Selected quad for the lemma: state_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
state_n	great_a	king_n	treaty_n	1,286	5	9.1447	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34148	Scotland's right to Caledonia (formerly called Darien), and the legality of its settlement asserted in three several memorials presented to His Majesty in May 1699 / by the Lord President of the Session, and Lord Advocate on behalf of the Company of Scotland, Trading to Africa and the Indies.	Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies.	1700 (1700)	Wing C5599B; ESTC R3522	18,731	38

SCOTLAND'S RIGHT to CALEDONIA Formerly called DARIEN And the Legality of its Settlement asserted in Three several Memorials presented to His Majesty in May 1699. BY The Lord President of the Session and Lord Advocate on behalf of the Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies Quod enim est nullius per occupationem acquiritur ejus Dominium Puffend de Jur. Nat. Gent. Printed in the Year 1700. The Three following Memorials were presented to His Majesty in May 1699. by the Lord President of the Session and Lord Advocat on behalf of the Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies asserting the Legality of their Settlement in Darien 1st MEMORIAL THe Establishment of the Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies was first prepared by an Act of Parliament 1693. Inviting and Encouraging Persons in General to enter into Societies and Companies for carrying on a Trade to whatsoever Kingdoms Countrie or parts of the World not being in War with His Majesty and thereafter perfected by the Act of Parliament 1695 and a Charter thereon under the Great Seal whereby the said Company was fully Settled with all the Powers Priviledges and Immunities in use to be granted in such cases and particularly with Power to plant Colonies and build Cities Towns and Forts in Asia Africa or America upon Places not Inhabited or upon any other Place by Consent of the Natives and Inhabitants thereof and not possess'd by any European Prince or State The Settling of this Company was so acceptable to the whole Kingdom abounding always with Men and of late Years very desirous to enlarge Trade and Commerce That the Company 's Books being once opened Subscriptions for a vast Sum were compleated long before the Day prefix'd by the Act of Parliament and there were few Persons or Families of any Account within the Kingdom who were not therein particularly concerned But tho' the Subscriptions were soon compleated and the Advances made as readily as propos'd yet the Directors and Managers did proceed with great Deliberation not being more Cautious to Conceal the Place where they were design'd for than Careful to make such a Choice as might be exactly in the Terms of their Act and Patent To wit Either not Inhabited or freely Consented to by the Natives and not possess'd by any European Prince or State and so lyable to no Exception In pursuance of these Resolutions The Company prepared Men and Provisions and set out their Ships and in the Month of November 1698 arrived on the Noth-side of the Isthmus of Darien in America they pitched upon a Place never before possess'd by the Spaniards and after formal and distinct Treaties obtained the Consent and Good-will of all the Neighbouring Natives and People The Spaniards and French raise a Clamour against the Settlement as an Invasion of the Spanish Possessions and Dominions in as much as the Place where the Company hath fixed lyes as it were in the Middle and Bosom of the Spanish Countries having Carthagenae on the East and Porto-Bello on the West and Panama on the South which is also alledged to be contrary to the Treaties betwixt the King of Great Brittain and the King of Spain whereby all these Countrie 's are yeilded and conformed to the Spaniards If these parts of America had been wholly Void and Uninhabited when the Spaniards made their first Discoveries and Plantations there the Question had certainly proceeded upon the head of Occupation the only Ground acknowledg'd by all Lawyers to determine the Property of all Waste and Uninhabited Countries where a formal Division hath not Interveened as Grotius in particular in his Second Book de jure Belli doth abundantly clear and then the Spaniards must have further Subsumed That as they found these Countries Waste so they were the Occupiers and Possessors thereof and in Special that they were the first Occupiers and Possessors of the Isthmus of Darien and the Place where the Company hath Settled it being most certain that Occupation gives no Right save in so far as the Real and Actual Possession extends But seing on the other hand it is Nottour and by all Acknowledg'd That the Spaniards did not find these Parts Waste and Uninhabited this Argument must necessarly fall and all that the Spaniards can now Plead is either present Possession which the Company 's Patent owns to be a sufficient Right to any European Prince or State or the above-mention'd Treaties as exclusive of the King of Great Brittain's Subjects For clearing then the Claim and Point of Possession The Company denies that ever the Spaniard had any Possession of the Place where they have Planted and it s obviously Incumbent to the Spaniard if they alledge Possession to prove and instruct their Alledgance for the Company 's Argument being Negative viz. That the Spaniards did never Possess the Country where the Company hath Settled it Undeniably proves it self as all Lawiers affirm unless the contrary to wit The Spaniards Possession be evidently made out and proved which is impossible Nor do the Spaniards pretend to prove the same But their Alledgance is That in these large Countries of America it were plainly Capricious to require the Actual Possession of every particular Place But since they have the Uncontraverted Right and Possession of Carthagena Porto-Bello and Panama which are the Extremities that in a manner environ the Isthmus of Darien their Possession of these Places must infer a Possession of the Interjacent Country in which the Company hath Settled and consequently that the Company hath Encroached upon and Invaded their Right And further it s said That the Spaniards have actually possess'd Gold and Silver Mines in Darien much nearer to the Company 's Settlement than Carthgena or these other Places and have constantly been in use to Seize and make Prize of all Ships coming upon the Coast betwixt Porto-Bello and Carthagena as Invaders of their Possessions tho' these Ships did really pertain to Friends and Allies To all which It is answered 1mo That the above-mentioned Places belonging to the Spaniard are very far distant from the Settlement of the Company Carthagena above Fifty and Porto-bello and Panama above Thirty Leagues which Distances are more then sufficient to render Countries distinct both as to Right and Possession 2do It 's certain that Carthagena Porto-bello or Panama cannot be understood to have unlimited Territories if then their Territories be limited it belongs to the makers of the Objection to show that the Limits of these places do reach to and comprehend the Place possess'd by the Company which neither the Spaniards nor any for them will ever be able to prove by the Law of Nations or any known Rule or Custom in such Cases It hath already been Notic'd That tho' these Countries had been wholly Void when the Spaniards begun to Plant there they could only by their Possession have appropriat as far as they did possess and that what was not possess'd would have

in Petit-Guavis in Hispaniola the rest of that Island being possest by the Spaniards The French have also a Settlement in Guiana in the Terra-Firma and several Forts upon the Coast of Caribana and above twelve or thirteen American Islands The Dutch have also the City of Coro in the North of Terra-Firma and Suranam and certain Forts upon the Coast of Guiana and Curasao and several American Islands The Portuguese have the Coast of Brasil divided into many Captainships The Interest of Spain was ever opposit to all these Settlements in America and wherever they were strong enough they attempted to expel the Planters without regard to Peace or War whereof the Scots did formerly feel the Effects in their Plantation at Carolina holden of the Crown of England from whence they were expelled These things were done by way of Fact but it is the first time that ever Spain did openly pretend a Right beyond actual Possession which was never sustained by any European Prince And it is desired and expected that there may be a further Condescendance of the Right and Title of Spain to exclude other Planters by the Consent of the Natives where Spain hath no actual Possession or Exercise of any Jurisdiction It is further alledged for Spain That all the Business in America was settled by the Pacification 1670 betwixt the Kings of Brittain and Spain which did confirm all the Plantations possess'd by English Colonies and left the Remainder of America to Spain and whatever happened before that General Treaty could be no Rule thereafter because there was almost perpetual War with Spain in America which were never settled or composed till the Treaty 1670 which did presuppose and establish the Right of Spain to all that was not possessed by the King of Brittain's Subjects As to the Instance of Sharp it is not denyed that he was acquitted and amongst others did propone that Defence That he Acted by Commission from an Indian Prince but that Defence was look'd upon as a Jest and it was not for that Reason that he was acquitted It is Answered There was indeed a Treaty in the Year 1670 concerning America in particular whereby it was provided That the King of Brittain should have hold and enjoy for ever with full Right of Sovereignty Dominion and Property all those Lands Regions Islands Colonies and Places whatsoever situated in the West-Indies or any part of America which the said King and his Subjects did then hold and possess From which Article the Spaniards would infer that all the rest of America was lost by the King of Brittain as a Right and Dominion of Spain because that Spain ratifies the Possession obtained by the King of Brittain and there is not a mutual Ratification of the Possession of the King of Spain This Article can bear no such Inference for 1. The King of Brittain and his Subjects did not then nor do they now in the least question the Possessions of the King of Spain and his Subjects but the King of Spain did very much question the Right of the King of Brittain to several of his American Plantations not only upon the general Ground of an Universal Title to all the West-Indies which no European Prince will bear but likewise upon particular Claims that the English had beat out the Spaniards and enjoyed what had been once possess'd by them in several places And the former Treaties with Spain especialy that in the Year 1667 were only general establishing a perpetual Peace betwixt the Dominions and Teritories of Brittain and these of Spain But the Question remaining anent the Right and Dominion of these American Settlements to which the King of Spain did lay still a Claim The Treaty 1670 did renounce his Claim to the Colonies in the English Possession but did determine nothing as to those parts of America which were never Possess'd by the Spaniard or Brittish and if it had been intended that the Right of Spain to all America that was not possess'd by some other European Prince should be asserted and declared the same would not have been left to such remote conjectures but would have been specially express'd 2. The whole Tenor of that Treaty does sufficiently clear that no such thing was intended as to presuppose much less to assert the Right of Spain beyond actual possession For by the Second Article of the Treaty it is provided That there be an Universal Peace in America as in other parts of the World between the Kings of Great Brittain and Spain and between the Kingdoms States Plantations Colonies Forts Cities Islands and Dominions belonging to either of them and between the People and Inhabitants under their respective Obedience This Article in the Treaty relating to America only doth clearly demonstrate that both Kings were set upon an equal foot and did Treat for themselves and the People and Inhabitants under their respective Obedience and no further so that all matters were left untouched that did concern parts not Inhabited or possess'd by Natives who were never under obedience to either Prince nor would the Treaty have been for Plantations Colonies Forts c. equally and mutually if either King had pretended an universal Title or Right beyond Possession 3. The Eight Article doth yet further clear that the King of Spain had no Universal Claim but according to his Possession which Article provides that the Subjects Inhabitants and Mariners of the Dominions of each Confederate shall forbear to Sail to or Trade in the Ports and Havens which are fortified with Castles Magazines or Ware-Houses and in all other Places whatsoever possess'd by the other Party in the West Indies To wit the Subjects of Brittain shall not Sail into and Trade in the Havens and Places which the Catholick King holds in the Indies nor in like manner shall the Subjects of the King of Spain Sail into c. This Clause is plainly restrictive upon the King of Spain That the Subjects of the King of Brittain shall not Trade into these places of the Indies which belong to Spain for thereby it presupposes that Spain has no Universal Title and it s left free to the King of Brittains Subjects to Sail into and Trade in all Ports and Havens which have no Fortifications Castles Magazines or Ware-Houses Possess'd by the King of Spain and consequently it was lawful to have Sailed to and Traded with the Darien Indians where the King of Spain had no Fortifications Castles Magazines or Ware-Houses nor can clear any manner of Possession and if they might Trade with the Indians it must be acknowledg'd they might Settle among them It 's also provided by the Tenth Article that in case the Ships of either Party be forced by stress of Weather or otherwise into the Rivers Creeks Bays or Ports belonging to the other in America they shall be treated there with all Humanity and Kindness Which Article states both Kings again upon an equal foot and mentions the Right of both as restrictive to