the King his Master did thereby break off all further Treaty between him and them and to be a Minister of the first second or third ranck makes no difference as to this they are alike sent to the State and to deliver their Papers in the first place to them and they theirs reciprocally to the said Ministers and when this Correspondence is broken off it ceaseth to be any further a Negotiation or Treating and becomes a declaring against each other and an appeal to others thereupon And so is this Case Page the 6 th and 7 th In answer to what he had said of his Majesties having as a perpetual mark of his kindness towards this Country suffered many antient pretences of his Subjects to be blotted out the Deputies are pleased to say Vpon which there is to be considered that if this abolition of all antient pretences be a mark of affection the pretences of the Subjects of this State and of the State it self were much greater in number and quality then those of the English as appears by the LISTS exchanged on both sides they desired that all the Piratories done by Portugal Commissions should have been forgotten and de facto your Lordships have testified so much more affection then the King of England for that you have yielded more of your Right then he for that which ought to be principally considered here is that it will not be found that even before the conclusion of the said Treaty any one English Ship hath been taken by the Inhabitants of these Provinces or their Armes which the English could reclaim as belonging really to them Whereas the said LISTS of dammages did not consist of or intermedle with or contain in them any thing that was blotted out by the said Treaty but onely such matters as were reserved by the same And as to any thing pretended to be done by Portugal Commissions those were also all matters that had happened since the year 1654. and so also not mortified but reserved by the said Treaty And how then do the Deputies bring these two instances as Arguments that this State had forgiven more than his Majesty And as to their third Argument which they call their main one viz. That it will not be found that even before the conclusion of the said Treaty any one English Ship hath been taken by the Inhabitants of these Provinces or their Armes which the English could reclaim as belonging really to them and which is again repeated page 11 th and 12 th For that the English cannot complain that since that time to wit the time of the General abolition and before the conclusion of the said Treaty the Inhabitants of these Provinces have taken any one Ship Effectually belonging to English What may not be said by them that will publish to the World deliver to foreign Ministers here and cause to be delivered by their Ministers abroad to Kings and Princes a Paper with such an Affirmation as this What not one Ship taken before the Treaty that the English could reclaim as belonging Effectually to them Was not the Ship Experience built in England and belonging wholly to English Sailed wholly by English taken Anno 1660. upon the Coast of Portugal with her lading worth between four and five Tun of Gold by one Quaerts and others of Zealand Was not the Ship Charles belonging to Captain Spragg and others his Majesties Subjects and whereof he was Commander taken as she was peaceably at an Anchor in the Road of St Martins in France under the protection of the Castle in the Month of July 1660 by three Men of War of this State and then in their Service Commanded by one Captain Enno doedeson Starre and the men barbarously treated And so all that great Roll of Ships specified and set down in the LIST of the Dammages of the English delivered by him unto them and all taken since the General Abolition and before the conclusion of the late Treaty and the Times and Places and by whom there particularly specified And is this as is said pag. 3. To inform duly the Kings their Allies of the true Estate of Affairs between the King His Master and them And have they not great Reason to expect That upon such Informations they should break with the King his Master to joyn with them Nor is it to be wondred since their Papers contain in them such Informations as these that they pass by the King His Master and Him His Minister and give them no Copies of them and are so angry that they take any notice of them For what is further said pag. 7 8. concerning the Lists of Damages That the Lists were exchanged in time convenient that he the saidEnvoyée had so much less Reason to complain upon this accompt for that their Lordships were sooner ready than he As to the first The Treaty was concluded upon the 4 th of September 1662. St. Vet. and the Lists of Damages were not exchanged till the 23 d of August 1664. St. Vet. which was near two years after and was that a convenient time to be spent meerly for the giving in of what they had to demand or did it look like a desire of hastning to a Conclusion and determining those Matters that had been the Cause of so much rancour between the Nations As to the Second viz. their being ready sooner than Him having several times by word of Mouth earnestly sollicited the Exchange of those LISTS upon the 11th of September 1663. Old St. he gave a Memorial to the States General wherein he declared That he was then ready on his part to exchange the said LISTS aud did from time to time after press the Exchange thereof giving in also some other Memorials to that End and yet it was near a year after e're he could obtain the same And when about fourteen dayes before the Exchange thereof the Agent de Heyde came to him to speak to him about the exchanging of them Which was the first Summons that ever he had about that Matter He returned for Answer that it had been so long since he had been ready that his Papers were neer musty with lying by that he would look them out and attend at the day should be appointed for the Exchange of them And when within a few dayes after viz. upon the 16th day of August he came to a conference with the Deputies theirs was not yet ready for that they had it only in Dutch whereas it hath been a constant Custom between them as with other Ministers also to deliver all Matters in some common Language or at least a Copy And so that meeting lost and the Exchange not made till the 23 d as above-said Pag. 8 9. The Deputies say To pursue from step to step the Text of the Treaty immediatly after the Exchange of the LISTS and before the speaking of any accommodement or decision of the Matters therein two things were to be examined First Whether the Pretensions set
small matter Yet this is not the main but the consequence hereof which was no less then the utter overthrow of the whole English Trade in those parts For if the said Companies might upon such pretences as these are defeat such Ships as were sent thither of their Voyages without making good and just satisfaction who would adventure any more or to what purpose And what might then France expect of their new East India West India Companies but that their Ships return as these with their Empty Holds Provision spent Tackle worn out Mens wages to pay over and above and yet the most Christian King must be importun'd by this State even to break with his Majesty because of his opposing these mischievous practises And as to what they say that satisfaction was offer'd 't is true that after many Memorials long and tedious Conferences and many Months delaies seeing His Majesty and His Parliament netled and alarm'd in the highest degree with these and orher the Insolencies of the Subjects of this State they do in their Resolutions of the 5 th of June last New Stile promise that they would so direct matters as that satisfaction should be made but nothing followed thereupon And whereas they would impute the cause thereof to the want of some Body to pursue it on the behalf of the persons interessed did not he the said Envoy from day to day with all vehemence and earnestness continue to press them in their Name and on their behalf and yet what doth their Resolution of the 25 th of September say more then their former And whereas the 14 th Article of the late Treaty requires expresly that satisfaction be made within 12 months for all matters on this side the Cape de Bonesperance that should have happen'd after the conclusion of the said Treaty the said 12 Months did expire and nothing done Complaint having been made by Memorial concerning the Ships Charles and James on the 17th of September 1663. Old Stile concerning the Ships Hope-well and Leopard on November 7. following and concerning the Ship Mary on February 16. of the year 1663. Old St. and yet to this day no satisfaction given whereby the Treaty broke and in the mean while daily new Complaints the Hope-well hindred in a second Voyage to Porca the Samson Hopefull-Adventure Speed-well and Captain Bartwick's Ship and in a word every English Ship that went to trade upon the Coast of Africa that they could master in like manner defeated in their Voyage as the Charles James and Mary and not so much as Satisfaction promised for any of those and which is above all to be remarked That whereas we had been so long held in Expectation of our mony now at last instead thereof it is added in the afore-said Resolution That the Case is disputable so that we were now further off our payment then in the beginning of the Summer or if it had been given Us which it is not yet being done in this manner that is to say not as of Justice and due but only as out of particular Courtesie and Complaisance to His Majesty for that time What would it have avail'd us The Dutch East-India Company did in the year 1659. make satisfaction for the Postilion Frederick Francis and John as above-said taken upon the accompt of their having traded to Bantam then block't up by Sea by them and there was added in the Treaty concerning those Matters That the two Nations should for the future rencounter one another with all peaceableness and perfect friendship as well within the East-Indies as elsewhere Yet so great is the advantage that the said Companies have made by practices of this kind as notwithstanding the said satisfaction and promise of the State they have continued ever since to do the like as appears by the many Complaints of this kind of the English East-India Company specified in the Englist LIST of Damages for that by hindring other Nations from trading they inforce the Natives to compact with them for the whole Product of their Countries and so though they do make satisfaction for the particular Ships stopped yet they thereby become infinite Gainers and then not suffering any Nation to Trade there because they say they have agreed for the whole Nor hath their present Grandeur arisen so much from their Mesnage or any thing of that kind as from these violent and indirect Means And if these things were practised by the said Companies while disowned and discouraged by the State and promise made that the like should not be done for the future What was now to be expected from them when it was said by the State that it was disputable whether they might not do so yea in the Dutch List of Damages as above-mentioned satisfaction demanded from the English for having traded in Places block'd up by them by Sea as they call it And thus whereas this Dispute had hitherto been only between the Companies of each side it was now become a Dispute immediatly between his Majesty and this State they patrocinating and maintaining what the said Companies had done And do not the Deputies say in this Book pag. the 11 th That These Pretensions are not so clear but that they may be disputed And pag. 18. they say We do avow and We do maintain that it might be done And thereby all hopes of any quiet Trade or good Understanding in those Parts for the future utterly cut off and not only so but what Security nearer home Do not the Deputies say in pag. 17. That which is just in the Indies cannot be unjust in Europe And is not that a fair Warning to all the Kings of Christendom to let them know what they are in time to expect in these Parts also that is to say to be handled by those of this Country as their said Companies now handle the Kings of the Indies to be told that unless they will sell them the whole product of their Countries they shall sell them to no body and to have Fleets plac'd upon their Coasts for the effecting thereof And as to what is said of their having proffered a Reglement for the future he refers to what is said by him concerning this matter in his Reply to pag. 17. And as to what is said pag. 11. concerning the Parliament of England the said Envoyée Extraordinary could wish that with what ever Language the Deputies had pleased to treat him that they had been more sparing as to them They say there That the Proposition which the Parliament made to His Majesty was That He ought to attacque this State and to make War upon them The two Houses of Parliament as is known to all that understand the Government of that Kingdom are they to whom the People thereof do ordinarily in great greivances address themselves and it is their Natural way for relief and the said Houses upon such Complaints cannot transact or treat with any Forraign Prince or State that being the Prerogative
Purchase And whereas they say page 26 That they had bought that Fort from the Danes It is very well known That the Ministers of Denmark do say and maintain that the West-India-Company of this Country did nevery buy them out but onely that during the late Siege of Copenhagen and in the time of the low estate of that Kingdom that the Governour-General for the Dutch West-India-Company called Van Huysen did debauch and corrupt one Samuel Smith who then commanded the said place for the King of Denmark to put the same into his hands for a Bribe of seven or eight thousand Gilders And that this was without the knowledge permission or order of the said King And this is their Title to this place about which they make so much ado Nor did they content themselves with the said Fort but as in all other places having once got footing they fell immediately to the utter expelling of the English from all share or interest there And whereas they had re-built themselves a House or Factory there some belonging to the Dutch West-India-Company and in their Service did on the first of May 1659. attacque the same and burn it with all the Moveables and Merchandizes And it being afterwards re-built by the English they hired others to set upon it and burnt it again with all the Merchandizes therein nor would so much as permit them to come and trade there with their Shipping And the said Deputies Rule is page 7 That one may retake by Arms that which hath been gained by Arms. But this Case had been otherwise for the Dutch having got into the said Fort in manner abovesaid were a little after droven out by one Jan Claes who was General for the Natives and the said Claes having driven them out and knowing well that the undoubted Right of that place did belong to the English made a tender to their Agent in those parts to restore the same to them but he was neither provided at that time with men nor other necessaries for the receiving thereof and before they came to him from England the said Jan Claes died Afterwards and while the Dutch were still out of the possession thereof the Government of that Country sent a publike Minister to Cormantine to treat with the English Agent there about putting of the said place again into their hands and a Treaty was perfected and compleated between the Governour of Fetu and Commissioners sent thither by the said Agent and a sum of money paid in hand according to the said Conditions Nor was there so much as any certain knowledge in England that the Dutch had re-possessed themselves thereof at the time when Holmes his Orders and Instructions were made nor other News thereof then a report which came about that time out of this Country And supposing it to be true yet that could not alter such a Treaty made while out of their hands and that Case being thus if his Majestie had given him such Orders what could they have to say against the same And whereas it had been said by him in his Memorial that his Majestie had been so much the more justifiable in letting his Subjects take possession thereof because of the little effect that the Instances made here in his Name in other matters had had The Deputies are pleased to mis-recite the clause in his Memorial and then descant thereupon after their fashion The Clause as recited by them is For seeing that his Majestie hath not been able by all endeavours and instances to get out of their hands one Ship or the value of a peny of Goods since his return to his Kingdom what hope was there that such a place should have been restored And they are pleased to comment thereupon This is a strange confidence of the said Envoy to put in writing and to publish among forraign Princes and Ministers and to present to your Assembly a thing of the contrary whereof he hath been so convinced by the Deduction which ye made the 9th of October last upon the King of Great Britain ' s Answer in Writing where your Lordships have made clearly appear by the restitution of the Ship Handmaid and of the Shaloup taken by Captain Banckert and by several other particularities That what the said Envoy saith here is not true so that he might have spared the giving occasion to have himself contradicted here Whereas the words of his Memorial are And in truth if his Majestie hath not been able by all his endeavours and instances to get out of their hands any one Ship or the value of a peny of Goods since his return to his Kingdoms which had been taken by violence from his Subjects concerning which he the said Envoy had made complaint heretofore what hopes that such a place would have been restored But their Lordships leave out all the middle thereof viz. Which had been taken by violence from his Subjects concerning which he the said Envoy had made complaint heretofore whereby the sense is quite changed and then apply instances thereto which would no wayes sute therewith taking the intire sentence together For as to the Ship Hand maid it is true that that business did pass his hands but that Ship had not been taken by violence from the Subjects of His Majesty The Turks had taken her from the English and the Dutch only rescued her from the Turks And as to the Shaloup taken by Banckert 't was not a matter whereof the said Envoy had made complaint for that it was a business managed at London by His Majesties Ministers there though there was scarce another instance of that kinde that passed not his hands and he doth here again affirm the truth of the said Clause in his said Memorial Whereas in the Letter of the States of the 26 of January 1664. to the King his Master their words are That His Majesty had very often caused justice to be done upon their complaints since the conclusion of the Treaty between him and this State But as to the second Did not the Agent Selwyn in his letter above-mentioned to Valckenburgh of the 14 of June 1663. remonstrate the right of the English to that place and protest against the detaining the same from them And did not he the said Envoy Extraordinary in a conference held with the Deputies of this State upon the 12 of Feb. 1663. Old stile deduce and make out the right of the English African-Company to that place and it was not taken by Holmes till the 9 of May following as is here confessed Page the 24. And how is it then that they say here That the English did not claim it till they had got the possession of it And whereas Page the 25 they say He himself did interpose in the said difference between the West-India Company of this Country and the African Company of Denmark concerning this place as he hath often intermedled with several matters wherein neither He nor the King his Master had
1660. And it is to be remarked that the Deputies in reciting page 27 the clause of his Memorial concerning Polerone wholly omit that part thereof relating to these Orders Concerning the Treaty of 1662. they say 'T was he himself that delivered to this State a Letter from the King his Master of the 22 of January 1663. in which His Majesty saith expresly That he was intirely satisfied with their procedure in this matter By the fifteenth Article of the said Treaty it was agreed That immediately after the Ratification thereof Orders should be given by the States General and the Dutch East-India-Company for the delivery of the Island of Polerone to the English East-India-Company whereupon after the Ratification thereof His Majesty wrote to the States General demanding the said Orders which being accordingly sent hence for London as His Majesty had demanded the same by Letter so He was pleased by another Letter to acknowledge the receipt thereof and that with very civil and obliging expressions well hoping that for the future all things would have gone after another manner then before the conclusion of the said Treaty And this is the Letter here mentioned nor doth it contain any more in relation to this business nor indeed could it being written not above fourteen weeks after the conclusion of the said Treaty being dated Whitehall the 22 of January 1662. Whereas the Deputies say in this their Book That it was dated the 22 of January 1663. which is above fifteen months after the conclusion of the Treaty whereby they would have it thought that this Letter had been written upon some further procedure in relation to this business and upon some advice out of the Indies concerning the same Nor will the excuse of New stile or Old stile serve the turn for if they had meant New Stile then it must have been dated the first of February 1663. and not the 22 of January 1663. And the King his Master doth by no means understand this manner of proceeding with him And now I pray doth this Letter contradict or interfere in the least with what had been said by him in his Memorial Had he therein said That they had not given Orders for the delivery thereof or more then that Yet we do not know to this day that the said place is restored And was not that then true And what ground or occasion given for them to say Page the 28 The said Envoy doth hereby make appear the wrong he doth in forming Complaints upon a matter concerning which the King himself had thanked the State Had he complained that this State had not given Orders for the restoring that place or said more then as above-said That we did not yet know that that place was restored and can any of them say yet to this day that it is restored But if he had thought he should have been taken up so short he would have added as he then could that the said Orders together with His Majesties Commission under his Great Seal of England had been actually â—endred and delivered to the Dutch Governour-General at Batavia and that he had made sport therewith as with the Orders of the year 1660. asking how he could know that piece of Wax from another piece of wax and how he could know the King's Picture and image thereupon from another with many vaunting and insolent expressions though he did acknowledge that he knew of the conclusion of the said Treaty and that thereby the said Island was to be restored and that the Orders by them presented as from the Estates General and East-India-Company were really their Orders and that they who tendred them were the Factors and Servants of the English East-India-Company and so that there could be no question but that it ought to be delivered to them And so what though His Majesties Commission should not have been kept so perfectly clean that could raise no question but it 's a signe how exact the Deputies informations concerning this matter are and what credit is to be given thereunto for that they call it a Paper Page the 28. Presenting to them a Paper that was so foul whereas it is very well known that the Broad-Seal of England is never put to Paper but to Parchment only nor do themselves alleadge that the Orders of the Estates General or Dutch East-India-Company were sullied or those of the English East-India-Company And when they had spent much time in descanting upon the Commission and Orders then the said General would have them to give an Acquittance wherein should be inserted such a Clause as was directly repugnant to the Treaty and no way in their power to signe and wherein they must in writing give thanks for the restoring of the said Island to them as if of grace and not a thing agreed by Treaty to be done and of due and which had so many years been unjustly kept from them and now to be delivered with the trees again utterly wasted and destroyed whereas at the time of its taking it was well planted and what other or further Devices may afterwards be made either there or by the Governour and Council of the Banda-Islands Time must shew we have cause to fear the worst and if it be not delivered it will appear to have been caused upon such account and not as is here suggested upon the want of Shipping or other necessaries on the side of the English for the receiving thereof though they had no great encouragement to be over-forward in providing them considering what the like Orders had cost them in the year 1660 and to what effect And whereas they say That the aforesaid Letter of the 22th of January was delivered to this State by him the said Envoy The Deputies have very much forgot themselves the said Letter was not delivered by him nor could be for that he was at that time in England nor had been in Holland some months before nor returned thither till several months after Page the 29 and 30 concerning the business of New Netherlands they argue First from the signification of the word Octroy which say they Is onely an Advantage accorded to some particular Subjects to the general exclusion of all other Subjects of the same Soveraign but which doth not at all oblige the Subjects of other Princes and States Secondly And though the Octroy or Patent which the King of England had given to his Subjects did comprehend New Netherland yet that could not give the English any Right to the Places and Lands which the Subjects of this State had possessed peaceably for fourty or fifty years and which they had occupied whilst it was deserted and uninhabited Thirdly As to what was alleadged of their endeavouring to usurp still more upon the English and to impose their Laws and Customs upon them and to raise Contributions from them They say We judge that this is a production of his Imagination and dare say that there is nothing of truth therein Fourthly That
of the West-India Company of this Country before the Treaty and saith that it is not strange that they had endeavoured to retake by force that which had been by force unjustly taken from them The Estates General had written a long Letter to the King his Master dated the 26 of January 1664. N. S. making a very long complaint to him concerning the taking of a certain Dutch ship belonging to the West-India Company of this Country called the Arms of Amsterdam Moreover they had communicated the said Complaint to him the said Envoy Extraordinary with a large deduction concerning the same making a huge noise about it which he the said Envoy Extraordinary examining narrowly and looking into the business found out that the said Ship called the Arms of Amsterdam was in truth an English ship belonging wholly to English Merchants of London and that her true Name was the Merchants Delight and that having sailed from Dover in the year 1660. upon a trading Voyage to the Coast of Guiny under the command of one C. Bonner an Englishman she had been there seized in an hostile manner by a certain ship belonging to the said Company called the Amsterdam whereof one Aaron Cousens was Commander in or about the Month of Aug. 1661. and carried by her to Jasper van Huysen then General for the said Company at Castle Delmina And although the said Bonner did declare to the said Van Huysen that himself and Company were English and that the ship with her lading belonged to one John Young and other Merchants of London and verified the same by authentick Writings and Papers yet that he kept the said ship and lading evilly treated the men altered and new named the ship calling her the Arms of Amsterdam that thereby she might be the less subject to be known wherever she should be met by the English and that he had order long before from the King his Master in Council to complain to the States General concerning the taking of that very ship from his Subjects and for which yet no satisfaction had been made Hereupon he took the liberty to inform them of the truth of the matter in his said Memorial and to tell them that the Case was not so strange and ill as they put it viz. That the English had taken a Dutch ship but only that they had by force retaken an English ship that had been by force taken from them thereby to excuse à tanto And what can now be said for the justification and defence of the sending Van Campen and De Ruyter for Guiny Was not the business of Cabo Verde and what else complained of matters hapned since the conclusion of the late Treaty and so directly within the compass of that Article And was not the resolution for the sending of Van Campen as is said in his Memorial taken within about 6 or 7 weeks after complaint made by this State to his Majesty concerning the taking of Cabo Verde and the actual sending De Ruyter within a little after and doth it not appear by the express words of Van Campen's Instructions that his being sent thither was not only upon the defensive to perserve the places and shipping of this Country in those parts but in direct and down-right terms to fall upon his Majesties Subjects and attacque them revenging themselves by force against such whom they pretended to have done them hurt Nor is it therein said that they might fall upon Holmes only who was the only person complained of but the words are general and dubious viz That those to whom the Command of the said Fleet was given in case that upon the said Coast they should find or rencounter any ships or Subjects of his Majesties that they should take care not to endammage them or to trouble or incommodate them in their Traffique provided they had not already or did not then do any dammage to this State or its good Inhabitants Whereby it is left in their construction and discretion whom they are to fall upon viz. whomever they should judge to have done or to be doing any hurt to this State or any of their Subjects And this Resolution is put into his Majesties hands by the Ambassadouâ—â— this Country and not only so but given to several other Kings of Europe his Friends and Allies And it s withall declared that this Fleet shall pass the Channel before his Ports and that under the Convoy of a numerous Fleet of Capital ships of War under the Command of the Lieutenant Admiral of this State And was it possible for his Majesty longer to sit still and to remain without doing any thing Hitherto the dispute had been only between the Subjects and Inhabitants of both sides but now this State had hereby engaged it self whereby the Dispute was come to be immediately between the King his Master and them and though while this State intermeddled not neither did the King his Master upon the other hand interpose but with patience expected justice to be done by them to his Subjects according to the terms of the Treaty but they on the other hand upon the first complaint of any injury done in those very parts to their Subjects breaking through the Rules and Bonds of the Treaty what now remained but the opposing of force to force And whereas the Deputies would have it thought no indignity or affront to his Majesty for that Fleet to have passed for that say they The Sea is open to all the World It may not be amiss to mark that however they plead so much for the the Seas being free in these parts yet that the contrary is practised where the people of this Country have the power witness the late Declaration of the Dutch East-India Company not yet disavowed by this State wherein they claim a whole great Sea to themselves And witness the usage of the West-India Company at Cape Blaneo upon the Coast of Africa where they will not suffer any Nation to fish in the open Sea without their permission and paying them the tenth fish and the Governour there within these few years seized and confiscated an English ship called the Leopard for having fished there but here in this Case there was no question about their Liberty of passing the Sea but about their passing with such a Resolution and to such an End And could a greater affront be done to a King then when he had done what was possible for the satisfaction of this State and more then requisite that notwithstanding thereof he shall be told by them that they are resolved to fall upon his Subjects and not naming whom whereby not any of them were in surety especially considering they questioned our trading even at our own Factories in those parts as hath been afore shewn and call it a hurting them Moreover it is to be considered that at the very time when this resolution was put into his Majesties hands there were just Reasons to surmise and believe that De
Ruyter was actually already gon or upon the point of going to Guiny and so that all this declaring of their intent of sending Van Campen was but a meer Grimasse whereby to colour the preparing so considerable a Fleet as they were then gathering together under the Notion of Van Campen's going to Guiny and the convoying of him but that in truth the real intent and meaning was to make use thereof nearer home for it had been said and written by this State to his Majesty That De Ruyters imployment was to be against the Pirates of Algiers and those parts and not a word of the sending him to Guiny and the Deputies say pag. 36. That it had been very rediculous to have made known his Order From whence it must necessarily follow that it was never intended to send Van Campen thither upon the same ground because this State did declare and give out that he was to go thither And yet it is not to be imagined that this State would have been at the charge of preparing such a Fleet as this for nothing or without some proportionable design and so his Majesty had just reason of jealousie that as they had sent De Ruyter to fall upon him in Guiny that in truth this Fleet was designed to have fallen upon him in these parts as was done in the beginning of the late War with England if he had not in time provided for his own safety and defence which was no sooner done but the noise of Campen's going to Guiny was immediately out of doors and the great Fleet which they had so long kept together separated And let the words of the instruction to Van Campen aforementioned be considered and it will appear that the same did reach as well to these parts as the Coast of Africa the words being In case that upon the said Coast or in their way thither they should find or rencounter any ships or subjects of his Majesties that had already done or were then doing any hurt to this State or its subjects So that the said instruction reached to his whole way viz. from the Maes to Guiny and so was no other then a declaring of War against His Majesty as well in Europe as upon the Coast of Africa And as to the reproach cast upon this State upon the accompt of their sending De Ruyter to Guiny viz. that they had invited His Majesty to send a Fleet to act with theirs against the Pirates of Algiers and those parts c. They say pag. the 35th He supposeth as if there should have been some kind of Treaty or Promise to act conjoyntly against the Pirates of Barbary but it will not be found that there was any Treaty to that effect nor yet any Negotiation conducing thereunto Is not this Clause in their Letter of January 1664. N. S. wherein they invite His Majesty to send his Fleet to act with theirs viz. That their Fleet should stay in the Mediterranean Sea and thereabouts until it had cleared the same of all those Pirates that ruined the Negotiation and the Trade there And doth it not follow in the said Letter We are intirely resolved so to do and not to recal our Fleet until we have reduced them to reason And did not His Majesty by word of mouth and He his Envoy Extraordinary after by his Order declare unto them in his Memorial of the 3d. of February 1663. O. S. his acceptance of that their invitation and his sending Sir John Lawson with a Fleet against those Barbarians and that it should act with all good correspondence with theirs and did they not do it accordingly until the time of De Ruyters quitting those parts and yet the Deputies would have it thought as if there had been nothing of a promise on the part of this State to continue De Ruyter against those Pirates and that there had been nothing of any Negotiation or Espece of Treaty or Promise concerniug that matter And had they so much upon any accompt to say against the King his Master as he hath to say against the Estates General in this as well upon the accompt of the unhandsomness as of the unwarrantableness of the action what an Out-cry would they make and what accompt is hereafter to be made of any of their Declarations as to the imployments of their Fleets And whereas it follows pag. the 35th That the English have made two different Treaties with those Pirates without giving notice to this State The first Treaty was made long before the writing of that Letter yea the said Letter refers thereunto And for the second Treaty it was not made till long after De Ruyter had abandoned that work and was gon for Guiny and how then could His Majesties Fleet communicate with him and as to any other Princes of Christendom His Majesty was under no engagement concerning that matter with any of them They say further pag. 35. It would seem that it was the intention of the English to imploy the Forces of this State alone against those Pirates while they carried their Armes upon the Coast of Africa there to ruine the Commerce of the Inhabitants thereof Whereas as appears by the fore-said Letter His Majesty did not put this State upon sending against the said Pirates but they put him upon it so that if there were any designs it must be in them by vertue of that their solemn Letter and Engagement to put his Majesty out of all manner of jealousies or suspicion of their diverting that Fleet that so it might the more securely steal away for Guiny Nor is it altogether unworthy the remarking that there were laid up before hand in readiness about Cadix all manner of Provisions and Necessaries for such a Voyage And I pray whereas it is said in the Resolution of the Estates General of the 20th of September last That the reason of the communicating to him their intention of sending Van Campen was That His Majesty may be intirely assured of the sincerity of their intention for the conservation of peace and of all good understanding with him Yet when at the same time His Majesty prest to know whether De Ruyter was gone who was in truth the person design'd thither nothing would be made known to him or confessed concerning the same Yea the Deputies say as aforesaid It would have been a ridiculous action to have let the same to be made known and that the Ambassador of this State himself had no knowledge thereof And when they had as aforesaid sent out a considerable number of Ships of War to his Majesties Coasts presently after the Estates General write to him to keep in his Fleet and they would keep in theirs and press vehemently by their Ambassador an immediate answer and if His Majesty had yielded thereto he had been their catcht also They say further pag. 36. concerning the instruction of De Ruyter That he is sent onely to punish the Authors of these Violencies and Hostilities whereby
which have been committed against them had been easily justified If then by this Reply it shall appear as it will that nothing was complained of by him but what was upon good and real ground it follows by the Deputies own confession that his Majesty is justified in what hath been done against the people of this Country and that he hath had sufficient ground and reason for the doing thereof Page the 19 Concerning the Remonstrance or Declaration of Valckenburgh they say The 14 ofAugust last the said Envoy presented a Memorial concerning the same subject upon which this State made a very considerable answer the 8 of October following so that he is in the wrong to say that satisfaction hath not been given him It is therein said that Valckenburgh Director General for the West-India Company upon the coast of Guiny doth not conclude in his Declaration to cause all other Nations to be gone out of all those Quarters ' T was not said by him in his Memorial that they had given him no answer but That a Remonstrance or Declaration had been published as well in the name of theStates General as of the said Company wherein was deduced their claim and pretended right to all that whole coast to the exclusion of all other Nations And that The said Declaration was not yet disavowed nor satisfaction given thereupon And hath not such a Declaration been published And did not he the said Envoy give this State a Copy thereof at their desire And can they say that in the forementioned answer it is disavowed And could it be call'd giving us satisfaction that when we complain that a Remonstrance is issued out by a Governour-General and that not only in the name of the West-India Company but in the name and on the behalf of the Estates General themselves claiming a whole Country wherein we have considerable Forts Lodges and Factories and a considerable Trade and which Remonstrance had been formerly sent and notified by the said Valckenburgh to the chief Agent of the English African-Company at their principal Fort to tell us that he doth not therein conclude to bid the English be gone What though he had not therein bid us be gone out of any place is not such a claim and the notifying thereof a great injury and which His Majesty had just reason to complain on and to expect should be disavowed by the State whereby his Subjects might be put out of apprehension of being disturbed in their quiet and peaceable possessions and Trade But he doth in the said Remonstrance not only claim the whole but therein actually commands the English to be immediately gone out of Tacorari and Cabo Corso two places in which they had not only a constant Trade but setled Factories at the very time of the issuing out the said Remonstrance as is therein confessed and acknowledged by him the said Valckenburgh and not only commanded them out of them but upon those very grounds and arguments upon which he therein claimed the whole And the Deputies will have it thought that the State hath given them satisfaction when they say in their deduction aforesaid That it doth not conclude to cause all other Nations to be gone out of all those Quarters So far from disavowing their pretended right to the whole or the commanding the English immediately out of those two Factories and places as that they will have it to be judged abundant satisfaction to them that they have time given them to dislodge by degrees first out of those places and not at once commanded to be gone out of all those Quarters And it is to be remarked that the said Remonstrance was issued out the 7 of June 1663. and so long after the conclusion of the late Treaty whereby it appears that since the conclusion thereof His Majesties Subjects were not onely disturb'd at Sea by the Shipping of the West-India-Company under the Command and by the Orders of the said Valckenburgh their General but also the whole Country claimed from them and actually commanded to quit immediately two of their setled and principal Factories And for what they say that Captain Holmes should have sent to one Henry Williamson Cop That Captain Holmes had sent three persons of condition to one Henry Williamson Cop that commanded at Cape Verd for the West-India-Company who said to him from Holmes that he had express Order from the King his Master to let all know that the right of Trading upon the coast of Africa from Cape Verd to the Cape of Bona Esperanza belonged to him onely to the exclusion of all other Nations We shew this State a formal Writing and not discourses which may fall and which may possibly not be well remembred or mistaken or stretched beyond the intent and meaning of them that said them And so was this Case yet what a mighty business did this State make hereof writing a Letter immediately to his Majestie expresly about it and causing their Ambassadour to complain highly thereof in an Audience demanded for that effect If we should make such ado about all the high words and threats in those parts and in the East-Indies and elsewhere of those employed by the East and West-India-Companies we should be able to do little else Besides those discourses are here acknowledged to have been upon the 12 of March 1661. and so long before the conclusion of the late Treaty and so upon which the Deputies cannot justifie any thing done by them since whereas this Remonstrance of Valâ—kenburgh was as abovesaid long after the conclusion of the said Treaty and so a new Breach and above all it is to be remarked that the Deputies do here confess That whatever it was that should have been said by Holmes or his order that it was immediately upon complaint as aforesaid disavowed by his Majestie as is here acknowledged page the 20. which their Lordships having represented to the King of Great Britain as well by their Letter of the 28 of July 1662 as by word of Mouth by their Ambassadours Extraordinary which were then at London His Majestie disavowed that Action of Holmes in his Answer of the 24 of August of the same year And so suppose such words had been spoken and that since the last Treaty yet they would have been so far from being to be imputed to his Majestie or to be made use of for the justifying of any Hostilities against his Subjects as that on the contrary this State had all the reason in the world to be highly satisfied with his Majesties generous and frank proceeding therein and themselves thereby so much the more condemned that when such a Remonstrance published in their Name and which a fresh breach being since the conclusion of the late Treaty and having been pressed so often and for so long time together concerning the same that yet to this day it is not disavowed by them on the contrary we are told that we ought to take it for satisfaction that
if his Majestie had thought that his Subjects had any pretence to this place would not his Majesties Commissioners during the whole time that the Ambassadours of this State were inEngland have spoken one word concerning this matter however since they have not done it it ought to be put among the number of those that are mortified by the said Treaty As to the first He doth reply That he did not argue in his Memorial from the Grammatical signification of the word Octroy but from the matter and substance of the Octroys Patents or Charters granted by his Majesties Royal Ancestours concerning those parts The Deputies suppose that they must be after the Model of the Octroys of the Dutch East-India and West-India-Companies which do not give the Soveraignty of all the Lands within the limits thereof to the said Companies but onely certain Priviledges therein to the exclusion of the rest of the Subjects of this State And some such there are in England also as of the English East-India Turky African Moscovian Companies c. but these are quite of another nature they do grant the Soveraignty of the Lands within their Limits to the Grantees under a certain Model and Form of Government and under certain Powers and Jurisdictions therein set down and prescribed And as to the second the Deputies doe not deny that this Land called New Netherlands is within the Patents granted by his Majesty to his Subjects and he the said Envoy doth affirme that it is And let those of the West-India Company produce an antienter Patent for the same but he doth not believe they can produce any at all other then that generall Octroy which as abovesaid grants not the Soveraignty of all Lands within the Limits thereof And as to the point of Possession there is nothing more cleare and certaine then that the English did take possession of and inhabit the Lands within the Limits of the said patents long before any Dutch were there 'T is not to say nor is it requisite that it should be said that they did inhabite every Individuall Spot within the Limits of them It is enough that their patent is the first and that in pursuance thereof they had taken possession and did inhabite and dwell within the same and made considerable Towns Forts and Plantations therein before the Dutch came to dwell there Is it to be imagined that the Dutch East-India-Company have fully Peopled and cultivated the Island of Ceylon and other their great Colonies in the East Indies and yet if the English should upon such pretence endeavour to settle there without their consent Would they approve thereof or suffer the same or accompt their Title there to be good or other then Precarious and the setling of the Dutch in New Netherlands so called was upon permission graunted them by the English for their Shipping to take in Wood and Water there and other Provisions for their reliefe when they should come into those Parts but the English did never grant unto them the Soveraignty thereof but that the said Company as they doe elsewhere did upon this precarious admission and connivance incroach from time to time upon the English But whereas they say Page 29. The said Envoy saith that the Dutch ought every year to demand the confirmation of their possessions and descant thereupon But we have above observed that there is very little to be built upon what he saith that it ought not to be believed but upon very good proofe It is very hard measure that the Deputies still take to themselves the Liberty of misreciting the Words and Clauses of his Memorial and make it speak what it never did and yet withall fall upon him with reproachfull and disdainfull Language for having said and Written that which is no where that he knows of to be found but in this Book The clause in his Memorial was That those Hollanders which were there did dwell there simply by permission and not by any Right that they could pretend to that place and that that had been declared to them from time to time and from year to year And is not there a great difference between That it had been declared to them from year to year that they had no right to dwell there and That they ought every year to demand the confirmation of their possessions And are not the very next words of his Memorial But so as that the English were content to have suffered them to dwell there provided they would have demeaned themselves Peaceably So far from having said that the English did expect that they should every year demand a confirmation of their possessions as that on the contrary what he said was that though their possession was but procarious yet that the English were contented to let them live there and enjoy the same upon condition of their demeaning themselves quietly And was it not so that about the year 1654 the English were about granting them certain Limits and the same had taken Effect and been ratified if their continued New Insolencies had not diverted the same yet it shall be far from him to retort any such unhandsome Expressions And as to the Argument whereby they would prove that they were more then few in Number for that It is not probable that a few Hollanders should have so fallen upon many English That they were but few in comparison of the English is a fact too known to need proving but the argument may be thus well Retorted How great was their presumption to have attempted those Insolencies which they did from time to time attempt being so few in Number and how great the patience of the English who are so Numerous and strong in those parts being able to bring many scores of thousands of able fighting men into the field that they should yet so long have suffered the same And this lead's me to the third particular It would have been a boldness and a presumption indeed in him the said Envoy to have fained these Allegations endeavoured to have imposed them upon their Lordships and the world that they had from time to time injur'd the English and usurped upon them in those parts if it had not been so But I pray was not One How sent by His late Majesty of Blessed Memory into those parts about twenty five years agone and did not the Dutch there seize him and his Company and keep them Prisoners and were not great complaints thereof brought to the Court of England and which were highly resented And did not the Dutch about twenty years agone come to an English Town called Stanford where none but English lived and summoned them to come under their obedience and pay them contribution and set up the Dutch Armes there and all along the late times of disorders in England were there not continually high complaints brought over against them did they not send armed Men to an English Town called Greenwitch and force the English there to come under
the said Article In case the offendors against this Treaty do not appear and submit themselves to Judgment and give satisfaction within the time above expressed that then their Estates Goods and Revenues whatsoever shall be confiscated for the injuries and wrongs by them offered and be lyable to further personall punishment so that the said twelve Months is given not for sending Fleetes and Armies to Fight against them but for their appearance and submitting to Judgement and for the giving of satisfaction not the taking of it by force and then if it be not thus given and not before their Estates Goods and Revenues in generall liable to be seized but not by the Arbitrary and Violent proceedings of Vice Admirals but by a lawfull sentence by way of confiscation the words being Their Estates Goods and Revenues whatsover shall be confiscated for due and full satisfaction of the injuries and wrongs by them offred And if there be a failer herein and that Justice is either denyed or delayed then and not till then is the door open for wayes of Force against them And whereas they say Pag. the 34 th That it is not easie to make pass for the injuries of particular persons such Hostilities as have been done with the Armes and under the Pavilion of the Soveraign It is true that the 14 th Article doth reach only to such matters as should be done by the Subjects and inhabitants of either side and not to such things as should be done by His Majesty on the one side or this State on the other but suppose an offence be committed under the Flagg of either side that alone is not a sufficient argument to make it to be an act of the Government of either side for example Enno Doedestarre took the Charles aforesaid in the year 1660 in the Road of Martins in France with three Men of War of this State and under their Flagg And Captain Banckert of Zeland did since take in the Channell with one of their Men of War under their Flagg His Majesties Shaloup aforementioned then in his service And the East and West-India-Companies of this Country do proceed and act in the Name of the States General and Valckenburg's Declaration was in their Name yet hath the King his Master charged any of these actions upon the State as done by them meerly because done under their Flagg or be their Authority in generall No more can Holmes his actions by upon that account imputed to His Majesty that were done without His Order And whereas they say pag. 33. that then The same Article would authorize these violences which is pretends to hinder Is there no medium between authorising of them and the forbidding the having recourse to force for a certain time Is the submitting them for a certain time to a course of Justice an authorising of them And when entail'd with so severe a punishment in the issue as the Confiscation of their whole Estate declaring their persons to be enemies and further personal punishment and an Obligation upon him whose subject he is for the taking care that Justice be accordingly done for that otherwise the 23 Article of the same Treaty gives them liberty of having recourse to force And for what is said Pag. 34. It is not enough to disavow an action and to protect him that hath done it Is insisting that the person offending be proceeded against according as it is set down in the Treaty a protecting of him By the same Rule the maintaining of any Courts of Justice or form of proceeding against Criminals and the not suffering them to be taken in a violent manner out of their hands and tumultuarily fallen upon may be called a Protecting them His Majesty was alwayes farr from protecting of Holmes on the contrary he alwayes declared that so soon as he returned He would have him punished in case it should appear he had done amiss and if they would have had the patience to have expected the fruits of Hâ—s Majesties Justice but that it ought to be done according to the way in the Treaty that is to say that he ought to have a time to appear and submit himself to Justice and not a Fleet sent immediately to fall upon him Right or Wrong And if it shall be Objected That great inconveniencies might follow if this rule should be kept to With their favour it is reciprocal and so as much danger to the one as the other and yet the King his Master hath kept up himself Religiously thereto He did not upon the complaints made by his Subjects to him concerning the injuries done to them in those parts or the East-Indies since the late Treaty send a Fleet to those Coasts to fall upon the Subjects of this State and yet the Argument Of fear of other Violences and Pirateries to follow without end was much more strong on his side then it could be on theirs considering how his Subjects have been from time to time treated in those parts but made and continued his complaints here and expected their doing him Justice according to the said Article And suppose such an Article had not been made would not the inconveniences and dangers have been greater on the other hand the Government on both sides being then lyable to be engaged upon every complaint and suggestion to the sending of Fleets and Forces to the attacquing and falling upon the ships and Subjects and Possessions of each other and so it would be impossible at any time to continue six Months in Peace with one another Or though it should be true that the inconveniencies might be greater with this Article then without yet the Treaty being now ratified there is no place to object the same But under favour this Objection lies not at all against the said Article nor doth at all reach the case in dispute for the Article doth not hinder the providing against future Violencies and Robberies It doth not forbid the sending Force to protect and defend for the time to come as was also declared by his Majesty to the Ambassadour of this State and that such and such only were his Orders to Holmes all it forbids is that if any injuries have been actually done that force cannot immediately nor till the expiration of 12 Months be sent for the revenge thereof or for procuring Right thereupon of which nature were the Orders of this State to Van Campen and De Ruyter Whereas they say Pag. 33 34. If Sir George Downing would take the pains to look over his Memorial and to hearken to reason he would not have the boldness to give here an Explanation directly contrary to the Maxime which himself avowed in his Memorial of the 13 of Febr. 1664. Wherein he endeavours to justifie the action of Five English men of Warr that had taken since the conclusion of the late Treaty a Dutch Ship called the Arms of Amsterdam which he pretended to be an English Ship and to have been taken by those