ratified by the States in haec verba Et praeterea Statuimus ac Ordinamus ut praedicta Societas Belgica cedat ac restituat Societati Anglicae praedictae Insulam Pouleron eo in statu conditione in qua nunc est ita tamen ut licitum sit dictae Societati Belgicae tollere amovere ex insulâ praedictâ apparatum Bellicum Merces Suppellectilem omnia mobilia si quae fortassis in dicta insula habeant So that then the word of Restitution us'd in both those Articles evinceth our original right to it and convinceth them of their Injustice in dispossessing us and deteining it so long from us And neither of those Articles obliges us to any Formalities of the King's Commission or more then a bare Demand of it when we had a mind to receive it And our Ships that were sent to possess it being departed as they confess before the conclusion of the Treaty in 1662 and That Treaty containing nothing that derogates from the two former Treaties they cannot but with monstrous confidence accuse us of proceeding irregularly especially when it shall be considered that our Ships carried not onely the King's Commission under the Great Seal to possess and plant it but even Orders also from their States and Company Dated the 18th of October 1660. The receipt of which the General and Councell of Batavia acknowledged by their Letter of the 8th of November 1661 and though in the same Letter they say that since the Date of those Orders they had by their last Ship out of Holland received Intelligence that new debates were arisen between the two Companies and therefore we could not with Reason demand surrender of the said Island until they had farther Intelligence from their Masters in Holland yet our Commanders had both the Order of their Masters and a just title to the liberty of sailing into those Seas to Trade without the Hollanders leave or disturbance Nor was there any colour of Jealousie given to the Dutch of any hostile design when the English Commanders declared their Resolution to follow their Masters Orders and went onely with two Merchants Ships provided for Trade and planting the Island if it had been amicably delivered as it ought to have been and therefore we think it had been ridiculous and imprudent for the Commanders of our Ships to have desisted from the prosecution of their Voyage and demanding the Island upon the place as it is in them now to demand of us satisfaction for the expence of those forces which they say they sent to affront his Majestie and keep us from our right while under the Fictitious Pretense of a Jealousie they designed according to their usual practise to give us a forcible and real interuption in our just course and liberty of Trade for which we hope in time to receive satisfaction and security against the like in future After that the East-India Company of these Countries had in the year 1655. Pretense Art 5. Vide page 22. for the Answer really paid in England under good and sufficient Acquittance the Moneys contained in the Arbitrary sentence pronounced in the year 1654. by the Commissioners named on both sides amounting unto the sum of 88615 l. Sterling by which they thought to have fully stopped all pretenses and therefore might safely order their Ships to take in their return the usual Channel and to those that they dispatch'd from hence to land in England as if they should be thereunto forc'd by storms or contrary winds there to expect fair weather and a favourable wind Nevertheless the English did not omit to raise new actions and pretenses against this Company as soon as they heard in the Month of Sept. 1657 that there was arrived in the said Channel a Ship of the said Company call'd Henrietta Louisia and they obtained presently by direction of their Admiralty a Warrant or Commission to make a Seizure of the said Ship and of its Cargo to the prejudice and contempt of the Treaty so lately made with them and That under a frivolous pretense of the English-East-India-Company for the sum of 100000 l. Sterling and of the Commissioners Established upon the disaster of Will. Courteen after his Bankrupt of the like sum of 100000 l. But the said Ship having very happily escaped their hands the Admiralty did anew grant in the Month of November following a second leave for seizure which was effectually executed upon the Ship call'd Sterling which being departed from hence to go to the East-Indies was forc'd by storm to Harbor at Portsmouth so that the Company of this Country seeing the irregular and unjust proceedings of the English to prevent such like inconveniences for the future hath been obliged to order their Ships instead of passing the Channel in their return to go about by Scotland and to take their way Northward as they did formerly which does not only cause that the Merchandizes arrive and are sold later every year then before to the great damage and prejudice of the Company which is thereby obliged to pay greater Wages and their men are expos'd to greater and longer dangers and suffer greater damages and inconveniencies but they are also oblig'd as well for the safety and preservation of their Fleet when it is coming home as for the refreshing of the men who coming from that Country hot do suffer by the cold in making so long turns by the North to fit every year a great number of Men of War and Pinnaces to send before to meet them by the North. The Charges disbursed and that must yet be disbursed to that purpose and the Damages amounting to a most considerable sum as it shall appear by the Accompt that shall be thereof given From the time that the Company of these Countries did understand that the grant of seizing the said Ship Pretense Art 6. Vide page 22. for the Answer call'd Henrietta Louisia was given because that about That time they did expect the two Ships call'd Arnhem and the Castle of Honigen which were to return by the Channel they found themselves obliged by a warrantable apprehension and necessary care to cause some Men of War and Pinnaces to be made ready and to depart with speed to meet and convoy the others So that the re-imbursement of those charges may justly be demanded from the English Furthermore Pretense Art 7. Whereas the Company abovesaid apprehended some like seizures in all the Ports of England they have been obliged expresly to forbid the Ships they dispatch from hence to enter there or cast Anchor in the Road which is the cause that many of their Ships finding themselves often surprized by storms have been forc'd to come back and enter into the Ports of these Countries to stay for a more favourable wind to the great prejudice of their Voyage and exposing themselves to great danger the damages thereby suffered and by those delays amounting to a sum also very considerable To the
fifth sixth Answer 5 6 7. and seventh Articles we think it sufficient for Answer that if their being conscious to Themselves of the injuries done by Them to the Subjects of This Kingdom and yet not honest enough to be willing to make legal satisfaction does fright them from passing with their Ships through the Channel lest they might fall within the Virge of the Law they may Themselves blame their own unreasonable fears but yet to shew the world how unreasonably they would ground a pretense of satisfaction from Vs for their own unjust Jealousies We desire it may be noted that all that they complain of was an attempt of a Legal Proceeding against the two Ships the Henrietta Louisia and L' Estourneau one of which was never Touched with an Arrest and the other released as soon as it was requested During the War that those of Bantam have begun against the said Company Pretense Art 8. against all equity and reason with so much perfidiousness that even the English have been obliged to avouch and testifie as much by their Letters the said Company had no other means to oppose themselves to it and to do them hurt then by keeping their Harbour and City surrounded and besieged with a Fleet of Men of War and to hinder their Trade and that there should not go in or out the Merchandizes and Provisions they might have need of thereby to disturb them so that they might be constrain'd to submit to reason or else to weaken them so much that causing their Forces to draw neer and assaulting them vigorously on the Land-side they might be utterly vanquished thereby and wholly subjected The Experience and Event having also made it known that they have been so much humbled thereby that they have been forc'd to come to desire peace as with joyned hands But the English who by virtue of the Treaty made with them by this State were obliged to be helpers to the Company of these Countries in this Encounter so much the more that it was They that were set upon and that only by an aversion and irrreconcileable hatred whereof the Moors are prepossessed against all Christians in lieu of helping them have lost no opportunity to oppose themselves to our designs and have endeavoured with their Ships to procure the Harbour free and to make them lose the Benefit of a siege which had cost them so much trouble and charges and in Consequence to cause the said Company to be consumed by those means because That hath been the cause that not only the said War and Siege have endured far longer then they should otherwise have done which hath caused great prejudice to the said Company and hath much vexed it but also that they have been obliged to hinder the English to obtain their end to have the said Road surrounded and besieged by a greater number of Ships and those bigger then otherwise they should have needed to employ so that besides the other delays hinderances and prejudice caused to the said Company for that cause in other occasions they have been obliged to be at a very great charge and have been very much incommodated with other Expences To the eighth Answer 8. We say it ought not to come in consideration at all because no time is assigned of the fact nor any person or Ships named nor have we knowledge of any thing but our sufferings during the time that some of their Ships lay before Bantam unless they will call it a crime that we endeavoured amicably to obtain from them the just liberty of Trade which the Law of Nations allows and they denyed us And we can guess at no other ground of that War unless it were to force the King of Bantam to a Contract to exclude us The English know that the abovesaid Company have ever treated with the Queen of Acheen Pretense Art 9. as well for the Tynn which is bought at Perager as principally for the Pepper which grows in the Western Coast of the Island of Sumatra by which Treaty the said Pepper is to be all delivered at a certain Rate whereof there is an agreement made with the said Company to the exclusion of any other Nations as the Company is likewise obliged on their side to go fetch all the Pepper at the said rate The English have heretofore made such Contracts as well joyntly with the said Company as by themselves with several of the Indians for it doth appear by the Agreement made in the year 1619 betwixt the two East-India Companies of England and that of the Low-Countries for the re-establishing of the Affairs of Bantam by the Approbation and Authority of the King of Great Britain and of the States That there had been then such a Contract made with the King of Acheen by the which it was also agreed how and in what manner both the Companies could joyntly make such a Contract with the King of Bantam for the Pepper which groweth in his Country and the same to the express and formal exclusion of all other Nations as well Indians as Europeans who would trade therewith The which was accordingly perform'd and practised And although for That reason the English were obliged not to trouble the Company of the Low-Countries in performance of the Agreements made which do as yet remain in force they have however always endeavoured to frustrate the said Company of the Benefit of the said Contract by indirect ways and evil means in corrupting the Inhabitants of that Country in obliging them to sell them the Tynn and the Pepper by the greater Price or Rate which they caused to be offered them from time to time without taking any notice of the protests made by the said Company or their Agents against such proceedings so far that the said Company not able to forbear any longer was forced for the observation and execution of the said Contracts to take up Arms to bring those men to their Duties by meer strength they having been taken off by the ill practices and cunning ways of the English The peace was not so soon renewed with the said Queen as also the old Contracts but the English came in with their Ships with a design to disappoint also the abovesaid Company of that Pepper if they could have done it so that the English have been the movers and given occasion not only for the said War which the said Company was forc'd to make against the Kingdom of Acheen with so excessive charges but also by the sleights they have made of their protests they have obliged the Company to keep there continually a number of Ships to hinder the Inhabitants to sell their Tynn and Pepper to the English by hidden and indirect ways and frustrate thereby the Company of the Low-Countries which hath caused a very considerable prejudice and damage to the said Company which doth conceive it self to have a right of demanding reparation thereof from the English Company In the third place the
nor cognizance in justice to the Prize and much less ought they to seize her de facto without any form or colour of Process Nevertheless the English Commissioners of Prize-goods taken by their men of War passing over all considerations of good Neighbourhood and Hospitality took away the said Prize from the said Captain and delivered her to the Portugal Embassadour then at London who disposed of her and the deputed Counsellors do pretend that they ought to be re-imbursed of the value of the said Prize cum omni causâ accessione The East-India-Company of England having seen the List of Damages Actions and Pretenses exhibited against them by the Netherlands East-India-Company do find it to be A deliberate Mass of FRIVOLOUS INSOLENT and UNJUST Demands built upon Conclusions made without the leave of any Premises of TRUTH REASON or LAW OF NATIONS as we hope all impartial and rational men will judge not only from the Articles themselves but when they shall see this subsequent Answer TO the first Article we answer English Answer 1. That no Complaint is entred in the Admiralty Court if there had the question would have born a hard dispute in Law Whether a Ship being taken as Prize shall be brought into the Harbor of a Prince in Amity with both the Taker and the Taken or to which of them the said Ship shall be delivered He that did reside at Jambee for the Company of these Countries having bought there in the Month of May Pretense Art 2. 1660. a quantity of 700 Picols or 85000 l. of Pepper at four Royals and a half the Picol the English did take it violently and seized on it by force To the second we say Answer 2. That we know not of any such Violence offered to the Hollanders as the taking of any pepper from them They name not the persons by whom it was that the pretended force was done nor have we received any pepper from Jambee or any other part of India but what our Factors have paid for and placed the money to our Accompt Nor have we ever had any the least hint of the matter of fact complained of in this Article But we have very good proofs of such things attempted against Vs in That Port and elsewhere by the Hollanders and had not the greater Justice of the Magistrates of the place relieved us we had had much more reason to complain of our Losses in that kind then we can have to hope that if they had been done the Hollanders Company would have made us reparations for it An English-man Pretense Art 3. called Mr. Paul dwelling at Ganara a place not a League distant from Bilipatman on the North-side took by force and carried away a very great quantity of Rice amounting to many hundred Lasts which the Company of these Countries or their Agents had contracted for and bought and this notwithstanding all the protestations of Mr. Kestlerus who did then reside there for the said Company against such violence which was the cause that the Ship freighted by the Company and design'd to go fetch the said quantity of Rice were not only retarded but also that the Gathering in the mean time being past not any of the said Ships could accomplish their Voyage which caused a very considerable damage and prejudice to the said Company To the Third Article Answer 3. we say we know no such man as Mr. Paul nor ever heard any thing of Rice bought for our Accompts at Canara nor any wrong or injuries done them by our people there and there being no time mention'd when it was done the Article answers it self It is only by the Treaty Pretense Art 4. made betwixt the King of Great Britain and This Estate the 4 14 Sept. 1662. and not before That it was agreed and Convened amongst other things that Pouleron should be restored to the said King or else to such as should by his Majesty be fully Authorized in Writing under the Great Seal of England And to that purpose the necessary Orders should be put into his Majesties hands presently after the Ratification of the said Treaty his Majesty having also demanded the said Orders from their Lordships by his Letters of the 18 of December of the same year which were then accordingly expedited And nevertheless those of the East-India Company of England made no difficulty to send their Ships and Men into the Indies about two moueths before to take possession thereof who also accordingly did address themselves to the General and Council of Batavia and summon'd them to give them the necessary orders for the rendring to them the said Island And though the said General and Council had no Authority to do it because that difference had not as yet been ended in Europe they were nevertheless so bold to go thither without any order or command from Batavia so that the said General and Council foreseeing the disorders that might thereupon ensue even to the shedding of Blood particularly since they could not know with what intent the English went that way were necessitated for fear of ill consequence as also for the conservation of the Forts Places and Goods of the Company to send thither with all speed a recruit of Ships and Men by which the English were kept back and hindred from undertaking any thing by violence whereof they would have made use but for that stop Therefore the Company doth demand re-imbursement of the Charges laid out and imployed to that purpose comprehending therein the freight of the Ships as also the Souldiers pay and Mariners wages and of the Victuals and withall a reparation for the Affront made to the whole Nation and to the prejudice of their Reputation Secondly They demand the Charges laid out by the Company and the Damages by them suffered whereof they pretend re-imbursement from the English as also of the Damages having been caused by them To the fourth we say Answer 4. That for the first Affirmation on which they ground their whole discourse they cannot but know to the contrary in Fact for they lay down that the Restitution of the Island Pouleron was not agreed on but by the Treaty made between the King and the States the 4th 14 of September 1662 Whereas they could not but remember that by the 9th Article of the Treaty in 1662 they were oblig'd to do it in haec verba Those of the Netherlands do faithfully promise that if so be they are in possession of the Islands and Forts of Pouleron or if they have been taken directly or indirectly by Them or by their Ministers or by any others in their Name to abandon give over and forsake them and to restore them unto those of the English Company in the same state and condition they enjoyed them during the time of the Treaty And when notwithstanding this Covenant they had deteined it unto the year 1654 It was then agreed de Novo by the Commissioners of Both Sides and
improve all ways and means to discourage us in the Trade And whereas in the Close of this Article the Netherlands Company presume to prejudge the differences now depending and to instruct both Our and Their Sovereignty in what they assume to judge to be their duty We shall onely say that when his Majesty shall in his Royal Wisdom think fit to establish any regulation between us we shall dutifully and cheerfully conform to it Amongst others an English Ship called the Surat Merchant Pretense Art 12. being in May 1662 on the Road of Gameron did force a Moorish Ship of Matulipatuan which did carry two Flags of This Estate to strike down and to take them off in the view of all the World which was no small affront to the whole Nation To the twelfth Article Answer 12. we say We know nothing of it but were it so That Company could not have had the Impudence to have made it an Objection that an English Ship riding with the English Flag would not suffer the States Colours upon a Moors Ship to be born up in her presence unless they concluded themselves both Sovereigns of the Indian and Persian Seas and Masters of the English Nation at Home But perchance they fancy that this their frivolous and unknown complaint might serve to ballance that unsufferable affront that was offer'd in February 16 62 63 to the English Flag of Saint George at Swallow Marine in presence of the English Nation when Captain Bence Commander of the Holland Ship Gouldstloome Riding Admiral there first made faste the said English Flag to the Star-bord list of the main-top-sail yard where it hung half an hour and was thence remov'd to the head of the main Mast and thence down to the Top and there remained all day under the Dutch Flag And the same day the Dutch landed and marched with their Flags flying round the English yard in derision of the English Flag there on shore and that they did the like with higher Insolence about the English House in the City of Surat it self Whilst the Forces of This Company did besiege lately the City of Cochin Pretense Art 13. the English which were in the Port of the said City so far forgot themselves as to serve the Artillery of the said City against the Besiegers and this directly against the Treaty made here with them in the Hague the 6th of February 1659. which saith expresly that both the Companies shall live quietly and in good Intelligence together and shall reciprocally shew one another proofes of friendship as well in the East-Indies as elsewhere for which the said Company of the Low-Countries doth demand reparation and satisfaction To the thirteenth Article we say Answer 13. We know not that any of our men served as Gunners in the Town of Cochin against the Hollanders or if they did it is like it was done in defence of This Companies Interest There which the Hollanders had equally designed for destruction with that of those whom they call their Enemies and when our differences come to the test it will then appear which of the two Companies hath observed or violated the Articles of Amity made in Anno 1659. Whilst in the Month of April Pretense Art 14. 1662. some Sea-men of this Country were about diverting themselves neer the Road of Suali in a Village call'd Selein Dammetyens they were not only ill-used with Cudgels by some English which hapned to come in but also three of them were so much wounded that one call'd Paul Francis Schoone fellow or Adjutant helper to the Gunner in the Ship called Buyenskereke dyed of his wounds two days after without any punishment inflicted on the Offenders by the English President of Surat called Matthew Andrews although he was summoned and motion'd to do it Therefore This Company cannot chuse but demand reparation of the affront and wrong done to the whole Nation and is oblig'd to maintain that there is an obligation to punish the guilty exemplarily To the fourteenth we say Answer 14. We conceive that neither This nor the tenth eleventh twelfth and thirteenth Articles being matters of State and not of Trade do fall within the Cognizance of the fifteenth Article of the Last Treaty and therefore ought not to be here admitted But yet we Answer that we know nothing of Paul Franc Schoone his being bastonaded by the English to death onely we find by good and sufficient Attestation dated at Sualy in March and April 16 62 63 that about that time three Dutch-men assaulted two English-men in the open field and one of the Dutch with his drawn knife struck at the face of one Wilks who receiv'd the stab on his hand and when the Dutch-man was making a second stab at the other English-man one Brewer whom he wounded in the Arm Brewer in his own defence stroke the Dutch-man with his staff over the face and felled him to the ground and if the Dutch-man dyed of the blow the English-man cannot be accused of a murther when what he did was se defendendo But on the other side we found that in April 1661 Joseph Goodson an English-man and other English-men were barbarously assaulted at Sualy by the Chyrurgeon of the Dutch Ship Henrietta Louisia and one John Abramson with drawn swords and run into the belly the said Chyrurgeon and in few hours after dyed of his wounds And another English-man one John Jones endeavouring to rescue the said Jos Goodson was then likewise slain by the two Dutch parties That upon the 16. of March 1662 about 30. Ans 14. Hollanders entered into the English Bazar with Lances Swords Clubs c. and Colours flying and enquired for English men swearing by their Sacrament and threatning the Death of all the English they could meet but finding none they brake into a mans house adjacent where they found an old man a Servant of the English Company to whom they gave four Mortal wounds and left him And now let the whole world judge whether the English or the Dutch bee the affronters and Murtherers That on the 14 of April Preten Art 15. 1658. the great Barque of the Holland-West-India-Company coming from Curaso was attacqued in the open Seas and brought to Jamaica by an Englishman of War named Sabado That the said Barque was not only arrested at Jamaica until the 23 of the same month but also during that time there was taken from her the sum of 900 Livres and therefore the said Company do demand satisfaction for what they have suffered by the said Encounter and by the retardment of the said Barque and restitution of the said 900 Livres To the 15. Article it is Answered Ans 15. That we have heard that about the time alleadged there was one Sabado who had Commission to be a private Man of War from Lieutenant General Branio but knew nothing of any such Prize taken by him or that was brought into Jamaica The said Company do say
the advantage of the night and turned out the Master and all the Seamen That the Proprietors having represented this to his Majesty did in the end obtain a second discharge in August 1662. the Master of the Ship hoping after this to enjoy the full effect of his Order was forced to content Captain Wutworth and to fit out the Ship again after she had been the second time plundered To the 26. Article it is Answered Ans 26. That we never heard of any Scotch Man of War called Wutworth but true it is that his Majesty upon the first complaint did write a peremptory Letter to the Lords of his Privy Council in Scotland in these words Being informed that there are 2. Vessels belonging to the States of the United Provinces the one named the Vogukay and the other the Goude Real and a Busse taken some of our Subjects Our will and pleasure is that you command them to be forthwith restored unto the hands of James Davidson or to the Masters of the same Ships who are now in Scotland to require them and withal that express order be given that none of our Subjects presume upon whatsoever Pretext or Commission to take or molest any Ship or Boat belonging to the said States under all highest pains This Letter was dated the 21. of August 1661. There was another Letter written by his Majesty 5 July 1662. directed to the Earl of Middleton then his Majesties Commissioner making mention of his former Letter and then adding But soon after upon an humble Petition presented to Us and our Privy Council of England by some pretending interest in the said Ships We appointed our Council to examine the Truth of what was alleadged and to certifie the same to Vs and in the mean time to cause the said Ships with all their materials to be secured till our farther pleasure And now they having examined the whole business and having reported the same to Vs upon consideration of the whole matter We do require you that the said 2. Vessels with all their materials be fourth-with restored to James Davidson or to the Masters of the said Ships who do attend to receive them Of which expecting your performance We bid you farewel That the Magistrate of Edinborough did any violence or that the Master was constrained to content Capt. Wutworth after the Ship had been a second time plundered was never complained of to his Majesty and therefore is not like to be true And seeing the King did so readily order restitution it seems a groundless complaint William Mumma Preten Art 27. and his Associates Merchants of Amsterdam do say that one of their ships named the Hercules David Wouters Master departing from St. Sebastians anno 1657. to go to St. Lucar and Cadiz was the 14 of August in the same year taken and detained by the said Captain John Stoakes who took out all the Merchandize laden upon her without giving him any reasonable satisfaction for his Freight See for the Answer to this pag. 44. onely that the said Commander paid him 1500 Ryals of 8. and no more The said Mumma and his Associates do pretend that they ought to be re-imbursed of their Expences Damages and Interests Albert Lemmerman of Amsterdam says that in Octob. 1655. Preten Art 28. one of the ships named the St. James of the burthen of 300 Tuns Aaron Martin Master coming from Porto in Portugal laden with Tobacco Sugars Shumack and Elephants Teeth having sprung a Leak at Sea by foul weather and being thereby made incapable of prosecuting her Voyage the said Master of the Ship to avoid a further danger ran ashore upon the Coast of Arundel and being there busie in unlading the Ship of some of her choicest Goods an Officer came to him and commanded him presently to leave his Ship not permitting him to carry any thing away with him That the said Master and Mariners being thus constrained to leave the said Ship and Goods there fell upon them presently a great number of the Country people who by the order or at least with the consent of the Officer pillaged the Ship carried away all the Merchandizes and took away the Cordage Rigging and all to the very bolts and nails leaving the very hulk of the Ship worth nothing And though the said Master made his complaint of this barbarous proceeding and in persuit of the business spent a great deal of his time and money and though the Ministers of State and the Admiralty of England were fully convinced of the reason of his complaint yet so it is that the said Lemmerman could never obtain the least satisfaction either by way of Justice or otherwise but was continually put off with delays and excuses As to the 28. Article it is Answered Ans 28. That it may be very well so and the parties may escape with so foul an Act unless a complaint had been made against some particular persons of them by name that they might have been proceeded against and prosecuted according to the Law of the Admiralty which hath certain Rules to proceed by against such Offendors yet we do find in the Court of Admiralty a complaint entered upon which a commission of Inquiry issued forth for discovery of such persons as had done such violence but can find no return thereof so that it seemeth no such discovery could be made Peter Pouilly Preten Art 29. Jerome Boshe the Widow of Heertgen Johnson the Heirs of Daniel Johnson Merchants of Amsterdam do all say that it is very true that one of their Ships named the St. Nicholas of which Baron Claessen Spierdyck was Master coming in January 1657. from the Isle of St. Vincent was taken by an English Fregat call'd the Mackdethem and was delivered to Admiral Blake That the same Ship being carried to Lisbon was there unladen of all her Merchandize part whereof was sent to London and the rest sold with the Ship it self at Lisbon The same Ship and goods being reclaimed by the said Merchants in the month of December in the same year 1657. after long and painful pursuits the said Goods were declared free and exempt from all confiscation by two successive sentences of the High Court of Admiralty of England the one of the 17 of January and the other on the 20 of October 1659. That there being made in England an exact accompt of the proceeding upon the sale of the said Ship and Goods it was found to amount to the sum of 11407 l. 3. s. 9d sterling making 120 m. Florens And forasmuch as the said Merchants could never enjoy the effects of the said sentence nor obtain any satisfaction They pretend that they may demand the same summe by vertue of the said sentence with the Expenses Damages and Interests To the complaint of Peter Ravilli Ans 29. and others set forth in the 29. Article it may receive the same Answer as is made to the complaint of the said Vanhulten upon the 21
Right therein the English sustained great damages to the value of 66436 pounds 15 shillings by the Hollanders and Zealanders the doing whereof was disowned by the States as a depredation and satisfaction treated upon by Commissioners who not agreeing it was referred to his Majesty who awarded 22000 pounds to the English Merchants but no part thereof was ever paid And as a farther testimony of their Right by Occupancy the English are the onely persons that ever did Winter there That the Dutch and Netherlanders to render this Right as ineffectual as they could have oftentimes of late years ridden with their ships before the said Harbours to disturb the fishing of the English by scaring and diverting the Whales from coming in To prevent which the English have to their great trouble and damage been compelled to leave their fishing in the Harbours and come forth to warn them away both by fair means and by force which warning the Dutch have ever used to receive and to submit to the English right by their departure accordingly but no damage was ever heretofore pretended for the same Nevertheless in the Year 1660 and 1661. the Subjects of the United Netherlands growing more numerous and insolent upon that Coast complaint thereof being made to his Royal Highness the Duke of York Lord High Admiral of England his said Highness was pleased in the Year 1662. to send Captain John Clark with one of his Majesties Vessels called the Little Mary to protect the fishing who in order thereunto did warn the Dutch off from that Coast where the English used to fish and have right of fishing As to the particulars mentioned We answer that Captain Clark and the others named therein being Mariners and abroad upon their several employments full answer cannot be given thereunto but certain it is that no claim hath hitherto been made by any person whatsoever in any of his Majesties Courts of justice nor demand elsewhere which gives just occasion to conclude that all those complaints are groundless All that we can hear of is That two ships of the Hollanders riding in one of the English Harbours called Fair Fore-land alias Sir Thomas Smiths Bay contrary to order before given by the aforesaid Cap. Clark were by him forced to depart from whom he took only 5 Shallops with some other fishing instruments whereby to disable them from farther disturbance of fishing in the English Harbours which could not be much damage unto them the season for fishing at Sea which was their design being then past For the ship called the Wooden Fort from which it is said there was a Whale taken it is affirmed that she was riding within two Leagues of Bell point in the mouth of the Harbour which is a place proper to do mischief to the English in scaring and diverting the Whales but not fit to fish in and the said Captain Clark coming on board and finding a Whale newly killed caused the said Whale as also 2 Shallops to be taken from him being there in contempt of his Majesties Authority after warning given and in contempt of his Highness Commission But the said ship had in her Hold to the quantity of 5 or 6 Whales in Bubber and Einns which he did not meddle withall conceiving them to have been taken at Sea As to the fourth ship for the reasons aforesaid no particular accompt can be given thereof but by all that is alleaged it appears that Captain Clark onely took from her such Utensils as might disable them from fishing in or before the Harbour to the disturbance of the English which His Majesties Subjects hold themselves bound to defend so long as his Majesty shall please to assert his interest and right of fishing William Johnson Kreigt dwelling at Graft saith Pretense Art 61. That one of his ships fishing for Herrings named the Charity Martin Geritzen Masters Mate returning from fishing laden with 21 Last of Herrings See for the Answer to the 61 62 63 64. in pag. 60. and having withal 120 Livres in money which he had received for a Last of Herrings that he had sold was upon the 13. of September 1661. attacqued about 8 Leagues from the Texel and taken by one Captain Sadlington and carried to Colchester where being arrived the said Masters Mate saw his ship unladen and was afterwards constrained to carry her to Wesnoo where he was forced to abandon all Nicholas-Corssen of Adrichen Pretense Art 62. Burgomaster of the Town of Vlaerding complains that one of his ships named the Crescent of which Henry Bastiaens was Masters Mate being laden with 14 Lasts of Herrings was in August 1659. taken by Captain White of Newcastle whose Associates as the said Nicholas Corssen is informed dwelt at Leith in Scotland Aaron de Vosse Pretense Art 63. Burgomaster of the same Town saith that one of his ships fishing for Herring named the Fox of which Joseph Foppen was Master being departed with many other Vessels for the said Fishery and being laden with 285 Barrels and a half of Herring was taken the 11 of July 1660. by the above named Captain Geo. Wotworth of Leith in Scotland whither the ship being brought the said Aaron de Vosse took a great deal of pains and made great solicitation for the Restitution of his ship and Goods as also for the reparation of damages suffered by him but notwithstanding all his pains and solicitatious he could not obtain the restitution of one penny John Martensen Pretense Art 64. Olden Roggen Schepen of the same Town complains That a ship of his of the burden of 54 Tun being gone to Sea to fish and being upon the 13 of April 1659. about 3 Leagues to the Northwards of the Sables was attacqued taken and carried to Newcastle by a Captain called John of London George Andriesen formerly Master of the ship called the St. Peter Pretense Art 65. doth complain That being departed from Middleburgh in Zealand the 18. of December 1661. armed with a Commission from the States to go to the West-Indies was taken and pillaged 10 Leagues from Cape de Cruze in the Island of Cuba by a Captain named James Young who had fitted his ship at London and had his retreat in the Island of Jamaica which Prize was taken the 24. of May 1662. and from the ship which was pillaged there was taken and carried away besides what the Seamen took all the Cargazon and Merchandize that had been entrusted with the Master of the said ship to trade withal so that they find themselves well warranted to demand satisfaction by the Authority of the Original Factors To the 65. Article We say Answ 65. that no such man had any Commission from Jamaica but we have heard that such a person had obtained a Portugal Commission and did Plunder English Ships and all Vessels that he took but durst never go into Jamaica for that Colonel Doyly the Governour of That Place gave Orders to all Men of War to