Importation Act 1667

Last updated

Importation Act 1667
Act of Parliament
Coat of Arms of England (1660-1689).svg
Long title An Additional Act against the Importation of Forreign Cattel.
Citation 19 & 20 Cha. 2. c. 12
  • (Ruffhead: 20 Cha. 2. c. 7)
Dates
Royal assent 9 May 1668
Commencement 10 October 1667
Repealed28 July 1863
Other legislation
Repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1863
Status: Repealed
Text of statute as originally enacted

The Importation Act 1667 (19 & 20 Cha. 2. c. 12) was an act of the Parliament of England which banned Irish cattle from being sold in England. It was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1863.

The bill was first introduced in 1663 and proved extremely contentious. It was the work of George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, who saw it as a means to injure his enemies James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormonde and Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon. Ormonde, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, believed that it would prevent any proper economic development in Ireland, while Clarendon, though he was not greatly interested in Irish affairs, promised Ormonde, his close friend and ally in government, to use his authority to see it defeated. Its passage would therefore greatly weaken them politically, and correspondingly strengthen Buckingham.

Buckingham said that "whoever was against the bill had either an Irish interest or an Irish understanding", giving great offence to Ormonde and his family as a result, but his difficulty was that England did not have a single "interest". The bill was strongly supported by those whom Samuel Pepys called "the Western gentlemen", the landed gentlemen of the North and West of England, and Wales, who believed that the bill would increase the value of their cattle. It was opposed by the graziers of Norfolk and Suffolk, who made their living partly by fattening Irish cattle, and by Londoners, who were the biggest market for Irish beef. Pepys also reports fears, unfounded in the event, that passing the bill would lead to a repetition of the Irish Rebellion of 1641.

In September 1666, against government opposition, the bill was reintroduced in the House of Commons. Pepys thought that this was "against the general sense of the House" but that the "Western gentlemen" might carry it by a small majority. Clarendon until too late was confident that the two Houses would reject it or that if all else failed the King would veto it; but preoccupied as he was with the Second Anglo-Dutch War, he seriously underestimated his opponents. Sir William Coventry, more realistically, warned Ormonde that in his view it would pass the Commons, that the House of Lords would make no difficulty, and that the king, embroiled with domestic problems and the Dutch war, would not risk offending Parliament by using his veto. Coventry's predictions were correct: although the King gave his assent with great reluctance, he was acting on Parliament's unofficial pledge to pass two crucial financial Bills on condition that the Importation Bill become law, as it duly did in January 1667. The King's "very sharp speech" to the Lords on 18 January, which Pepys mentions in his diary, is an indication of his displeasure at having to assent to the Act.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Charles II of England</span> King of England, Scotland and Ireland from 1660 to 1685

Charles II was King of Scotland from 1649 until 1651 and King of England, Scotland, and Ireland from the 1660 Restoration of the monarchy until his death in 1685.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949</span> United Kingdom legislation establishing the supremacy of the House of Commons

The Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 are two Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, which form part of the constitution of the United Kingdom. Section 2(2) of the Parliament Act 1949 provides that the two Acts are to be construed as one.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Royal assent</span> Formal approval of a proposed law in monarchies

Royal assent is the method by which a monarch formally approves an act of the legislature, either directly or through an official acting on the monarch's behalf. In some jurisdictions, royal assent is equivalent to promulgation, while in others that is a separate step. Under a modern constitutional monarchy, royal assent is considered little more than a formality. Even in nations such as the United Kingdom, Norway, the Netherlands, Liechtenstein and Monaco which still, in theory, permit their monarch to withhold assent to laws, the monarch almost never does so, except in a dire political emergency or on advice of government. While the power to veto by withholding royal assent was once exercised often by European monarchs, such an occurrence has been very rare since the eighteenth century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormond</span> Anglo-Irish viceroy (1610–1688)

Lieutenant-General James FitzThomas Butler, 1st Duke of Ormond, KG, PC, was an Anglo-Irish statesman and soldier, known as Earl of Ormond from 1634 to 1642 and Marquess of Ormond from 1642 to 1661. Following the failure of the senior line of the Butler family, he was the second representative of the Kilcash branch to inherit the earldom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham</span> 17th-century English statesman and poet

George Villiers, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, 19th Baron de Ros, was an English statesman and poet who exerted considerable political power during the reign of Charles II of England.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Denzil Holles, 1st Baron Holles</span> English statesman (1598–1680)

Denzil Holles, 1st Baron Holles, was an English statesman, best remembered as one of the Five Members whose attempted arrest by Charles I in January 1642 sparked the First English Civil War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon</span> English politician and historian (1609–1674)

Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon was an English statesman, lawyer, diplomat and historian who served as chief advisor to Charles I during the First English Civil War, and Lord Chancellor to Charles II from 1660 to 1667.

Promulgation is the formal proclamation or the declaration that a new statutory or administrative law is enacted after its final approval. In some jurisdictions, this additional step is necessary before the law can take effect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cavalier Parliament</span> Parliament of England (1661–1679)

The Cavalier Parliament of England lasted from 8 May 1661 until 24 January 1679. It was the longest English Parliament, and longer than any Great British or UK Parliament to date, enduring for nearly 18 years of the quarter-century reign of Charles II of England. Like its predecessor, the Convention Parliament, it was overwhelmingly Royalist and is also known as the Pensioner Parliament for the many pensions it granted to adherents of the King.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury</span> English politician and founder of the Whig party (1621-1683)

Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury PC, FRS, was an English statesman and peer. He held senior political office under both the Commonwealth of England and Charles II, serving as Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1661 to 1672 and Lord Chancellor from 1672 to 1673. During the Exclusion Crisis, Shaftesbury headed the movement to bar the Catholic heir, James II, from the royal succession, which is often seen as the origin of the Whig party. He was also a patron of the political philosopher John Locke, with whom Shaftesbury collaborated with in writing the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina in 1669.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">George Digby, 2nd Earl of Bristol</span> English politician

George Digby, 2nd Earl of Bristol was an English politician and peer who sat in the House of Commons from 1640 until 1641, when he was raised to the House of Lords by a writ of acceleration. He supported the Royalists during the English Civil War, but his ambition and instability of character caused serious problems to himself and both Kings he served.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich</span> Royal Navy admiral, diplomat and politician

Edward Montagu, 1st Earl of Sandwich, 27 July 1625 to 28 May 1672, was an English military officer, politician and diplomat from Barnwell, Northamptonshire. During the First English Civil War, he served with the Parliamentarian army, and was an Member of Parliament at various times between 1645 and 1660. Under The Protectorate, he was also a member of the English Council of State and General at sea.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parliament Act 1911</span> UK legislation about the House of Commons

The Parliament Act 1911 is an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is constitutionally important and partly governs the relationship between the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the two Houses of Parliament. The Parliament Act 1949 provides that the Parliament Act 1911 and the Parliament Act 1949 are to be construed together "as one" in their effects and that the two acts may be cited together as the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arthur Annesley, 1st Earl of Anglesey</span> 1st Earl of Anglesey

Arthur Annesley, 1st Earl of Anglesey, PC, was an Anglo-Irish royalist statesman. After short periods as President of the Council of State and Treasurer of the Navy, he served as Lord Privy Seal between 1673 and 1682 for Charles II. He succeeded his father as 2nd Viscount Valentia in 1660, and he was created Earl of Anglesey in 1661.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Coventry</span> 17th-century English statesman

Sir William Coventry was an English statesman.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indemnity and Oblivion Act</span> 1660 English Act of Parliament

The Indemnity and Oblivion Act 1660 was an Act of the Parliament of England, the long title of which is "An Act of Free and Generall Pardon, Indempnity, and Oblivion". This act was a general pardon for everyone who had committed crimes during the English Civil War and subsequent Commonwealth period, with the exception of certain crimes such as murder, piracy, buggery, rape and witchcraft, and people named in the act such as those involved in the regicide of Charles I. It also said that no action was to be taken against those involved at any later time, and that the Interregnum was to be legally forgotten.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scottish Militia Bill</span> 1708 United Kingdom legislation vetoed by Queen Anne

The Scottish Militia Bill 1708 was a bill that was passed by the House of Commons and House of Lords of the Parliament of Great Britain in early 1708. However, on 11 March 1708, Queen Anne withheld royal assent on the advice of her ministers for fear that the proposed militia would be disloyal. This was due to the sudden appearance of a Franco-Jacobite invasion fleet en route to Scotland which gave ministers second thoughts, at the last minute, about allowing it to reach the statute books. As of 2024, it is the last occasion on which the royal veto has been used in Great Britain or the United Kingdom.

Since 1997 the United Kingdom government has been engaged in reforming the House of Lords, the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. The history of reform before 1997, is set out in sections below about reforms of composition and powers carried out in the past and of unsuccessful proposals and attempts at reform in the twentieth century. Proposals include decreasing the number of lords, introducing a system where lords are democratically elected, or abolition of the House of Lords in favour of a unicameral Parliament.

<span title="Norman-language text"><i lang="nrf">Le Roy le veult</i></span> Phrase used in parliamentary procedure

Le Roy le veult or La Reyne le veult is a Norman French phrase used in the Parliament of the United Kingdom to signify that a public bill has received royal assent from the monarch. During the Anglo-Norman rule of England, the kings were titled Roy, Roi, Rey, Rei and the Latin Rex, all meaning "King". Usage of this phrase is a legacy of the time prior to 1488 when parliamentary and judicial business was conducted in Norman, the language of the educated classes dating to the Norman Conquest of 1066. It is one of a small number of Norman phrases that continue to be used in the course of parliamentary procedure.

References