 658–9, 1681–5, p. 105).